Mac users: What machine/spec would you recommend for Alteryx?

[HelenL]

I've used Alteryx on Macs for about 4 years.

Q1. After initial attempts with Bootcamp, I've used Parallels in order to run Windows in order to run Alteryx.  My Alteryx workflows run fine. However, Alteryx can be very laggy when I'm building / modifying a workflow (e.g. dragging icons around the canvas). I sometimes have to save the file and reopen. I expect this is due to the Parallels config, so any advice on the best Parallels configuration would be appreciated.  

Q2. I have two Macs (2010 and 2012). Both have been upgraded to 32GB memory. The older machine definitely performs the worse of the two. The drives differ so that may be a factor. I now need to replace the 2010 Mac. My employer is keen for me to have one MacBook Pro to replace the two iMacs. I'm sceptical about whether a MacBook Pro will be adequate. Apple's business team advise:

"In short - our new M1 processors wouldn’t support the applications that you use the most so we would have to look at the 16-inch MacBook Pro which still runs on an Intel Core Processor. 

With all MacBooks you can connect unto 2 displays - you would just need the correct Thunderbolt adaptor. 

The 16-inch MacBook Pro already comes with a larger RAM size as standard (16GB instead of the standard 8GB of our other devices) and then you have the choice of 512GB or 1TB storage size."

I'm wary about  dropping to 16GB RAM. Since I upgraded to 32GB I see less "swap used' in Activity Monitor. Any advice on the best Mac option would be appreciated.

Regards,

Helen

[mceleavey]

Hi @HelenL ,

unfortunately Macs will always run slower. I would recommend throwing as much RAM at it as you can, but it's never going to run particularly well.

Also, running on a VM incurs a hit of around 10-15% on performance.

I would recommend upgrading to a PC!

M.

[HelenL]

Thanks for highlighting the importance of RAM.  It may help my argument for an iMac over a MacBook Pro. 

The consultancy I work for is 100% Mac. I'm the only one who needs Windows.

I used PCs for 20+ years of corporate life but now anything to do with Windows completely confuses me. Even simple file management tasks and software upgrades are frustrating. And if anyone suggests contacting Microsoft for support I feel almost physically sick with anxiety. So I don't think there's any going back now 🙂

[chrisha]

Hi @HelenL ,

I'm running Alteryx Designer in a VMware Fusion VM on a MacBook Pro (15") with 32 GB. I wouldn't use any less, so you can assign 16 GB to the VM, which Alteryx regularly uses. But I'm also switching a lot between the VM and macOS, so I like to have both systems running rather smoothly. It's not perfect but it works.

If you are looking to upgrade, I'd recommend to buy an MBP 16" before late summer / autumn, because new MBPs will likely be M1-only meaning you won't be able to use Parallels / VMware anymore.

Best

Christopher

[HelenL]

Thanks Chris,

That's really informative. Your comment about the M1 chip agrees with the Apple advice and gives me a deadline. 🙂 

Did you upgrade your RAM to 32GB after purchase?

I've found VMware Fusion. I hadn't realised that there was an alternative VM product. Have you always used it? Is the technical support good?

I seem to have only 8GB allocated to the VM on the iMac I'm working on today. I'm balancing between Alteryx on the VM and Tableau on MacOS. I'm switching between them constantly. I admit I don't know which is more hungry. 

Regards,

Helen

[chrisha]

Hi Helen,

no, as far as I know, current MBPs are not upgradeable, so I had this already ordered with 32 GB.

VMware Fusion and Parallels Desktop do pretty much the same thing. I do not know about any particular differences in feature or performance. We chose VMware Fusion because we also have other VMware software in use, so our IT department favoured this solution. Can't really say anything about the support, though, as I'm only using the community support, which is okay.

I cannot give a precise answer to which one is more RAM-hungry, but I would expect that any virtualization software requires some overhead, so if you assign 8 GB to the VM, you will have actually less than 8 GB for real work in macOS. Nevertheless, I feel like more RAM for the VM is well spent, especially since you have Alteryx running there.

General advice would be to uninstall anything you do not absolutely need in our Windows guest OS. And have only limited apps running in macOS while working with the VM. That's what I'm trying at least 🙂

Best

Christopher

[HelenL]

Thanks so much. That's all really helpful. 

I just found the tech spec for the MacBook Pro 16"

https://www.apple.com/uk/macbook-pro-16/specs/

• 2.4GHz 8-core Intel Core i9, Turbo Boost up to 5.0GHz, with 16MB shared L3 cache
• 32GB or 64GB of 2666MHz DDR4 memory
• AMD Radeon Pro 5500M with 4GB of GDDR6 memory
• AMD Radeon Pro 5500M with 8GB of GDDR6 memory
• AMD Radeon Pro 5600M with 8GB of HBM2 memory
• 1TB, 2TB, 4TB or 8TB SSD

[hellyars]

@HelenL 

Until last week, I ran Alteryx on an iMac Pro via Parallels.  I also ran it briefly on a 2018 16" MBP.   The iMac Pro has a 10 core Xeon CPU and 64GB of ECC RAM, 16GB HBM2 VegaPro).  The 2018 MBP has a 6 core i9 CPU and 32 GB of RAM.  I typically allocated 6 cores and 32GB of RAM to the VM on the iMac Pro.

Performance was solid.  The only exception being the Text Mining tools -- they just don't work when running Alteryx via Parallels.  My biggest issue with Parallels is stability and annoying quirks, such as changing the path to my shared drives where my workflows reside after every update.  (Performance on the MBP was less that stellar because of thermal throttling.)

I now run Alteryx on a dedicated custom built PC (Falcon NW).  It's equipped with a 16-core Ryzen 9 CPU, 64GB RAM, 2TB NVMe PCIE 4.0 SSDs, and an RTX 3080.  Alteryx performance is 30-40% faster (newer CPU; faster single core clock speeds; 6 additional cores; no Parallels overhead tax, etc.) and I can actually run the Text Mining tools.  Alteryx was the primary reason to get a PC, but I cant deny that I wanted to game a bit.   Then again, you should expect improved performance on a newer machine with more cores (Mac or PC).

Do not get an intel MBP.  They run hot and throttle - reducing CPU (Alteryx) performance and battery life, etc. 

I belive Parallels has or is about to launch an update that supports M1 Macs. 

The new M1 Macs are something new.  They are extremely fast, quiet, rarely thermal throttle, and offer long batter life.  Single core and multi core performance are exceptional, especially when you consider the low levels of power consumption compared to Intel and Ryzen rivals.  (We just bought my wife a new M1 Air, but I also just bought a Ryzen CPU desktop -- so I am only partially conflicted.)

Many high end PC laptops (notebooks) (including those with the new Ryzen mobile CPUs) compete with the M1 Air and MBP on paper.  But real world testing shows something very different.  These new PC notebooks throttle quickly, often, and significantly compared to the M1 Macs.  Performance for some is even worse when not plugged into the wall.  So real world performance is significantly less than on paper.  In contrast, testing shows the M1 Macs throttle significantly less and perform equally as well whether they are plugged in or not.  The unified memory of the M1 Macs also means that 8GB of memory in an M1 Mac outperforms 16GB of RAM in an intel Mac. 

Performance to dollars spent, especially when CPU throttling is considered, seems to swing heavily in favor of the M1 Macs relative to Ryzen notebooks or even Intel powered Macs. 

That said, the 8 core M1 Air and MBP are first generation products.  Apple is expected to launch higher end M1 MBP and iMacs with 16 or more cores at WWDC this June.  If you can wait, it might be worth your time to consider these.   In a perfect resource unconstrained world, I plan to ditch the PC (except for gaming) as soon as they come out with the rumored M1 equipped MacPro.  

[HelenL]

What a fantastic reply. Thank you for taking the time to explain it in so much detail. I think you've taken a lot of care to make the terminology clear but as so much is new to me, may I clarify please?

The Macs that I might consider:

1. iMac (I'd want 27") available with

(a) Intel 

(b) M1 and 16 core N/A rumoured release in June

2. MacBook Pro (MBP) available with 

(a) Intel

(b) M1 N/A in the 16". Possibly June.

3. Mac Pro

(a) Intel

(b) M1 N/A yet but rumoured

Parallels does not currently run on M1 Macs but is about to launch an update. When this happens, my options will open up.

In order of preference it would then be:

1. Mac Pro M1 with two 27" screens (but too £££)

2. iMac 27" M1 with one 27" screen

3. iMac 27" Intel (but only if I can't wait for the M1 release)

Avoid all MacBook Pros

How did I do? 

Helen

[hellyars]

@HelenL 

I guess it depends:  1) how much do you want to stay Mac; and 2) how long can you defer?

I would not avoid all MBPs.  I would only avoid the Intel MBPs.  If the current M1 Air and MBP are any indication, the higher end MBPs when equipped with an M-series chip will have excellent performance, with few thermal issues, and great battery life. 

A somewhat less expensive version of the MacPro with an M-Series chip is rumored, but, that could be 2 years off and is likely overkill.  

Higher end M-series MBPs and iMacs are rumored to be announced at WWDC in June.  Conventional wisdom has it they will be available this summer, but this is just a prediction.  It will likely be this year, but it could be June-July or October. 

The higher end iMac rumor has it that the 27" might be replaced by design with an even larger 30 or 32" screen.  The just released low-end M1 iMac has a 24" screen and replaces the previous 21" model.  So, it seems logical that the higher end iMacs might also have larger screens. 

But then again, it all comes down to Parallels support.