All present versions of Lightroom Classic (from 10.x and later) are fully functional with Monogram on Apple Silicon machines.
With that in mind, let's look at the compatibility with a few specific applications: App-Specific Compatibility Lightroom Classic Therefore, Creator’s most crucial features-the user interface for assigning modules, and the integration between software and hardware-should be nearly identical in performance whether Creator runs on Rosetta 2 or is compiled for Apple Silicon. Monogram Creator does not make heavy demands of either processor. The apps that benefit most from native Apple Silicon support are those that make heavy use of system resources, specifically CPU and GPU. We have tested Creator on M1-equipped Macs and are confident to promise the same standard of performance as one would expect with Creator running natively on a comparable x86 system. Intel Mac and Intel/AMD Windows PC) and runs on Apple Silicon machines via Apple’s Rosetta 2 compatibility layer. DAWs (Logic Pro X, Cubase, Ableton Live, etc.)Īt present, Monogram Creator is complied for x86 systems (i.e.Current Monogram + Apple Silicon Support.Going back to the Pfeiffer report, if you’re interested in reading the full scope of their M1 vs Intel tests, you can click here. Had they decided to use the higher-spec Intel Core i7 version, it would’ve added RM 800 to the pricetag. The M1 machine that Pfeiffer tested costs RM 9,599 in Malaysia, while their Intel variant would cost RM 10,399. That being said, the Intel MacBook Pros are certainly a lot costlier. Furthermore, while the M1 MacBook Pro maxes out at 16GB of RAM, you could still have more RAM on the Intel variant, for a total of 32GB. You can check out the table below for the specific numbers:Ĭuriously, Pfeiffer had opted not to use the higher-spec MacBook Pro 13 that has an Intel Core i7 in it. On average, the M1 laptops performed a massive 83% faster than the Intel-powered MacBook Pros. Even the lowest average M1 gain over Intel stood at 59%, in InDesign. That’s saying quite a lot, seeing as Lightroom Classic has been known to be one of Adobe’s slowest programs. The highest average improvement was seen in Lightroom Classic, with a whopping 116% improvement in performance. “It seems clear that Photoshop strongly benefits from, among other aspects, the unified memory architecture of the M1 chip, as well as from the acceleration provided for Adobe Sensei-powered features by the Neural Engine of the Chip, as can also be seen in benchmarks of other Creative Cloud apps,” – Pfeiffer report
0 kommentar(er)
