Thread: New mac Pro Out in December; Starts at 2.999 USD

Page 21 of 21 FirstFirst ... 11192021
Results 201 to 208 of 208
  1. #201  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by tefliux View Post
    There is no war between mac or pc... this is just two different products. The hardware is not everything, you need also to have good software well developed.

    Anyway, following some test with the new mac pro, a 8 cores, done by yakyakyak.fr, Davinci Resolve support more than 25 nodes with 4K 4444 prores files and still playing 24 frames per second . R3D files need the de-bayering set to quarter of quality but the number of node is not really impacted.

    .
    Hmmm- I can't get single ProRes 444 4K to play at 25fps in Resolve 10 (6 cores MAC PRO) on 4K screen.
    I'm not sure why everyone is so excited about 12 cores. MAC PRO Xeons are nothing special- standard Intel Xeons and only 1 CPU is posstible. It's already outdated compared to PC/Linux possibilities (you can have 96 cores if needed). The worse Apple decision was to use ATI cards- way, way more software works with Nvidia (CUDA), but of course Apple does not care about it

    Fact that 6 Thunderbolt2 ports share only 3 Thunderbolt buses is also very disappointing. If you want to work with 4K you actually run out of bandwidth quite quickly.
    I like form factor and it looks lovely, but only until you connect your external devices, than it very quickly became a small mess.
    Last edited by Andrew_HD; 01-23-2014 at 10:49 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #202  
    Member tefliux's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew_HD View Post
    Hmmm- I can't get single ProRes 444 4K to play at 25fps in Resolve 10 (6 cores MAC PRO) on 4K screen.
    I'm not sure why everyone is so excited about 12 cores. MAC PRO Xeons are nothing special- standard Intel Xeons and only 1 CPU is posstible. It's already outdated compared to PC/Linux possibilities (you can have 96 cores if needed). The worse Apple decision was to use ATI cards- way, way more software works with Nvidia (CUDA), but of course Apple does not care about it

    Fact that 6 Thunderbolt2 ports share only 3 Thunderbolt buses is also very disappointing. If you want to work with 4K you actually run out of bandwidth quite quickly.
    I like form factor and it looks lovely, but only until you connect your external devices, than it very quickly became a small mess.
    They are doing a presentation on the video and it works. Davinci 10 is working fine with AMD cards.

    What is your bottle neck ?

    We need more feedback and good success story about thunderbolt 2. The technology is really new and we cannot trust it based on the performance on the paper. But this is a good innovation and I'am really interested about the new 100 meters TB cable.
    Apple ][ for ever
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #203  
    Senior Member Unknown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    599
    I'm curious how the most basic version new Mac pro runs with davinci 10. Thinking of getting a new mac.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #204  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by tefliux View Post
    They are doing a presentation on the video and it works. Davinci 10 is working fine with AMD cards.

    What is your bottle neck ?

    We need more feedback and good success story about thunderbolt 2. The technology is really new and we cannot trust it based on the performance on the paper. But this is a good innovation and I'am really interested about the new 100 meters TB cable.
    Well- they run it in the video I run it next to my eyes DPX 4K was fine, ProRes stuttered. Maybe 10.1 will make difference.
    Do they run it on 4K monitor? I'm not saying that there is no power in MAC PRO and Resolve, but there are still many issues. Resolve 10 seams to be far from being rock solid (well Resolve never was rock solid on MAC).
    I will try again later. One thing which I can confirm is SSD- nice and fast, around 900MB/sec read.

    What do you want to know about Thunderbolt2?
    6 ports, but on 3 controllers, so you have 20Gbit shared between 2 ports. This is the reason why MAC PRO can drive "only" 3x 4K screens (not eg. 6). 4K at 60Hz is about 16Gbit/sec so it almost saturates Thunderbolt2 connection.

    This bit is unclear and very confusing, so I don't guarantee it's 100% accurate:

    This:

    http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/384157/t...-to-20gbit-sec

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/7618/l...-2-mini-review

    is not what Intel was promising:

    http://blogs.intel.com/technology/20...fer-display-2/

    TB1 has 2 separate channels- data and display port, so 10Gbit+10Gbit. They are independent and can't be joined, but offer 20Gbit total bandwidth.
    Looks like (even if this is against info on Intel site) TB2 joins these 2 channels creating 1x 20Gbit, but this means that bandwidth is shared between display port and data, so once you have 4K screen connected, not much more bandwidth is left for data.

    Answer maybe that Apple is "lazy" and not implementing TB2 "properly" in their devices.
    Another "issue" is that TB2 is still on PCI-E gen2 x4 bus internally, so this is at most 2GB/sec.



    Real data bandwidth is at least at 1.5GB/sec (probably more, update- Intel does say 1.5GB/sec in real life). I will be cheeking this soon with Sanlink2 attached to very fast RAID. This should be around 1.5GB/sec (at leas on fibre channel side), so this will prove if TB2 can also pass it. I will try adding 4K screen through daisy chaining and see what happens. This should give an answer (but some tests already proved that it's just 20Gbit in total).
    Another question- if TB2 can drive 4K screen at 60Hz than it should be able to deliver 2.0GB/sec, but looks like when used for sending data it's rather limited to 1.5GB/sec- strange.
    Last edited by Andrew_HD; 01-24-2014 at 10:39 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #205  
    Member tefliux's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew_HD View Post
    Another "issue" is that TB2 is still on PCI-E x4 bus internally, so this is at most 2GB/sec.


    Real data bandwidth is at least at 1.5GB/sec (probably more). I will be cheeking this soon with Sanlink2 attached to very fast RAID. This should be around 1.5GB/sec (at leas on fibre channel side), so this will prove if TB2 can also pass it.
    Is it PCI-E x4 v3 ? on the last motherboard.
    Apple ][ for ever
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #206  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    423
    Forgotten to add - no, apparently is still v2.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #207  
    Senior Member Frank Glencairn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    4,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew_HD View Post
    What do you want to know about Thunderbolt2?
    6 ports, but on 3 controllers, so you have 20Gbit shared between 2 ports. This is the reason why MAC PRO can drive "only" 3x 4K screens (not eg. 6). 4K at 60Hz is about 16Gbit/sec so it almost saturates Thunderbolt2 connection.
    HDMI is also on one of the TB controllers, reducing bandwidth even more.

    1228-macprodisplay_ports-macprodisplay_ports.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #208  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    423
    Yes- I left it unmentioned
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •