Osirix MD users - M2 or M1 Pro/Max?

[xraydoc]

For anyone using the FDA-approved Osirix MD on Apple Silicon, I have some performance questions...

How's the 3D performance/responsiveness on the M1-based chips like the M1 Pro or the M1 Max? At present I only have the performance-limited free version of Osirix, so it's hard to judge, but I'll be purchasing the Osirix MD license after July 1.

I'm trying to gauge whether or not an M1 Pro or M1 Max would make a substantial difference over the 10-GPU core version of the M2 (14+ graphics cores versus the M2's 10 cores).

Basically debating between a MacBook Air with a 8-core CPU/10-core GPU M2 or something like the 14" 10-core CPU /16-core CPU MacBook Pro M1 Pro (or potentially M1 Max). I'll be rendering some 3D CT models and exporting video loops/animations. Smooth performance is preferred, though I don't need top-tier performance. It's mostly for teaching purposes rather than massive clinical use.

TIA to anyone with experience...

 

[BanditoB]

Sorry, I’m not a user of this application, but as it is optimized for Monterey and ASi, its performance should scale fairly linearly with your CPU and GPU choices.

You might want to contact them to determine what they would recommend for your planned use of the application.

 

[xraydoc]

Sorry, I’m not a user of this application, but as it is optimized for Monterey and ASi, its performance should scale fairly linearly with your CPU and GPU choices.

You might want to contact them to determine what they would recommend for your planned use of the application.

Thanks. I’m reaching out to users on other forums as well, so hopefully someone can share some good info.

 

[jav6454]

For anyone using the FDA-approved Osirix MD on Apple Silicon, I have some performance questions...

How's the 3D performance/responsiveness on the M1-based chips like the M1 Pro or the M1 Max? At present I only have the performance-limited free version of Osirix, so it's hard to judge, but I'll be purchasing the Osirix MD license after July 1.

I'm trying to gauge whether or not an M1 Pro or M1 Max would make a substantial difference over the 10-GPU core version of the M2 (14+ graphics cores versus the M2's 10 cores).

Basically debating between a MacBook Air with a 8-core CPU/10-core GPU M2 or something like the 14" 10-core CPU /16-core CPU MacBook Pro M1 Pro (or potentially M1 Max). I'll be rendering some 3D CT models and exporting video loops/animations. Smooth performance is preferred, though I don't need top-tier performance. It's mostly for teaching purposes rather than massive clinical use.

TIA to anyone with experience...

If the app is optimized to work natively on Apple Silicon, then you'll see a performance jump. However, there haven't been reports of apps (except MS made apps) being worse via Rosetta 2 on any M1 or M2 flavored Mac.

 

[Slartibart]

RAM… maximize RAM. There is almost no difference between the Pro and Max in Osirix MD.

 

[xraydoc]

If the app is optimized to work natively on Apple Silicon, then you'll see a performance jump. However, there haven't been reports of apps (except MS made apps) being worse via Rosetta 2 on any M1 or M2 flavored Mac.

Right. My question is more of a performance issue — is there a substantial performance increase with more GPU cores, or is the app more CPU-limited.

I’ll check with the vendor but I was hoping someone here might have first-hand experience. I know there’s at least a couple users here that are familiar with this app.

 

[xraydoc]

RAM… maximize RAM. There is almost no difference between the Pro and Max in Osirix MD.

Very helpful! So noted.

 

[jav6454]

Right. My question is more of a performance issue — is there a substantial performance increase with more GPU cores, or is the app more CPU-limited.

I’ll check with the vendor but I was hoping someone here might have first-hand experience. I know there’s at least a couple users here that are familiar with this app.

I wouldn't know, but new M-series chips are much better than any Intel CPU in the past generations. So any performance impact would be for the better, not worse.

 

[xraydoc]

I wouldn't know, but new M-series chips are much better than any Intel CPU in the past generations. So any performance impact would be for the better, not worse.

This I know. I use an M1 MacBook Air currently. The free version of this app is performance-limited, so it's hard to compare the performance of one machine to another based on the free version. The paid version is around $700, so I want to plan any hardware upgrades appropriately.

 

[jav6454]

If the app is performance limited, it stands to believe that the full app has Apple Si support.

 

[xraydoc]

If the app is performance limited, it stands to believe that the full app has Apple Si support.

I think the performance limit is single core vs. multi core (CPU) support. When I run some scans through the free version for 3D volume render, I see only 1 core hitting 100% activity with other cores hovering around 10% activity (per Activity Monitor).

Hard to tell how many GPU cores are active with Activity Monitor (at least I don't know how to visualize this).

Otherwise the app is most certainly Apple Silicon-native.

 

[lcubed]

i'd think about going with an M1 Ultra with as much RAM as you can afford if multicore performance is the critical factor.

in the activity monitor, under the CPU tab, there's a % GPU column that might give a clue on how many GPU cores are being used.