MP 7,1 Configuration advice for MP 7,1 for Adobe After Effects

[ssgbryan]

Thanks everyone for weighing in, I really appreciate it!

Quick questions:

1. If I want to maximize performance and keep Photoshop + After Effects open simultaneously (would love to be able to hop into Photoshop while RAM previewing or rendering in After Effects), would you recommend something along the lines of six 32GB DIMMs = 192GB RAM?

2. Will definitely look into purchasing new SSD storage via NVMe. Can you recommend a reliable brand/vendor for purchasing NVMe cards and a reliable brand/vendor for purchasing PCIe 3.0 MVMe blades?

3. For NVMe SSD, can I partition the SSD to create multiple drives and use Carbon Copy Cloner to clone my startup drive, so I can make a backup bootable drive?

1. AFA memory - I belong to the "Maximum amount of memory is the correct amount of memory" school. I don't use AE and the version of Photoshop I use is 32-bit, so I can't really speak for those products.

What I did notice was that going from 32 - 64Gb of ram, I saw a notable increase in responsiveness (Caches were used less). I saw another increase in responsiveness going from 64Gb to 96Gb. In my workflow, what uses up most of my horsepower is tile-based render engines. They use all of the ram & all of the cores I can throw at it.

2. My new system is will use the Sabrent Rocket NVMe of the 1tb, PCIe 3.0 version (Currently, around 100 USD). If you are on a mac, there is nothing to be gained by buying the PCIe 4.0 version - the 7,1 doesn't have PCIe 4.0.

The important thing to remember about NVMe drives, is that most of them use the exact same controller and the same memory. The difference between them is the PCB design. From all of the reviews I have seen, the Sabrent Rocket gives the best price/performance ratio (11 cents per 1Gb).

3. You should be able to do that. In my 4,1 once I got my boot drive situated, I CCed it to a separate SSD drive and stored it away. I also had one with 10.6.8 on it when I needed to use a program that wouldn't run on 10.7 or later. It just had the os and the program on it.

 

[AlexMaximus]

WOHOO! What a cool setup, thanks for sharing. I kind of have the same "HDD/SSD moving to a new system" issue in the close future. Here are my thoughts, depending on your "need of speed"config.
However to give you a sound solution the question will remain, how many PCIe slots will you need down the line for non SSD cards.(?)

Here is what I would do:

https://www.sonnettech.com/product/echo-express-se3e/overview.html

Put both OWC Accelsiors inside + this card down below:

https://firmtek.stores.yahoo.net/satai6g.html

This way you can store 4 SSD's in one box only without wasting valuable slots inside the 7.1.
The other two remaining SATA SSD's can be slotted into the Promise frame (J2i) because it will be connected to both
SATA ports inside the MP 7.1 (behind the CPU cooler) You either use the standard HDD that comes with the J2i and use a double cable to put two 2,5 SSD inside this one remaining 3,5 slot. (accessories needed)
But of course you can populate your free PCIe slots inside the MP 7.1 if you don't want the external TB3 expansion.
However, if you go with the external sonnet box, ask sonnet tech support first if they support this "SSD only solution".

I will need a solution like this moving from a maxed out 5.1 to an iMac Pro2 in 2020 with external eGPU Razor/VEGA VII & that sonnet box above.

 

[tommy chen]

why should a expansion box for the new macpro ???

 

[ssgbryan]

why should a expansion box for the new macpro ???

Because we don't know how much an empty MPX box is going to cost?

 

[profdraper]

Hi everyone,

I’m looking for advice on configuring a new Mac Pro 7,1 for my independent animation studio. I use Adobe AfterEffects for animation (lots of “2 and a half D” style motion graphics as well as compositing and film/video manipulation) and Adobe Photoshop for design.

I keep my computers for about 8-10 years (I’ve been in business since the mid-90s and I’ve only used Macs — I’m not interested in building a PC). I’ve got a large budget set aside for this new computer and accessories (I’m looking at upgrading my external storage solutions to Thunderbolt from eSATA as well as purchasing dual 4K monitors).

That said, I would also like to see if it’s possible to continue using some of the upgraded components I’ve purchased over the years in my current setup as well, especially the SSD storage that I’m currently using.

I’ll start by thanking everyone for reading this — I know there are a ton of expert users on this forum, and I really appreciate any advice I get. Also happy to answer as many questions as possible.

First off, I’ll describe my current setup:

Mac Pro 5, 1 (Mid 2010), running macOS Sierra v 10.12.6
Processor: 2 x 2.66 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon
Memory: 64 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTx 980 TI 6144MB (Purchased from macvidcards)

Monitors:

LED Cinema Display (2560x1440)
Cinema HD Display (1920x1200)

Internal SSD storage:

2 TB Samsung SSD 850 PRO
2 TB Samsung SSD 850 PRO
1 TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO
1 TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO

960 GB OWC Mercury Accelsior PCIe SSD
960 GB OWC Mercury Accelsior PCIe SSD

External spinning drive storage:

24 TB OWC Mercury Elite Pro Dual RAID USB 3.1/eSATA
10 TB OWC Mercury Elite Pro 7200 128MB with eSATA
10 TB OWC Mercury Elite Pro 7200 128MB with eSATA

(I connect these spinning drives to my 5,1 Mac Pro via a NewerTech MAXPower USB/eSATA 2x2 host adapter.)

My questions for the new Mac Pro 7,1 are:

1. Processor: Considering I’d like this computer to last for 8-10 years, I’m assuming I should choose the fastest processor — the 28-Core 2.5 GHz Intel Xeon W?

2. Memory: I’m considering just getting the ‘minimum’ memory when I build the computer from Apple and then upgrading with memory from OWC (I’m assuming the OWC memory will be cheaper without sacrificing quality).

That said, what ‘amount’ of memory should I consider? I’d love to be able to run AfterEffects and Photoshop simultaneously on this new machine.

3. Graphics: Which AMD Radion Pro Vega II option would be the best for AfterEffects? I’m also purchasing two new 4K monitors (I’m looking at the LG UltraFine 4K display, but if anyone has other recommendations, I’d love to hear them) and place them side-to-side in my new setup.

4. Storage: Considering I currently have almost 8 TBs of SSD storage internally inside my 5,1 Mac Pro, I’m obviously looking at solutions where I’ll be using external SSD storage of some kind.

A. One of my main questions is are there solutions where I can move the Samsung SSD drives and/or the OWC Mercury Accelsior PCIe SSD cards that are currently inside my 5,1 Mac Pro to external enclosure(s) and connect them via Thunderbolt to the new 7,1 Mac Pro?

Would moving these drives “erase” the data currently on the drives? What kind of speed loss would I be looking at compared to the internal SSD drive options from Apple? Would I just be, in the long run, better off buying something like an OWC Thunderblade for my external SSD needs?

B. If I purchased a new Thunderbolt enclosure for my spinning drives, would I be able to move my current spinning drives that are in my Mercury Elite Pro eSATA enclosures? Or would it just be better off to buy a new Thunderbolt drive enclosure + new drives (something like the OWC ThunderBay 4 RAID?)

Totally understand that I’ve asked a ton of questions here, and I thank you all again for any advice you have to offer!

Here's a few suggestions based on running Mac OS and Windows workstations over the years, numbers of different configs in mass university labs and studios etc (mostly pro audio and film production):

1. Processor: largest number of cores is not necessarily the best option for various workflows /apps etc. I suggest doing a little research on the particular processors involved & there are very good platform agnostic /pro sites that will provide such information, in this case on the various models of Intel Xeon-W CPUs. A a general rule of thumb however, multiply the core numbers by the CPU speed to get a better understanding of the processing power (there is also a third multiplier for specific use scenarios worth following up via research if you wish). Aside from this, there are also many good use cases which also indicate 'nothing less than 3.0 Ghz raw CPU speed'. Bottom line here, I'd suggest that the 16 core Xeon-W would be the sweet spot for multi-core usage, but also NB that for some apps single core performance is more useful

2. Memory. Mac workstations want and perform best with 3 x multipliers of Ram configurations, ie, in your existing Mac Pro that would have been 48GB (not 64). So for the MP 7.1, I'd suggest 48GB or 96GB (likely the latter for now). NB that the 'minimum memory' from Apple is different Ram class that what you need for the optional processor upgrades - one assumes that a BTO would make this happen automatically given compatibility issues here.

3. Graphics: displays, would suggest some of the excellent Benq Displays for colour calibration and pro delivery work etc. GPU, personally, I'd go with the Vega II Duo MPX.

4. Drives. IMO, this is the biggest drag for now (or at least unknown until we see some real world builds and updates from 3rd party vendors; see other 'Storage options' thread this forum). Yes there are no internal bays (extraordinary); only two internal proprietary drive slots and which only take yet more proprietary disks made by Apple (double extraordinary), ie no industry standard M.2s like say the Samsungs ... the OWC sleds (yes have run a few of these in the past), am doubtful Apple's T2 will allow these to be used as System boot (or at least in the first instance). I'm a fan of OWC's tech as well ...

Moving the Accelsiors externally would require a thunderbolt PCIe chassis (OWC make these); an OWC Thunderbay 6 would take care of 6 x 2.5" SSDs, plus has a spare slot under the hood for an M.2. Moving the drives will not erase them (I assume these already use a HFS+ or APFS file structure).

However, am dubious about running all this stuff over Thunderbolt (not that many ports here, plus the need for dual displays, perhaps audio and/or video IO etc), nor do we really know about lane limitations, switching etc just yet (see for example, Apple's Expansion Slot Utility which returns to Catalina for the MP, clearly there will be give and take re. the config depending on exact hardware installed). I would want at least some of the drives located internally - the Accelsiors should do so, at least for storage (if not system) - drop OWC a line, they know their stuff in my experience.

Bottom line, 1) I would wait until this is in the wild and fully tested by those who are platform agnostic and not necessarily 'Apple fan boys' eg, Linus Tech Tips (say Jan /Feb 2020?) and 2) this storage thing ... OWC have new tech in the pipe-line for the 7,1MP: am waiting to see if they do (say) a bare bones MPX bay for 2.5" SSDs ... now that would be useful.

 

[deconstruct60]

WOHOO! What a cool setup, thanks for sharing. I kind of have the same "HDD/SSD moving to a new system" issue in the close future. Here are my thoughts, depending on your "need of speed"config.
However to give you a sound solution the question will remain, how many PCIe slots will you need down the line for non SSD cards.(?)

Here is what I would do:

https://www.sonnettech.com/product/echo-express-se3e/overview.html

Put both OWC Accelsiors inside + this card down below:

https://firmtek.stores.yahoo.net/satai6g.html

This way you can store 4 SSD's in one box only without wasting valuable slots inside the 7.1.
The other two remaining SATA SSD's can be slotted into the Promise frame (J2i) because it will be connected to both

for about the similar ball park for the Express se III there is a Sonnet 4x4 card.
https://www.sonnettech.com/product/m2-4x4-pcie-card.html

There are twice as many slots in the new Mac Pro as the classic Mac Pro ( yes the MPX modules can quickly hog up most of that) , but the slots are not relatively scarce in the new system ( so one for drives won't necessarily blow away several other options later.). the upside with the 4x4 if put it on a x16 slot is that could later get way more bandwidth out of a combined drive than hanging it off of Thunderbolt. ( a cache drive better if the cache is fast and has a high hit rate. That card will do more and faster. )

Folks who need to pack in two Duos and a Afterburner card will be short on space. But most folks coming over from a Mac Pro 2009-2012 set up will have plenty of space to go to if only using one MPX bay for one MPX module.

 

[Successful Sorcerer]

In addition to all tips, I personally think you can better buy a simpler computer/processor now and upgrade earlier than 10 years which often is cheaper and you'll have newer tech earlier on. As said before After Effects probably won't use the 28 cores to the fullest (yet).

 

[theatwar]

Excellent suggestions all around. I am leaning towards putting my existing 2.5" SSDs into an external Thunderbolt enclosure, like the OWC Thunderbay as suggested above, and purchasing a new M.2 4x4 PCIe card to put inside the new computer (I use a ton of HD stock footage files & prerenders in my AE projects that I would love to have on SSDs).

Quick question on purchasing the actual NVMe M.2 SSD, using 2 examples:

Intel 2TB 660P NVMe M.2 Internal SSD, $199.99 at B&H

(1800 MB/s sequential read speeds)

Samsung 2TB 970 EVO Plus NVMe M.2 Internal SSD, $399.99 at B&H

(3500 MB/s sequential read speeds)

Obviously the Samsung product is much faster -- will I see a hugely noticeable difference in my line of work (AfterEffects animation)? In other words -- worth paying the extra $ for the Samsung? (Of course there are probably even better deals to be found elsewhere for these products, I'm just trying to get a good handle on the best type of SSD to get for my setup.)

 

[chfilm]

Excellent suggestions all around. I am leaning towards putting my existing 2.5" SSDs into an external Thunderbolt enclosure, like the OWC Thunderbay as suggested above, and purchasing a new M.2 4x4 PCIe card to put inside the new computer (I use a ton of HD stock footage files & prerenders in my AE projects that I would love to have on SSDs).

Quick question on purchasing the actual NVMe M.2 SSD, using 2 examples:

Intel 2TB 660P NVMe M.2 Internal SSD, $199.99 at B&H

(1800 MB/s sequential read speeds)

Samsung 2TB 970 EVO Plus NVMe M.2 Internal SSD, $399.99 at B&H

(3500 MB/s sequential read speeds)

Obviously the Samsung product is much faster -- will I see a hugely noticeable difference in my line of work (AfterEffects animation)? In other words -- worth paying the extra $ for the Samsung? (Of course there are probably even better deals to be found elsewhere for these products, I'm just trying to get a good handle on the best type of SSD to get for my setup.)

I doubt you will see huge performance gains from that honestly. I think after effects has much bigger bottlenecks in its own engine. Could be wrong though..
[automerge]1575973102[/automerge]
I have a Lacie Little Big Disk 2, with 2x512gb PCIE SSDs inside. Over TB2 it reaches about 1gb/s.
I'm considering - would it be possible to remove those ssds and put them inside the mac pro via a card? It seems like it could be?

Do you think heat could become an issue?

 

[skippermonkey]

I'm a bit confused about GPU options now. If AMD's RDNA is going be an 'Nvidia killer', perhaps I should just get a rubbish old 580X and look at Navi GPUs, which I believe should be available early 2020.

But surely the Pro Vega IIs are suitably powerful?

Also, AMD says RDNA is engineered for gaming https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/rdna

 

[chfilm]

I'm a bit confused about GPU options now. If AMD's RDNA is going be an 'Nvidia killer', perhaps I should just get a rubbish old 580X and look at Navi GPUs, which I believe should be available early 2020.

But surely the Pro Vega IIs are suitably powerful?

Also, AMD says RDNA is engineered for gaming https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/rdna

Im wondering the same thing...

 

[skippermonkey]

Then what about things like the new W5700 workstation GPUs – they are Navi 7nm units. Will these work okay in macOS?

I bet there's going to be shedload of 580X GPUs on eBay in January...

 

[theatwar]

Super conflicted about GPUs. Also considering ordering my machine with the base 580X, then upgrading with the Pro W5700X whenever the hell it comes out (or just waiting to build my machine when it's actually available...?)

Can anyone weigh in on whether it's worth waiting for the W5700X? Speed performance wise, for AfterEffects/Photoshop, how would that GPU compare to the Pro Vega II or Pro Vega II Duo?

 

[bsbeamer]

Have been using/testing an RX 5700 XT in eGPU in 10.15.1 with an MBP16,1 and the drivers absolutely need some tweaks before I'd say it is ready for primetime. Would say the same with 5500M. Hopefully 10.15.2 addresses some of the issues.

FWIW, there are major eGPU issues with RX580 in Catalina 10.15.1 with the eGPU flat out not working (along with 560 & 570). I'm told the RX580 native via PCIe is not impacted, but have not personally tested this.

 

[deconstruct60]

.....
Can anyone weigh in on whether it's worth waiting for the W5700X? Speed performance wise, for AfterEffects/Photoshop, how would that GPU compare to the Pro Vega II or Pro Vega II Duo?

No it won't be an equivalent.

See the W5700 versus WX 9100 chart here.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15124/amd-announces-radeon-pro-w5700-navi-gets-drafted-to-the-pros

talking a 3.4 TFLOPS drop in performance against a Vega 10 based card. The Vega II are Vega 20 based (and faster in compute).

The standard W5700 sells for $799. If Apple got AMD to toss a customer additional 8GB of VRAM on and then has some exclusive lock out agreement on cards then probably close to a $999-1099 option from Apple. Nonexclusive then probably about $899.


The W5700X apparently is an additional 8GB of VRAM which will help of computational loads that load up on the VRAM so it will probably close the gap slightly if the drivers are highly tuned by AMD and Apple. But extemely likely not to close the whole gap.

The W5700X is going to be better at apps that have 3D objects that maniuplate on screen as opposed to churning through video data conversions. Faster frame rates not fastest computation.

It is also quite likely to nuke the 4 TBv3 ports on the Mac Pro in terms of being able to drive a TBv3 display docking station monitor.

the W5700X is because the giant chasm between the 580X and the Vega II means there are going to be lots of unhappy folks they are stuck with a 580X when wanted something closer to the middle. The W5700X is likely going to be a stop gap until Apple can get out something better for an entry card. ( and perhaps develop something for the upper-mid - lower-high range that is MPX also. I wouldn't hold my breath on that. ).

I suspect also that Apple is working hard on a replacement for the Vega II that is faster still ( probably Arcturus based ) because this pricing on the Vega II isn't going to hold its relatively worth in 6-10 months very well at all.

 

[theatwar]

Thanks so much for the info!

If I'm reading this correctly -- apologies if I'm not -- it sounds like if I can afford the Vega II Duo, it would be better to purchase that for my setup (AfterEffects/Photoshop, lots of video manipulation/compositing) rather than waiting for the W5700?

No it won't be an equivalent.

See the W5700 versus WX 9100 chart here.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15124/amd-announces-radeon-pro-w5700-navi-gets-drafted-to-the-pros

talking a 3.4 TFLOPS drop in performance against a Vega 10 based card. The Vega II are Vega 20 based (and faster in compute).

The standard W5700 sells for $799. If Apple got AMD to toss a customer additional 8GB of VRAM on and then has some exclusive lock out agreement on cards then probably close to a $999-1099 option from Apple. Nonexclusive then probably about $899.


The W5700X apparently is an additional 8GB of VRAM which will help of computational loads that load up on the VRAM so it will probably close the gap slightly if the drivers are highly tuned by AMD and Apple. But extemely likely not to close the whole gap.

The W5700X is going to be better at apps that have 3D objects that maniuplate on screen as opposed to churning through video data conversions. Faster frame rates not fastest computation.

It is also quite likely to nuke the 4 TBv3 ports on the Mac Pro in terms of being able to drive a TBv3 display docking station monitor.

the W5700X is because the giant chasm between the 580X and the Vega II means there are going to be lots of unhappy folks they are stuck with a 580X when wanted something closer to the middle. The W5700X is likely going to be a stop gap until Apple can get out something better for an entry card. ( and perhaps develop something for the upper-mid - lower-high range that is MPX also. I wouldn't hold my breath on that. ).

I suspect also that Apple is working hard on a replacement for the Vega II that is faster still ( probably Arcturus based ) because this pricing on the Vega II isn't going to hold its relatively worth in 6-10 months very well at all.

 

[deconstruct60]

Then what about things like the new W5700 workstation GPUs – they are Navi 7nm units. Will these work okay in macOS?

Since apple is going to offer the W5700X as a BTO option in the future. ... yes it will probably work. ( it looks like that just gets a 8GB bump to VRAM capacity and maybe a minor clock bump, but the same baseline die. )

I bet there's going to be shedload of 580X GPUs on eBay in January...

Or folks will just wait and buy later. Apple already has a notice on the BTO page that more options are coming later. That is going to push some folks to just wait. ( the 'gotta have it now' folks will buy, ).

For the folks who also want to use the 4 TBv3 sockets for video out, the W5700X would be better as a second GPU in MPX bay 2. It probably isn't going to help there. [ Lots of folks with 2009-2012 models would have a "boot screen" card and another video card in their system. Same thing here. ]
[automerge]1576003787[/automerge]

Thanks so much for the info!

If I'm reading this correctly -- apologies if I'm not -- it sounds like if I can afford the Vega II Duo, it would be better to purchase that for my setup (AfterEffects/Photoshop, lots of video manipulation/compositing) rather than waiting for the W5700?

After Effect and Photoshop make limited use of dual GPUs. The DUO won't 'buy' much right now. ( or years given Adobe's pace of parallelism improvements. ). Unless transcoding tons of 8K Red code before get to AfterEffect/Photoshop the parallel compute of the Duo isn't going to have a good 'bang for the buck' ratio.

A single Vega II solo card would work better if can afford it. The W5700X probably won't have lower throughput times. It may be better $/performance though. Especially in the Photoshop range of workloads.

 

[theatwar]

Thank you so much for the advice, I really appreciate it!

Since apple is going to offer the W5700X as a BTO option in the future. ... yes it will probably work. ( it looks like that just gets a 8GB bump to VRAM capacity and maybe a minor clock bump, but the same baseline die. )




Or folks will just wait and buy later. Apple already has a notice on the BTO page that more options are coming later. That is going to push some folks to just wait. ( the 'gotta have it now' folks will buy, ).

For the folks who also want to use the 4 TBv3 sockets for video out, the W5700X would be better as a second GPU in MPX bay 2. It probably isn't going to help there. [ Lots of folks with 2009-2012 models would have a "boot screen" card and another video card in their system. Same thing here. ]
[automerge]1576003787[/automerge]


After Effect and Photoshop make limited use of dual GPUs. The DUO won't 'buy' much right now. ( or years given Adobe's pace of parallelism improvements. ). Unless transcoding tons of 8K Red code before get to AfterEffect/Photoshop the parallel compute of the Duo isn't going to have a good 'bang for the buck' ratio.

A single Vega II solo card would work better if can afford it. The W5700X probably won't have lower throughput times. It may be better $/performance though. Especially in the Photoshop range of workloads.

 

[vinegarshots]

Woah.....hold on there. After Effects is horribly optimized for multicore chips. It performs fastest on chips with strong single core performance. You add a bunch of Xeon cores and you're not going to see the performance gains you think you should have.

EDIT: And all that old documentation on recommended RAM per core is obsolete. That was back when After Effects had support for MultiCore rendering, which they removed and never added back.

Also, After Effects barely utilizes the GPU too (only for a part of the total effects list). Really, what you want is fast single core performance , fast storage on multiple drives, a lot of system RAM, and a decent GPU.

BTW, After Effects works just fine on the iMac Pro...doesn't throttle up the fans or anything like that other guy said. But it would probably be faster with an i9 vs. the Xeon...

 

[theatwar]

I'm leaning towards the 3.2GHz 16-core Xeon W, and the single Pro Vega II, rather than the Duo, thanks to the advice on this thread.

Woah.....hold on there. After Effects is horribly optimized for multicore chips. It performs fastest on chips with strong single core performance. You add a bunch of Xeon cores and you're not going to see the performance gains you think you should have...

 

[vinegarshots]

I'm leaning towards the 3.2GHz 16-core Xeon W, and the single Pro Vega II, rather than the Duo, thanks to the advice on this thread.

I would bet that the 8-core is actually faster in After Effects. Thats how it is on the iMac Pro.

 

[theatwar]

I've heard that as well. My thinking in selecting a 16 core processor is that AE might wind up being speedier down the line in future updates.

I would bet that the 8-core is actually faster in After Effects. Thats how it is on the iMac Pro.

 

[vinegarshots]

96gb for 16 cores? Don't think that's enough, your cores are gonna choke. Adobe recommended 8gigs per core previously..

After Effects doesn't multicore render anymore-- it was removed in 2015. Those guidelines haven't been valid since then.
[automerge]1576005523[/automerge]

I've heard that as well. My thinking in selecting a 16 core processor is that AE might wind up being speedier down the line in future updates.

Dont hold your breath...they've been promising performance improvements for a decade, and they haven't delivered. Even the latest update promised performance improvements, but it feels about the same as it always has to me. If you use software other than adobe software (like C4D or something), then the extra cores could be useful. Just not for AE.

 

[theatwar]

I never hold my breath when it comes to Adobe, but fingers crossed I'm making a good choice. Element 3D has been creeping into my projects more and more, and of course I might have to work with other 3D apps down the line. Feels like 16 cores is the right way to go for now.

Dont hold your breath...they've been promising performance improvements for a decade, and they haven't delivered. Even the latest update promised performance improvements, but it feels about the same as it always has to me. If you use software other than adobe software (like C4D or something), then the extra cores could be useful. Just not for AE.

 

[vinegarshots]

I never hold my breath when it comes to Adobe, but fingers crossed I'm making a good choice. Element 3D has been creeping into my projects more and more, and of course I might have to work with other 3D apps down the line. Feels like 16 cores is the right way to go for now.

Element 3D is pretty GPU limited actually. Doesn't really leverage the CPU, and certainly not multiple cores.