FORUMS: list search recent posts

New Mac Pro

COW Forums : DaVinci Resolve

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Vladimir Kucherov
New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 6:06:16 pm

Thoughts?

Basically a CPU core and all expansion via Thunderbolt. Makes a lot of sense. I wonder if there will be an elegant enclosure to hold all the bits together and how much they'll sell the various PCIe or Sata thunderbolt enclosures for. Will they even sell them, or rely on 3rd parties to handle that?


Return to posts index

Al Arnold
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 6:07:34 pm

Haha... Beat me to it. Not that impressed at this point.


Return to posts index

Vladimir Kucherov
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 6:16:38 pm

I'm fairly impressed. If it works. They're basically taking what everyone is doing right now anyway - expanding a tower with external boxes, and designing around it.

This allows them to sell a GPU accessory kit with extra power and room for the craziest stuff that comes out. Should make the system more upgradable.


Return to posts index


John Sellars
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 6:48:37 pm

But isn't external I/O limited to TB 2.0 speeds? Still half the speed of external PCI-e.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 8:24:21 pm

[John Sellars] "But isn't external I/O limited to TB 2.0 speeds? Still half the speed of external PCI-e."

But fast enough for 4K. That means (at least as it's relevant to this industry) it's really only going to be a bottleneck for external GPUs. So the big question is going to be, how well will Resolve run with the on-board GPU options? They're AMD, so no CUDA, which is less than ideal, but I imagine Blackmagic will invest some work into optimizing for these systems since they'll clearly become the standard choice for high-end Resolve work on the Mac platform.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Joseph Owens
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 11, 2013 at 12:18:02 am

[Chris Kenny] "how well will Resolve run with the on-board GPU options? They're AMD, so no CUDA, which is less than ideal,"

If "less than ideal" translates to "non-starter", as RESOLVE/CUDA processing stands for the moment, then "no problem".

jPo

"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.


Return to posts index


Eric Fiegehen
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 12, 2013 at 4:37:23 pm

TB2 = Half the speed of PCIe Gen 1.1 x16, I believe, which was 40Gbps bi-directional. PCIe Gen2 x16 = 80Gbps (Xpander Desktop 4, Xpander Desktop Elite specified transfer rates). PCIe Gen3 x16 Xpander data transfers will be at the theoretical 160Gbps, or close, depending on OS and host system overhead.

Eric


Return to posts index

Eric Hansen
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 8:26:51 pm

But TB2.0 doesn't compare to PCIe 3.0 speeds for GPU work. Maybe if you could bond the 6 TB ports together to feed a Cubix...

i think my head just exploded

e

Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
http://www.erichansen.tv


Return to posts index

Vladimir Kucherov
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 8:54:06 pm

What are the bandwidth differences we are talking about?

PCIe 2 x16 which is what is in all the current mac pros is currently 8gb/s from the reading I could find. TB2 according to the presentation supports 20gb/s. What am I missing in terms of it not being fast enough for GPU work?


Return to posts index


Juan Salvo
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 10:01:19 pm

[Vladimir Kucherov] " What am I missing in terms of it not being fast enough for GPU work?"

PCIe 2.0 x16 is 80Gbps, and it's a few years old. PCIe3.0 x16 is 128Gbps. Way faster than ThB2. But that's not the only issue. There's also much higher latency, and the fact that ThB is point-to-point interface.

As of today, ThB can't support any GPUs. In the future the os may be updated to support this. And clever programming may allow for ThB 2.0s limited bandwidth to be used for GPGPU. But performance will still fall behind that of a 4 year old interface, and WAAY behind that of a modern one. Heck it's even behind that of PCIe1.

That said, I'm sure clever people will make it work as best they can. Not to mention that there are a pair of onboard GPUs.

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

http://JuanSalvo.com


Return to posts index

Eric Fiegehen
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:30:32 pm

Apple has not, up to this point, supported discrete GPUs external to Mac Book Pro or iMac - through Thunderbolt or ExpressCard 34/54. It's a BIOS support issue, which I'm sure would be a simple update for any Apple OSX user, if Apple choose to support external graphics processing. What makes you think they will with the upcoming new Mac Pro? (Anybody know of a release date?)

Seems like an interesting product, if you can accept that all of the I/O drivers for any current OSX-supported PCIe adapter will need to be re-written for Thunderbolt / Thunderbolt 2. Your standard PCIe drivers for OSX-supported cards are not supported through Thunderbolt.

Also, assuming Apple sticks to it's policy of not allowing a GPU(s) to be attached externally to the Thunderbolt port, what happens in 6-12 months when NVIDIA comes out with either a graphics card(s) which are double the speed of the AMD cards (which appear to be integrated into the system and non-upgradeable), or if next-gen CUDA blows the doors off of OpenCL? Looks to me like Apple has found a way to force OSX professional users who depend on hardware acceleration to upgrade every 12-18 months. Clever

Eric Fiegehen
Director, Visualization & GPU Compute Solutions
Cubix Corporation
ericc@cubix.com
http://www.cubix.com


Return to posts index

Dwaine Maggart
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:55:22 pm

Damn Eric! I was hoping you guys had a Tbolt-2 Expansion chassis ready for the new MacPro release that would handle this! :)

Dwaine Maggart
Blackmagic Design DaVinci Support


Return to posts index


Eric Fiegehen
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 11, 2013 at 11:50:27 pm

;) Don't be too shocked when we do release one later in the year (NOT an official company statement, BTW). I would, however, be shocked when / if Apple supports external discrete graphics controllers (AMD or NVIDIA) connected via TB or TB2.

This one drawback kept us from committing to TB in the past, but we would commit to it regardless of this deficiency if Resolve users out there are hungry enough for a Cubix-built TB expansion device which would allow them to reliably run 1-2 RED Rockets, ATTO, and other PCIe-based devices that could accelerate Resolve performance beyond what this new Mac Pro would be able to accomplish out of the box.

Eric


Return to posts index

Laco Gaal
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 8:46:08 pm

So.. Supermicro will get our money.
Just think of the expenses...thunderbolt expansion chassis for adding HDDs, or buying a Promise Pegasus.
Thunderbolt expansion chassis for PCI cards like a RAID controller, a firewire card, a 10GigE card, etc.
Thunderbolt expansion chassis for GPUs, because the onboard AMDs won't get you anything like a Titan for example.

All they were supposed to do, is upgrade to USB3, add 4 Thunderbolt ports, get the New Xeons, increase the number of SATA, and PCI ports, and increase the PSU performance, and that's all.
Instead of this, future mac pro users will have to buy 2-3 Thunderbolt expansions chassis just to get where the 2011 Mac Pro was.

Argh...


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 9:16:18 pm

http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=8898

Well Grant seems to like it!

Steve Connor

There's nothing we can't argue about on the FCPX COW Forum


Return to posts index


Nate Weaver
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 10:08:09 pm

I just found that link. I don't see any reason for Grant to go out of his way to say something like that other than it's really the way he feels.

I also was carefully reading the Apple new Pro pages and the way it's worded, it looks like it might be possible that each TB2 port has it's own bandwidth and controller. I'd expect the new school will be bonded TB2 lines to a Cubix, 1, 2 or maybe even 3 or 4 TB2 lines to an enclosure.

Either way, with his nice words about "new" OpenCL, maybe I don't have to worry about much.

HDMI 1.4 to a 4K monitor (that is, when it gets to the point when we need such things) and off you go.

Nate Weaver
Director/D.P., Los Angeles
http://www.nateweaver.net


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 10, 2013 at 10:11:48 pm

Didn't Phil say 3 controllers and 6 ports?

Steve Connor

There's nothing we can't argue about on the FCPX COW Forum


Return to posts index

Joseph Owens
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 11, 2013 at 3:54:00 pm

[Nate Weaver] " I don't see any reason for Grant to go out of his way to say something like that other than it's really the way he feels."

Hard to say. However, having been around computers for ~ 40 years, whenever someone in sales says "this screams", I assume that its around 5% faster and costs twice as much. Maybe I'll be wrong this time, (like the time I was mistaken).

jPo

"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.


Return to posts index


Joseph Owens
Re: New Mac Pro
on Jun 11, 2013 at 12:40:54 am

[Vladimir Kucherov] "Thoughts?"

First impression is that it looks exactly like all those hotel cigarette ashcans that used to blight the landscape. Fill the top with some of that white silica sand and there you go...

jPo

"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.


Return to posts index

Chris Tomberlin
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 11, 2013 at 3:08:09 pm

And why only 12 cores? Won't there be a PC with the E5 chips running dual 8-core cpus that will be faster than the mac? And have PCIe slots? Sure it will be big and ugly. But Apple doesn't realize we don't care. How will the revolutionary new Mac Pro be able to keep up with a 16 core PC?

Chris Tomberlin
Color/Finishing
Outpost Pictures


Return to posts index

stig olsen
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 11, 2013 at 3:54:42 pm

It is very far from keeping up with a PC. Mac is dead to me.


Return to posts index

Rick Lang
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 11, 2013 at 4:47:04 pm

It does sound surprising to some people that Apple is not offering more cores than their current Mac Pro. However a system is the sum of its parts and it does appear to be designed for overall throughput with the very fast flash PCI SSD, fast memory that uses compression on idle memory before paging to that very fast SSD, very very capable dual GPUs with up to 6GB of video memory each! So much disappointment reflected in many of the posts here when Apple has shown quite a lot of information in their preview of the device, but it is still just a preview. The dress has been raised to show an ankle, but there is a lot of leg left to your imagination.

Personally I am not disappointed and the breaking news form Alex Gollner's blog is that the machine is user configurable and will be serviceable so that the custom base architecture allows the cards to be upgradable.

Rick Lang

iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB


Return to posts index

David Gagne
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 11, 2013 at 5:12:35 pm

Why only 12 cores? To keep costs down. Do you have any idea how much those Xeon processors cost? You would be complaining about cost if they offered a 24 core version for $13k, and you'd need a noisier fan to deal with the heat. Have you ever heard an XServe fire up? Yeah that kind of noise.

Each of those processors is probably around $2,000-3000. The GPUs are probably $3k each, so a decked out Mac Pro should cost around $10k.

My bet is the low end will be single GPU, 6 cores, for probably around $3k.


Return to posts index

Rick Lang
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 11, 2013 at 6:00:00 pm

David, I altered my post to make it clear that I was not another naysayer based on the preview we saw. I see how you could have thought I was being critical when I intended to support the design previewed. Hard to convey a tone of voice in a written post. Thanks.

Rick Lang

iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB


Return to posts index

Chris Tomberlin
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 11, 2013 at 9:12:48 pm

If the 12 core is going to cost $10K (by your estimations) then a 24 core at $13K would be a reasonable deal. My point is not to complain or be a naysayer but to ask why Apple has FINALLY updated the Mac Pro and yet possibly hindered it's ability to compete at the highest end by sacrificing power and throughput for the sake of cool design. As others on this forum have stated, TB2 does not have the bandwidth for external GPUs like PCIe3 does. If the built in cards are all you need then fine; but others need more and won't be able to get it. What about that $4k Red Rocket card? Will TB2 be enough for that to still be useful? Dual processors? doesn't seem to be an option.

Maybe in time, the entire industry will move everything over to TB2 and we'll all replace all of our PCI cards with TB2 (or TB3 or TB4) widgets but in the mean time, the long awaited Mac Pro kinda throws a wrench in the way professionals are currently using their Macs. I know that is the Apple way - "innovation" at all costs. It reminds me a little of the transition away from CRT technology. Manufacturers stopped producing them years ago and we're only now getting to some technology that can really replace them.

Hopefully it will all be great and things will be better than ever for the Mac Pro. If not, I'll go another route. I just hate to see such a great OS limited in any way by the hardware options available.

Rant over,

Chris Tomberlin
Color/Finishing
Outpost Pictures


Return to posts index

Juan Salvo
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 11, 2013 at 9:35:16 pm

[Chris Tomberlin] "What about that $4k Red Rocket card? Will TB2 be enough for that to still be useful?"

Yes. But likely not enough for RR-X.

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

http://JuanSalvo.com


Return to posts index

Margus Voll
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 12, 2013 at 5:56:37 am

there is possibility that RR would be obsolete tech by then if you read all the posts around ?

--

Margus

http://iconstudios.eu
https://vimeo.com/iconstudioseu/videos

DaVinci 9, OSX 10.7.4
MacPro 5.1 2x2,93 24GB
GTX 470 / Quadro 4000
Multibridge 2 Pro


Return to posts index

Eric Fiegehen
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 12, 2013 at 4:30:23 pm

Chris - TB2 does not even come close to PCIe Gen3 x16's 160Gbps data transfer rate. Will most Mac Pro users need this much bandwidth? Probably not. Would most Resolve users make use of 160Gbps data transfer rates if their host system supports it? Probably yes, when Resolve 10 is released (I'll need to check with DaVinci on this question).

I think it will be interesting to see what, if any, influence the PCIe adapter partners and current Mac Pro customers will add to any revisions made between now and later this year.

Eric


Return to posts index

John Sellars
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 12, 2013 at 5:29:17 pm

Eric- How about you guys make a piggyback PCIe3 on the SSD connector, so we can drill a hole in the (plastic?) case, and run it to the Cubix…


Return to posts index

Juan Salvo
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 12, 2013 at 5:34:10 pm

[John Sellars] "Eric- How about you guys make a piggyback PCIe3 on the SSD connector, so we can drill a hole in the (plastic?) case, and run it to the Cubix…"

Ha! Great idea! Well except that the PCIe SSD slot is a single lane slot. :(

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

http://JuanSalvo.com


Return to posts index

Marco Amaral
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 13, 2013 at 8:42:34 pm

so... dear apple, about your new mac pro:
how I connect my non-apple dvi displays?
and that SATA internal disk that the client bring to me?
wow... yes I have a usb2 reader for this...

how I connect my Optical Fiber RAID?
and If I need to install a CUDA card for some specific application?
yes I can buy a cubic with a lot of PCIe...

or I can offer to my girlfriend a nice holidays I build a hackintosh to work.
with love
m


Return to posts index

Eric Hansen
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 2:35:32 pm

Marco

I can't tell if you want a serious answer to this question or not.

E

Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
http://www.erichansen.tv


Return to posts index

Marco Amaral
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 3:21:33 pm

yes please.

and, if its possible, I can add one more.
how I connect my blackmagic multibridge without PCIe slots?

I know the answer: I should buy a thunderbolt blackmagic video card,
as I should buy thunderbolt storage,
and more thunderbolt readers for anything I already have.

the computer is a peace of a configuration we have for resolve.
I want to work with my equipment changing only my "lovely grey" mac pro.


Return to posts index

Eric Hansen
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 4:18:45 pm

I totally agree that losing PCIe slots sucks. But this isn't too different than the transition from PCI-X to PCIe. I had to replace perfectly awesome Kona and Fibre Channel PCI-X cards with equivalent PCIe versions without gaining any additional functionality. It's the same here with your examples of BMD cards. But you have to decide which is more important to your workflow, upgrading your $1000 cards or $5000 workstation. Some years you have to do cards, some years it's workstations and some years it's both. And sometimes it's OS platforms. Only time will tell

Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
http://www.erichansen.tv


Return to posts index

Juan Salvo
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 4:26:04 pm

There are also relatively cost effective ThB to PCIe enclosure you could put you card into.

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

http://JuanSalvo.com


Return to posts index

Chris Tomberlin
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 4:28:29 pm

Unless it's a bunch of GPUs. Juan, what are your plans? Hope that in time there's a ThB solution or go hackintosh that still has (superior) pcie tech?

Chris Tomberlin
Color/Finishing
Outpost Pictures


Return to posts index

Juan Salvo
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 4:42:19 pm

My primary resolve machine is Linux... with my existing MacPro to support it. For editorial we'll likely pick up new iMacs, MacMinis, or MacPro depending on need.

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

http://JuanSalvo.com


Return to posts index

stig olsen
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 4:45:05 pm

What I dont understand is why you guys even care! This is a perfect opportunity to trash your old macs and buy a high end kick ass PC. Z820 is in the same price range, more CPU, 7 slots and works like s charm. Let Apple do what they can best, please the non-professionals. Stig


Return to posts index

Chris Tomberlin
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 4:47:14 pm

You have a very valid point. Most of us that care however, care because we really don't like Windows as an OS and / or have too much invested in a Mac infrastructure.

Chris Tomberlin
Color/Finishing
Outpost Pictures


Return to posts index

William Edwards
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:01:19 pm

Yeah I'm right here with Stig, which is why I ditched Apple last summer, waiting for this macpro to come around.

It's the peripherals that scare me, not this ash tray computer. All those cords (only 4 USB ports? Really?), extra devices...it seems so hack. It'll cost a lot of money, more time researching and building and waiting, etc.. I need more to work with one device that's known to work well and get the job done- and affordably upgradable if need be. Let apple build a computer for its broader base of users.


Return to posts index

Marco Amaral
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:07:12 pm

Stig,
my only concern is about PRORES codec.
EVERYONE asks me a DCP and a PRORES file in the end of a movie.

Maybe there is a solution for windows? a codec that good?
As you know, resolve in windows don't export prores.
I dont want to have a kiss-ass PC to run resolve, and 99% of the jobs ask me to go to a apple machine
just to export a PRORES file.

I don't work in windows a long time. is there any good news about codecs?
PRORES is so good...


Return to posts index

Juan Salvo
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:20:32 pm

DNxHD is quite good.

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

http://JuanSalvo.com


Return to posts index

William Edwards
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:27:04 pm

Yeah, I read about people just sending out a job with DNxHD and shipping along the codec for the client to install with it.

ProRes 422 does have a slight color shift too.


Return to posts index

Juan Salvo
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:33:38 pm

Just to be clear when it comes to DNxHD i prefer to not use an MOV container.

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

http://JuanSalvo.com


Return to posts index

William Edwards
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:06:08 pm


Only dilemma I find is not being able to produce ProRes files on a PC. Do you find that to be an issue Stig?


Return to posts index

stig olsen
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 5:50:01 pm

Like Juan says, DNxHD.
It is effectively lossless at higher bitrates (185+) and 185X (10bit) +
DNX is coming fast forward as a standard and it is cross platform.

And for finishing most colorist export DPX, so I cant really see any point in holding on to the PRORES codec.

I have delivered TV spots to all the nordic channels and some european channels and none of them are tied to PRORES only.

And with DNxHD you dont need to think about the gamma issues that is well documented in PRORES.

DNxHD444 is also becoming a mastering format for a lot of large post production houses around the world.

You can also deliver to most platforms with the animation codec that is a very common codec used by a range of graphic artist.


STig


Return to posts index

Marco Amaral
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 6:03:42 pm

Ok. I'll check DNxHD!
I don't know if resolve in windows can read and work good with a PRORES movie.

I dont work for tv Stig (well, 5% of my work is for tv...)
Usually I finish for DCP, DPX, bluray and digital files.

But its normal to get a movie in PRORES and a conformed EDL to work in resolve.
Its possible to open prores in a windows resolve?

thank u all


Return to posts index

William Edwards
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 6:28:20 pm

Yes, windows can work with ProRes just fine.


Return to posts index

Marco Amaral
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 6:31:29 pm

thanks william
I've checked in the resolve codec list


Return to posts index

Margus Voll
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 8:39:43 pm

After seeing Foundry Mari on new Mac Pro i bet that Resolve will fly as mad on this machine.

It looks like SGI machines used to be, really fluid when playing 20 gigs worth of 3d maps
in realtime.

I do not see at the moment that HP Z machines can match that in any way.

Question is just how well one or the other of software is optimized on that platform and os.


At the moment it feels by the videos really cutting edge.

Cores do not play a big role here if data bus is really big and cores run really fast or efficiently.

Alone OS on 1200 MB sec drive will burn a little hole on my desk i'm sure. :D

--

Margus

http://iconstudios.eu
https://vimeo.com/iconstudioseu/videos

DaVinci 9, OSX 10.7.4
MacPro 5.1 2x2,93 24GB
GTX 470 / Quadro 4000
Multibridge 2 Pro


Return to posts index

Eric Fiegehen
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 9:06:22 pm

Margus,

The mother board they're using is / will be Intel Falcon Ridge-based with the internal PCIe running at 160Gbps for the GPUs, PCIe Gen3 x1 or 4x for the flash drive. HP and others will be able to match bus speed, plus have available slots for whatever cards you want to put in these systems.

If you're using an HP/Dell/whatever flavor, its chipset is Intel Falcon Ridge, and you want your power-hungry state-of-the art GPUs to run cool, or you don't have more than a couple of expansion slots available, then you add a Cubix PCIe Gen3 x16 HIC plus Xpander to an open slot in the host and add 4,6, or 8 cards.

Eric


Return to posts index

Margus Voll
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 9:09:23 pm

Ok i see your point.

But what we do not know if and how all this is optimized in resolve and
how it would compare to linux based multi gpu machines?

This is the part that is a mystery at the moment and only speculation?

Also os compatibility and integration and efficiency would play a big part.

I have used Resolve on beefy pc machine with windows and i hated it compared to a lot
weaker mac machine with less gpu power.




--

Margus

http://iconstudios.eu
https://vimeo.com/iconstudioseu/videos

DaVinci 9, OSX 10.7.4
MacPro 5.1 2x2,93 24GB
GTX 470 / Quadro 4000
Multibridge 2 Pro


Return to posts index

Eric Fiegehen
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 9:57:04 pm

Yes, that is a very good question Margus. I think alot of people will be interested in this info from the good folks at Blackmagic Design, which I'm guessing we'll know once Resolve 10 is released.

Eric


Return to posts index

Juan Salvo
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 10:34:17 pm

I think the linux machines will still come out ahead. Though the new MacPros will certainly be solid machines for mainstream applications, you'll want the robustness and capabilities of a Linux config for things like DI and stereoscopic/HFR work.

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

http://JuanSalvo.com


Return to posts index

Margus Voll
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 14, 2013 at 10:42:15 pm

Yeah for regular hd tv stuff linux is a bit too much at the moment imo ?

If new Mac Pro will work out then it would be ideal.
If there is turnover to support linux version then there is no question at the moment but for small
shops like i have mac pro seems more reasonable just have to wait
for the machines to emerge and to see some comparison.

--

Margus

http://iconstudios.eu
https://vimeo.com/iconstudioseu/videos

DaVinci 9, OSX 10.7.4
MacPro 5.1 2x2,93 24GB
GTX 470 / Quadro 4000
Multibridge 2 Pro


Return to posts index

Juan Salvo
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 15, 2013 at 1:36:37 am

Well "too much" is a bit subjective. The big issue with the new MacPro is that there is 0 expandability. That's it, what you buy is what you get. So while performance will be great for 95% of the work that people do in resolve, if you want to ever do that 5% work... I imagine you'd need to get into Linux anyway.

But it's always great that we have choices. And the new MacPro will be an excellent choice for I'd say most Resolve users. It's just that any improvements will have to come through updates. Hopefully Apple sets a pattern of updating every 12-18 months like they did with the prior MacPro... Until they didn't, that is.

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

http://JuanSalvo.com


Return to posts index

Margus Voll
Re: New Mac Pro-why only 12 cores?
on Jun 15, 2013 at 5:41:20 am

Yes it is subjective i agree :D

Most likely when you have this 5% level of jobs then you also have budget for linux machines i bet ?

--

Margus

http://iconstudios.eu
https://vimeo.com/iconstudioseu/videos

DaVinci 9, OSX 10.7.4
MacPro 5.1 2x2,93 24GB
GTX 470 / Quadro 4000
Multibridge 2 Pro


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]