FORUMS: list search recent posts

1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Walter Soyka
1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 14, 2016 at 12:41:46 pm

In case you haven't seen Juan Salvo's observation yet, the Mac Pro line was last updated 1,000 days ago. Here's a little screenshot from MacRumors showing the number of days between each of the releases:



Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 14, 2016 at 12:57:48 pm

Looks like it has become inversely proportional to Mac OS updates. During that time I've had two motherboard updates and three graphics card updates and only one OS update.


Return to posts index

Michael Phillips
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 14, 2016 at 2:36:40 pm

And around that time, the iPhone 5c and 5s were announced if you want to compare it to other Apple revenue streams.
A nice interactive timeline for iPhone: http://time.com/2934526/apple-iphone-timeline/

Would be interesting to see a timeline of all Apple products aligned together.


Michael


Return to posts index


Warren Eig
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 14, 2016 at 3:35:54 pm

And I just had to buy a used 2012 Mac Pro tower as my previous Mac Pro gave up the ghost....

Warren Eig
O 310-470-0905


email: info@babyboompictures.com
website: http://www.BabyBoomPictures.com



For Camera Accessories - Monitors and Batteries
website: http://www.EigRig.com



Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 6, 2016 at 5:23:43 am

I just did the same! My "new" 2012 12-core 3.46Ghz arrives tomorrow! It was about 25% the cost of a nMP 12-core and about 90% of the performance though no Thunderbolt of course. Hoping Apple offers more cores on new iMac in the future... an 8 core iMac with 64GB RAM would be nice.

It was at a Vegas premiere that I resolved to become an avid FCPX user.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 14, 2016 at 4:05:08 pm

Way too long.







Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 14, 2016 at 5:31:04 pm

I always loved that spot. :-)

It begs the question I raised in the Apple Event thread -- do we in fact need another Mac from Apple? Why? Sure, faster, but no matter what they do, somebody's ALWAYS want faster.

Of course, nobody who cares about peak performance is using a Mac anyway, and Apple hasn't even pretended to aspire to peak status since those hilarious Super Computer ads, where the whole concept was played for a (very clever) joke. Talk about a classic punchline!



If anything, the lesson that Apple appears to be trying to teach is to get out of the habit of thinking we need something new or different.

"If we thought you needed it, we'd give it to you. Ergo, if we don't give it to you, you don't need it."


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 14, 2016 at 5:50:10 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Apple hasn't even pretended to aspire to peak status since those hilarious Super Computer ads,"

Don't forget at the G5 Mac Pro headline, "Apple Unleashes the World’s Fastest Personal Computer—the Power Mac G5"
https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2003/06/23Apple-Unleashes-the-Worlds-Faste...


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 14, 2016 at 6:57:59 pm

[Tim Wilson] "do we in fact need another Mac from Apple? Why? Sure, faster, but no matter what they do, somebody's ALWAYS want faster...Of course, nobody who cares about peak performance is using a Mac anyway, and Apple hasn't even pretended to aspire to peak status since those hilarious Super Computer ads,"

That 1999 ad dated from the RISC vs CISC era when having a non-Intel CPU was perceived as faster, better, etc. The PowerMac G4 had a theoretical Linpack peak of about 1 gigaflop, which the 1999 ad mentions ("one billion calculations per second"). That was probably at least 2x the performance of the then-fastest Pentium III, but that is floating point which is less often used in most workloads.

Considering integer workloads which are more typical of many commercial apps, even historically Intel wasn't that far behind. This was because RISC had lower code density which caused the knock-on effect of higher bus bandwidth to achieve the same real-world performance as CISC. It also caused lower hit ratios in the various CPU and data caches, so larger more expensive caches were required to produce the same instruction hit ratio.

Then as decreasing feature size inexorably increased fabrication cost (now close to $10 billion per plant), it became more about capital investment and fabrication prowess than CPU architecture.

But the G4 and G5 were definitely fast in real-world apps of the day, as can be seen from these old Bearfeats benchmarks: http://barefeats.com/pentium4.html

It only made sense for Apple to capitalize on that in their 1999 ads. But that wasn't because Apple somehow cared more about performance then vs today, rather they had (for better or worse) wedded themselves to a RISC CPU architecture which temporarily delivered better performance than similar Intel CPUs. When that advantage dwindled they transitioned (yet again) their CPU architecture to Intel and are fortunate to have survived that.

Today essentially everyone is using the same CPU families in desktop machines. Those are vastly faster than the so-called G4 supercomputer which did about 1 gigaflop. The Intel Xeon E5 2687W v4 does about 1078 Linpack gigaflops, or over 1,000 times faster. The biggest Xeon has 22 cores. Maybe Apple will something similar in the updated nMP.

However even with such extreme performance available, you can't economically go any faster using the available parts. IOW even though the Power8 CPU exists, there is realistically no alternative to Intel on the high-end desktop. That said, most people who have edited a lot of 4k could use a lot more performance than the current nMP provides. But it's less about who is fastest than providing adequate performance for increasingly challenging workloads.

People on Premiere can always go to Windows. For FCPX they are stuck with Apple, so in that sense an updated nMP is vitally important. A top-spec iMac 27 is just not comfortably fast when editing and applying effects to large amounts of 4k, even using FCPX and even using proxy. If an updated nMP does not materialize that will drive users off the Mac which means away from FCPX. You could argue it's not worth it to Apple financially but that's like arguing the Corvette is not worth it to GM based on annual sales. There is a halo effect beyond the actual unit and dollar sales.


Return to posts index


Darren Roark
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 4:27:52 am

[Joe Marler] "People on Premiere can always go to Windows. For FCPX they are stuck with Apple, so in that sense an updated nMP is vitally important. "

Agreed, but a Mac Pro refresh of any significance has only really been possible since April as that's when all the new GPUs came out that were a large enough leap forward.

All the chipmakers are slowing down cycles by a big margin.


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 10:47:45 am

[Darren Roark] "but a Mac Pro refresh of any significance has only really been possible since April as that's when all the new GPUs came out that were a large enough leap forward. "

But this is also because Apple decided to redesign the MacPro so you couldn't swap out the graphics cards when new ones came on the market that were considerably better (like the handful of cards nVidia has released). So their inability to update with any significant leap forward is entirely of their own design.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 7:01:00 pm

[Michael Hancock] "But this is also because Apple decided to redesign the MacPro so you couldn't swap out the graphics cards when new ones came on the market that were considerably better (like the handful of cards nVidia has released). So their inability to update with any significant leap forward is entirely of their own design."

So far eGPU support on Sierra seems very promising. I chalk this gap up to a lot of moving parts weren't there yet like thunderbolt 3.

AMD's OpenCL implementation is much stronger and since their software uses that over nvidia's proprietary CUDA it makes sense that they would shy away from that the same way they did with flash.

CUDA was reverse engineered recently showing that it actually runs well on an AMD GPU. This proves to me what I've suspected for a while which is "CUDA is just mumbo jumbo tech to keep people locked into nvidia cards".

However if they don't release a GPU update kit for the 2013 mac pros with the new AMD chips I will be very disappointed.


Return to posts index


Walter Soyka
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 9:58:16 pm

[Darren Roark] "CUDA was reverse engineered recently showing that it actually runs well on an AMD GPU. This proves to me what I've suspected for a while which is "CUDA is just mumbo jumbo tech to keep people locked into nvidia cards". "

CUDA's biggest strength is its development toolchain. NVIDIA has done a lot of work to make developers' jobs easier.

https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-zone

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 9:27:23 pm

[Darren Roark] "Agreed, but a Mac Pro refresh of any significance has only really been possible since April as that's when all the new GPUs came out that were a large enough leap forward. "

When the new Mac Pro shipped, NVIDIA was still on Kepler. In the last 1,000 days, NVIDIA has shipped two generations of Maxwell, plus the first generation of Pascal.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 9:31:00 pm

[Walter Soyka] "When the new Mac Pro shipped, NVIDIA was still on Kepler. In the last 1,000 days, NVIDIA has shipped two generations of Maxwell, plus the first generation of Pascal.
"


And how did that effect day to day performance?


Return to posts index


Walter Soyka
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 10:16:30 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "And how did that effect day to day performance?"

That depends on your application. If you're using multi-GPU 3D renderers, a lot. For editorial, maybe it doesn't matter as much.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 11:34:08 pm

[Walter Soyka] "That depends on your application. If you're using multi-GPU 3D renderers, a lot. "

How much is "a lot?" Like buy a new GPU every time a new one comes out, a lot?


Return to posts index

Scott Thomas
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 10:42:03 pm

We're not alone in the speculation on what's happening to the Mac. The feeling is that the long delay is a sign that some big change might be on the horizon.

One idea is that Apple will go with an AMD SOC (System on a Chip)
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/08/26/amd-soc

Apple is developing their own ARM based CPUs at a breakneck pace. What if they got Intel to fabricate them in their foundries?
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/08/26/intel-arm

One way of thinking about it is that the original 68K Mac lasted about 10 years. PPC lasted a bit longer, say, 12 years. So now we're at the 10 year mark for Mac on X86. It's already being talked about. Maybe we are going to see Mac move to ARM, if the history is any guidepost?


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 10:49:13 pm

[Scott Thomas] "Apple is developing their own ARM based CPUs at a breakneck pace... Maybe we are going to see Mac move to ARM, if the history is any guidepost?"

The iPhone 7 Geekbenches faster (single-core) than the nMP.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Scott Thomas
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 11:12:35 pm

Intel has smaller, faster processes than TSMC who currently fabricates the A10, so it could only get faster.
http://daringfireball.net/2016/09/a_series_benchmarks

Also... I took note that Apple used a new naming convention for the A-series chips. The iPhone 7 has the A10 "Fusion". My immediate thought was that would allow for other strata of chips for different purposes. So maybe we'll see an A10 "Unobtanium".

http://scottgfx.com


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 8, 2016 at 1:51:13 pm

[Scott Thomas] "One idea is that Apple will go with an AMD SOC (System on a Chip)
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/08/26/amd-soc

Apple is developing their own ARM based CPUs at a breakneck pace. What if they got Intel to fabricate them in their foundries?
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/08/26/intel-arm....Maybe we are going to see Mac move to ARM, if the history is any guidepost?"


There has been informed commentary about ARM-based Macs. However there's also been lots of wild speculation based on misunderstood reports, like iPhone 7 Geekbench performance is faster than one core of a 12-core nMP. In fact the multicore performance of my iPhone 7 is slower than my 7-year old Windows PC with a six-generation-old four-core i7-875K. My 2015 iMac 27 with a 4Ghz i7-6700K has 3x the multicore Geekbench performance of my iPhone 7. It is amazing the iPhone 7 is that fast but it is still a lot slower on real world multithreaded workloads than a seven-year-old PC.

When you are starting from lower performance (like ARM), it is easy to make big gains. Intel experienced that decades ago. Those gains cannot continue whether ARM or x86. You encounter fundamental architectural issues with superscalar instruction decoding, leakage current and fabrication. ARM (including the Apple-specific ARM designs) is making more rapid progress because their performance is lower so they haven't yet reached that point of diminishing performance. When they do their performance gains will probably taper off, just like Intel.

If you were willing to give up Windows compatibility, an ARM-type CPU could (performance wise) replace the x86 in lower-end Macs. I'm sure Apple is evaluating that. It would fragment the product line, creating x86 and ARM-based Macs. It would greatly reduce the software catalog for ARM-based Macs. They would essentially be like the now-defunct Windows RT -- a special version of macOS for ARM for which there are few apps. Apple might judge the tradeoffs as worthwhile but I doubt it.

But this thread is about the Mac Pro, and I don't see any conceivable way ARM could compete with Intel up in the Xeon performance space.

An alternate approach is maintain x86 compatibility by partnering with AMD and Apple taking over their own line of x86 CPUs, similar to how they did with ARM. That is slightly more conceivable, but the gap from AMD's projected performance to Intel's Xeon performance is huge.

Based on Intel announcements, rumors and leaks, we expect significant Xeon upgrades in the relatively near future, including possibly on-chip programmable FPGAs. These could theoretically be reprogrammed by developers to execute application specific logic in hardware, e.g, maybe video encoding. It is conceivable the Mac Pro delays are to sync up Intel's upcoming products with an updated Mac Pro design, plus of course the new 14/16nm GPU technology which only recently became available. Then there is Thunderbolt 3, USB-C, updated 4k monitors, etc. The production-quantity availability of all those items must converge within a specific timeframe to make possible a new workstation.


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Sep 16, 2016 at 8:34:36 pm

Is someone with an uber fast PC and an external RAID willing to do some tests to see what this 1000 day old Mac Pro is up against in the current market of video editing, colouring and exporting?

I'm genuinely not poking the PC vs Mac bear, I'm just trying to see if the cow could provide a really useful resource for anyone wanting to understand what's out there...

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Kevin Johnson
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 5, 2016 at 5:48:01 pm

For what it's worth, I have a 4 year old HP Z800 with 24GB of RAM, and a crappy nvidia 3800 with 1GB of video RAM. I was hoping my coworkers year old macpro would help with some after effects rendering. 4K comp all greenscreen footage from the Sony F55-hundreds of layers. I was expected the macpro would crush my old PC. They rendered almost exactly the same speed. Really bummed me out.


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 5, 2016 at 6:23:01 pm

Is it possible that anemic sales convinced Apple there's not enough of us power users out there to make an update profitable?

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 5, 2016 at 6:55:34 pm

[Kevin Johnson] "or what it's worth, I have a 4 year old HP Z800 with 24GB of RAM, and a crappy nvidia 3800 with 1GB of video RAM. I was hoping my coworkers year old macpro would help with some after effects rendering. 4K comp all greenscreen footage from the Sony F55-hundreds of layers. I was expected the macpro would crush my old PC. They rendered almost exactly the same speed. Really bummed me out."

Wow, which processor(s) is in your z800... is it a dual or single processor machine?

Shawn



Return to posts index

Warren Eig
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 5, 2016 at 7:07:40 pm

Cuda?

Warren Eig
O 310-470-0905


email: info@babyboompictures.com
website: http://www.BabyBoomPictures.com



For Camera Accessories - Monitors and Batteries
website: http://www.EigRig.com



Return to posts index

Kevin Johnson
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 5, 2016 at 7:27:08 pm

Dual Xeon 2.67- Windows 7.
Macpro was 3.5ghz 6 core, d500's, 64 GB ram

I was rendering 20 frames per minute on the PC, 22fpm on the Macpro (10% faster).
The macpro SSDs were much faster, when rendering internally instead of ISIS, it was 22fpm (pc) to 28fpm (Mac, +27%)


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 5, 2016 at 7:47:13 pm

[Kevin Johnson] "
Dual Xeon 2.67- Windows 7.
Macpro was 3.5ghz 6 core, d500's, 64 GB ram

I was rendering 20 frames per minute on the PC, 22fpm on the Macpro (10% faster).
The macpro SSDs were much faster, when rendering internally instead of ISIS, it was 22fpm (pc) to 28fpm (Mac, +27%)"


Yeah... time for an upgrade. How long are you willing to wait for the next nMP before considering another PC?

Shawn



Return to posts index

Kevin Johnson
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 6, 2016 at 8:51:23 pm

We are a PC house for editorial and ingest although I am a Mac guy so it stings a little bit. I ran the test in the hopes that the Macpro would be scorching fast to maybe justify switching over to Mac for editorial...but alas, the is zero chance our engineering department would switch over to Mac for such little gains. Was it a fair comparison? No. But I would expect a "year old" new Macpro to perform much better than the 4-5 year old workstation. We do a ton of 4k work in AE so that's where we need it to perform.

We'll probably end up dropping $10-15k a piece on the latest HP workstations and NVIDIA graphics cards so I'd hope that we would get some nice gains there...and these "old" workstations can be used elsewhere or as render nodes.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 5, 2016 at 10:56:50 pm

A single 6core MacPro was 10-27% faster than a similar vintage CPU dual Xeon.

That's not nothing.

Also, Ae is glacial with 4K renders, but I digress.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 6, 2016 at 5:10:33 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "A single 6core MacPro was 10-27% faster than a similar vintage CPU dual Xeon.

That's not nothing."


Sure, but didn't the PC have two much slower processors, less than half the RAM and an ancient video card?

Shawn



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 6, 2016 at 6:22:24 pm
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Oct 6, 2016 at 6:44:19 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Sure, but didn't the PC have two much slower processors, less than half the RAM and an ancient video card?"

This is the age ole question. I know I have asked it, I know others have. What constitutes fast?

The PC was stated to be "4 years old". The MacPros, have "old technology in them" (3+ years old), yet the Mac still outperforms on less processors of a similar vintage. As far as I know, Ae does not render on the GPU for most of the work, so we can probably not focus on that aspect. We can see that the PCIe SSD seems to speed up the Ae renders.

And I'll say it again, Ae is reaaallllyy slow at 4k. Is this a problem with the hardware? I don't really think so. I think it has to do with how Ae is built and what it's built for.

And they might as well hang the "Page under construction, check back soon!" sign on Ae until they are done fixing whatever it is they are fixing. I think they are trying to fix speed by separating the UI from the render function, but I don't really know anymore, don't really care, but I wish it was fixed.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 6, 2016 at 8:00:25 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I know I have asked it, I know others have. What constitutes fast?"

In general, I think this is why there haven't been many updates of much of anything on either platform. The answer is, "They're all pretty damn fast." And to your point about AE and 4K, the real bottlenecks aren't always, or often, in hardware.

That said, this does NOT apply once you get up to the realm of sizzlecore and dedicated 3D/CG machines. But in the realm that most of us live in most of the time, what are we looking for? New IO, really, and even that can be a PITA as often as not.

So I don't think the issue is that Apple doesn't care enough about the Mac Pro market, or that the market is too small to motivate Apple to prioritize it, or anything else. HP has a dedicated workstation unit that bigger than the entirety of Apple....but they're not rushing out new stuff either. The chip guys aren't turning the crank that often either.

I think we're in a transition that's characterized by nothing moving. LOL

There's little we DO, actually DO, that REQUIRES the kind of increases we used to demand just to keep up with our work. But now, honestly, we can make do with older machines. We know this, because we are.

So there's my semi-rhetorical question for you. Is any of this really a PROBLEM-problem for you folks in your day-to-day, or more of an itch that isn't being scratched?

Not to trivialize itches that need scratching. New gear is fun, and I'm starting to itch for a new point-and-shoot for personal use just because I don't need a new car, a new TV, a new phone, or a new computer. Got my new Kindle (Paperwhite ftw), a coupla new Roku sticks to go with my Chromecast, Amazon Echo is more than I need right now, so what else is there? LOL


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 6, 2016 at 9:29:44 pm

[Tim Wilson] "That said, this does NOT apply once you get up to the realm of sizzlecore and dedicated 3D/CG machines. But in the realm that most of us live in most of the time, what are we looking for? New IO, really, and even that can be a PITA as often as not."

When we need true 3D, our vendor renders everything in the cloud. They may need faster machines for previews, but for the most part, the previews are wireframe, or super low res. Once everything is done, to the cloud it goes. Things get recomposed downstream, but at that point, processing is relatively light.

[Tim Wilson] "So there's my semi-rhetorical question for you. Is any of this really a PROBLEM-problem for you folks in your day-to-day, or more of an itch that isn't being scratched?"

It hasn't been a problem for us. To your point about i/o, thunderbolt 2 has been the most dramatic shift in our workflow. It's great, and I don't want it to go away. Since we are on FCPX, the new MacPros churn through 4k work, and I rarely render in X. I don't feel like the MacPro is old tech at all, and I miss them when I am not editing on the desktop, but rather a laptop. Do Pr users feel the same way? If they do or don't, why?

I wonder, if Apple did update the MacPro, say, to the newest Xeon processor, what would the day to day gains be? Would it be worth dropping another $10+k per machine? If I am already working without doing much rendering, how much faster can I go? I think these are the types of questions that Apple engineers, marketers, and execs ask themselves. Is it worth it for us to do an incremental upgrade?

By the way, have you used the new Resolve? Sometimes the renders go so fast, I think that there's a problem and that the program isn't working correctly when in fact it's working, just really really fast. Obviously, the new MacPro's standard dual GPUs help in regards to Resolve, and Blackmagic seems to be keen on building applications for the Mac (and perhaps other modern architectures).

I have never have this "problem" in After Effects. I always know how hard it seems to be working. Always. Especially when it crashes, which is a lot these days.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 6, 2016 at 8:02:24 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "[Shawn Miller] "Sure, but didn't the PC have two much slower processors, less than half the RAM and an ancient video card?"

[Jeremy Garchow] "This is the age ole question. I know I have asked it, I know others have. What constitutes fast?"

Fast equals acceptable image quality, divided by the time left to deliver the project - the less time left to deliver, the higher the tolerance for lower quality. ?

Seriously though, it IS a good question. For me, 30 seconds per frame seems really fast some days, on other days it seem like an eternity... one thing if for sure though, it's NEVER fast enough.

[Jeremy Garchow] "The PC was stated to be "4 years old". The MacPros, have "old technology in them" (3+ years old), yet the Mac still outperforms on less processors of a similar vintage. As far as I know, Ae does not render on the GPU for most of the work, so we can probably not focus on that aspect. We can see that the PCIe SSD seems to speed up the Ae renders.

And I'll say it again, Ae is reaaallllyy slow at 4k. Is this a problem with the hardware? I don't really think so. I think it has to do with how Ae is built and what it's built for.

And they might as well hang the "Page under construction, check back soon!" sign on Ae until they are done fixing whatever it is they are fixing. I think they are trying to fix speed by separating the UI from the render function, but I don't really know anymore, don't really care, but I wish it was fixed."



AE's render isn't exactly a mulit-threaded champ, so I can see how a faster, single processor machine can outperform a slower dual processor machine on the same project - I think the PC would have been faster than the nMP if it had been equipped with the same processors. But I agree with you on everything else - AE's renderer is ancient, I know they're working on it, but it can't come soon enough.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 6, 2016 at 9:47:27 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Fast equals acceptable image quality, divided by the time left to deliver the project - the less time left to deliver, the higher the tolerance for lower quality. ?"

Ha! I like that view on the pick two from the cheap, fast, good, equation.


Return to posts index

Kevin Johnson
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 6, 2016 at 9:00:48 pm

I'd guess the z800s are closer to 5 years old and were built to Avid specs back then, but the fact that Apple is still selling the macpro with the old hardware is ridiculous. Maybe they are waiting on intel/chipsets/TB3 latest hardware to come out?

Pulling and rendering to ISIS is another factor but can't imagine that is the bottleneck. Obviously working off a dedicated Raid you could achieve faster speeds but that doesn't work with our workflow.

AE really needs to implement an easy way for network rendering using available or idle workstations without collecting files beforehand.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 7, 2016 at 2:37:57 am

[Kevin Johnson] "Maybe they are waiting on intel/chipsets/TB3 latest hardware to come out?"

That would be my guess. The eGPU tests with TB2 and Sierra have been pretty impressive despite the slower I/O so I'm hopeful.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 7, 2016 at 4:14:17 am
Last Edited By Michael Gissing on Oct 7, 2016 at 4:17:55 am

[Kevin Johnson] "Maybe they are waiting on intel/chipsets/TB3 latest hardware to come out?"

I've been running my WIN 10 PC on the latest chipset intel USB-c/ TB3 MOBO for three months. The tech is already out. No reason to wait.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 7, 2016 at 6:10:55 am

[Michael Gissing] "The tech is already out. No reason to wait."

There is in the sense that Apple makes their own boards using chips from their vendors. One of the AMD engineers told me at NAB "We give Apple the GPU chips, and then we find out what they get used for the same way the general public does."

Is TB3 officially released yet?


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 7, 2016 at 6:21:41 am

[Darren Roark]"Is TB3 officially released yet?"

Yes. I've had it on my mobo for months and there are peripherals available including a TB2 to TB3 converter which I have. Importantly USB-c uses the same connector and auto switches. Apple would have had access to the chipsets and TB3 for as long as Asus or any of the many MOBO manufacturers who have had these MOBOs out for many months.

So I don't see why Apple would wait until the other manufacturers had a six month lead if they wanted to release a grunt machine. It's hard to see any reason to lag. I have heard of Hackintoshes using these MOBOs in the wild.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 7, 2016 at 5:05:07 pm

[Michael Gissing] "there are peripherals available including a TB2 to TB3 converter "

But there are no video periphs available, form the likes of AJA or Balckmagic. So while it may be ready, it might not be ready.

AS a litmus, do a search for Thunderbolt 3 at B&H. You don't get very far without running in to Thunderbolt 2.

Now do a search for USB-C. Most of the stuff is adapting you to USB-3.

The cart is a little before the horse. It happened with TB2 as well.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 7, 2016 at 5:09:46 pm

Sorry, not TB2, but thunderbolt in general.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 8, 2016 at 1:18:18 am
Last Edited By Michael Gissing on Oct 8, 2016 at 2:15:56 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "The cart is a little before the horse. It happened with TB2 as well."

Actually the format is the horse. Waiting for people to develop the cart.

Lacie have a Porche hard drive with USB-C
http://www.lacie.com/as/en/personal/porsche-design/porsche-design-desktop-d...
TB3 Hard drive enclosures
https://thunderbolttechnology.net/product/akitio-thunder3-quad

USB-C is ahead of TB3 for sure but for me the obvious thing was to buy a MOBO that had the USB-C TB3 connector, even if it was to be able to plug in TB2 devices via and adaptor. My card reader for CFast2.0 is TB2 and editors bring in drives that are USB3 or TB2. Having the next gen connector with backward compatibility was important to me when choosing my new MOBO.

It always happens this way. I would be very wary of buying a computer that didn't have this next gen connector. If Apple want to sell editing computers they need to have this connector and support both USB-C and TB3.

And to add, Blackmagics Terranex converters have USB-C and the latest Ultrastudio 4K extreme 3 has TB3 - https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/ultrastudiothunderbolt Check the video half way down the page....giddy up


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 9, 2016 at 8:51:08 pm

[Kevin Johnson] "my coworkers year old macpro "

What are the specs on it?


Return to posts index

Scott Thomas
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 19, 2016 at 6:32:57 am

Better late than never?

RECODE: Apple plans to launch new Macs at an October 27 event

http://scottgfx.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 19, 2016 at 4:52:15 pm

[Scott Thomas] "Better late than never?

RECODE: Apple plans to launch new Macs at an October 27 event"


So new Macs and 10.3 next week then?, it will be nice to have something new to talk about here


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 19, 2016 at 6:22:59 pm

Credit card is out. Daddy needs a new MBP.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 19, 2016 at 10:07:39 pm

It's official ! http://www.macrumors.com/2016/10/18/apple-to-introduce-new-macs-at-october-...


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 19, 2016 at 10:18:46 pm

New Macs. New OS. New version of X (10.3). So who thinks FCPX 10.3 will require MacOS Sierra in order to run?


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 20, 2016 at 12:47:48 am

The only time you had to update to the newest OS was 10.1 no?

I remember that had to do with the change over to libraries.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 20, 2016 at 12:54:59 am

[Darren Roark] "The only time you had to update to the newest OS was 10.1 no? "

FCP X 10.2 dropped in April 2015 and required OS X 10.10 (which launched in Oct. 2014). Given the long lag time since the last X release I'd bet at least some of the new X functionality depends on MacOS Sierra.


-Andrew


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 20, 2016 at 12:51:48 pm

Ah they are looking to catch up at least with the laptops -
"Additionally, the refreshed MacBook Pros are said to feature USB-C support and Thunderbolt 3."

Any rumours of anything bigger than a lapotp?


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 20, 2016 at 5:57:52 pm

[Michael Gissing] "Any rumours of anything bigger than a lapotp?"

Not that I've seen. I don't think the new desktop class Intel CPUs w/the built in Th3 controller launch until late this year, early next year. Probably be a spring thing?


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 20, 2016 at 10:30:01 pm

That will have given me a years head start on my PC with USB-c and TB3. Eying off the new Blackmagic extreme TB3 interface so I can fit two of the new Titan X cards in the PC. Ridiculous amounts of power but then again 8k Red footage is bound to turn up before then.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 25, 2016 at 8:32:52 pm

Leaked images of the new MBP

http://www.macrumors.com/2016/10/25/images-of-new-macbook-pro-leaked/


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 25, 2016 at 9:00:18 pm

Leaked (& confirmed) image of a new MacPro:

See here


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: 1,000 days since the last Mac Pro update
on Oct 25, 2016 at 9:32:27 pm

Brilliant


Return to posts index

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