Peregrin Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 I recently put forward a bug report about FFT Denoise, but having tried it out on a friend's newer macbook air it seems like it's probably just a bug on Lion or just on my old computer. It doesn't make that much of a difference, really; my Macbook Pro is woefully out-of-date, and I've been intending to get a new one anyway. Since I'm going to be buying a new Macbook Pro in the next few months, I thought I should ask about this. I read a recent thread on this forum where you said that the best computer for Affinity is the 15-inch Macbook Pro, and I was wondering how vital the 15-inch is. I mean, would a 13-inch with all the extra processing power you can get be passible, or does Affinity really need the 15-inch to work well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixx Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 I have 13" (mid 2012) and it works fine. 13" is a bit crowded screen but very usable. Adding 24" extra monitor helps a lot. Peregrin 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff Andy Somerfield Posted August 9, 2016 Staff Share Posted August 9, 2016 Hi, The 13" is an excellent machine - the only thing holding it back it that it is impossible to configure it with more than 2 processors - where the 15" always has 4 processors. Number of processors is probably the single best way to make all Affinity apps to fast.. We have fixed the FFT bug too - it should work in the next beta :) Thanks, Andy, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william7 Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 Number of processors is probably the single best way to make all Affinity apps to fast.. Is there a point where this stops making sense? ie 8 core vs 12 or does this continue to scale well beyond what macs can be configured with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdenby Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 Is there a point where this stops making sense? ie 8 core vs 12 or does this continue to scale well beyond what macs can be configured with? My knowledge about this is limited. As I understand the issue, a single processor can handle all the operations, which might include recording user input, performing calculations to accomplish tasks, send and receive data from GPUs, write to memory, etc. That single core can only perform 1 operation per clock cycle. If the stream of tasks can be separated, and performed on another core, each core will perform a sub task at the same speed as the primary. An analogy. In a kitchen, the chef receives the order, and hands off the different portions to dedicated cooks. Then inspects the results, and instructs the server to deliver. The chef could do it all, but for some meals, it would be very hard to have everything ready at once. I don't know how many varieties of tasks have to be co-ordinated w. a graphics app. I would suppose more than I mentioned above. So, 4 cores seems a good starting point. To respond to the original post, I'm using an iMac w. an Intel i5 4 core. Affinity Designer has had almost instantaneous response for most operations, and probably less than a second for those things that had a noticeable lapse. Quote iMac 27" Retina, c. 2015: OS X 10.11.5: 3.3 GHz I c-5: 32 Gb, AMD Radeon R9 M290 2048 Mb iPad 12.9" Retina, iOS 10, 512 Gb, Apple pencil Huion WH1409 tablet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william7 Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 My knowledge about this is limited. As I understand the issue, a single processor can handle all the operations, which might include recording user input, performing calculations to accomplish tasks, send and receive data from GPUs, write to memory, etc. That single core can only perform 1 operation per clock cycle. If the stream of tasks can be separated, and performed on another core, each core will perform a sub task at the same speed as the primary. An analogy. In a kitchen, the chef receives the order, and hands off the different portions to dedicated cooks. Then inspects the results, and instructs the server to deliver. The chef could do it all, but for some meals, it would be very hard to have everything ready at once. Thanks for the explanation, but I already knew that :P (I am a computer engineer). Maybe my question wasnt clear enough. How many threads can affinity run in parallel? are there enough for 8 or 12 core machines? More? at what point does affinity cease to benefit from more cores? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine1868 Posted November 1, 2016 Share Posted November 1, 2016 Thanks for the explanation, but I already knew that :P (I am a computer engineer). Maybe my question wasnt clear enough. How many threads can affinity run in parallel? are there enough for 8 or 12 core machines? More? at what point does affinity cease to benefit from more cores? Bump I am also curious about how Affinity Photo is programmed/engineered - as a systems engineer/photographer I want to know how to get the most bang for my buck. My 2012 MBPr is beginning to show its age when developing RAW photos in AP. As I am considering upgrading to a newer MacBook or MacBook Pro, I want to know what will be most important - a fast CPU, a higher thread count CPU, or a GPU...that being said, does AP utilize hardware acceleration provided by a discrete GPU? I basically want to know whether going for the 15" MBP is a necessity or if the 13" without the discrete GPU will be able to handle the raw files I throw into AP Quote - Nikon Z7 | Nikon D7000 | Nikon D70s with Ikelite Housing | GoPro Hero5 Black - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.