Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Adobe Adding Support for Mac Pro's Afterburner Card to Premiere Pro

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,550
39,404


Beta builds of Premiere Pro include support for Apple's Afterburner accelerator card, Adobe told Premiere Pro users earlier this week. Premiere Pro and After Effects were recently updated with native ProRES RAW support.

macproafterburner.jpg

The Apple Afterburner is a ProRes and ProRes RAW accelerator card that is an optional add-on accessory available in the 2019 Mac Pro. It supports playback of up to 3 streams of 8K Pro-Res RAW or 12 streams of 4K ProRes RAW.

Adobe says that Premiere Pro supports decode acceleration of ProRes 4444 and 422 codecs using the Afterburner card, but ProRES RAW acceleration through the Afterburner card is not supported at this time.
The Metal renderer must be selected for use in the applications (this is already the default setting):
After Effects (Beta): File > Project Settings... > Video Rendering and Effects > select "Mercury GPU Acceleration (Metal)"
Media Encoder (Beta): Preferences > General > Video Rendering > select Renderer: "Mercury Playback Engine GPU Acceleration (Metal) - Recommended"
Premiere Pro (Beta): File < Project Settings > General > select Renderer: "Mercury Playback Engine GPU Acceleration (Metal) - Recommended"
Click to expand...
Adobe is seeking Mac Pro users with an Afterburner card to test the ProRes 422 or 4444 support to improve the feature.

Article Link: Adobe Adding Support for Mac Pro's Afterburner Card to Premiere Pro
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/05/21/premiere-pro-afterburner-card-mac-pro-support/
jrlcopy said:
Now let me eGPU this and leeeets go!
Click to expand...

Have to agree with you there...I can’t see the x4 PCIe 3.0 connection being that much of a bottleneck for most users who would buy a mini or a MacBook Pro. Even those who might be inclined to buy a Mac Pro, but need a MacBook Pro for whatever reason, Apple is leaving money on the table from that demographic instead of simply allowing that user base to benefit from what Afterburner offers. I would seriously plunk down the cash for the Afterburner card, but I have a 27” i9 iMac and I’m NOT buying a Mac Pro anytime soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shadowbird423 and Internet Enzyme
Cool I guess - All adobe software is still an unoptimized mess on MacOS - top of the line Macbook Pro 2018 and sometimes my Macbook Pro 2014 runs it a little better... even then basic things take forever to do sometimes with how much lag there is... I wish it had the snappiness of FCX because there's no way in hell I'm using FCX...
 
robsp2000 said:
Let me answer that, because FCP X is a hot mess
Click to expand...
I lived indirectly the despair triggered by the migration from previous Final Cut to the X one through a guy I was helping with for his short film, I was just doing compositing, keying and color correction of some of the shots that needed After Effects (slow as hell) while he was mastering a couple of his short films on final cut. He decided to give the FCPX a try and myself I couldn’t believe his side by side comparison between the previous one and the new one... half the features ready, some of them broken, file annotations mess, etc
That being said, I still just recently bought FCPX and Logic Pro, since judging by the latest reviews it is snappy and finally up to standard (I mean, I would love it to be)... am I heading myself into a corner of despair too?
 
Ries said:
Because the number of people with these boards and adobe number maybe in a few thousands?
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I think Adobe in general makes bloated software with no substantial (at least publicly or to my knowledge) engine code/performance upgrades... it’s all about adding new features nobody asked for (like that weird 3D text engine), slower interface, and heavier startup times (for no apparent reason). Photoshop, it is my understanding that it’s still dependent on ancient engine code. Just check the Zoom or Spin Blurs... they take ages and at least up until a year ago, you couldn’t even visualize a preview of it before applying it. Something that’s pretty much real-time nowadays on your mid-lower end mobile phone game.
After Effects, I love it dearly... but is there a way for this thing to be fast? Every new CC update is slower, checking the “performance enhancer” (like OpenGL ‘acceleration’) actually makes it slower... just doing ctrl+z on a medium sized project can take seconds, even if it was just clicking a single layer visbility, it’s just 10x faster to click it back yourself without undoing. After Effects for me is just a (very nice mind you) interface hub for a bunch of state of the art plugins... where all those plugins be hosted on another better software, I would make the jump.
The video game dev community stirred up a bit when they bought Allegorithmic and their Substance Suite... in fear of getting tainted by Adobe’s hands, we will see the consequences of that in a couple of years max.
Where Resolve or FCPX take 5 mins to render a 4K vid, premiere could very well take 200mins, no joke.
But credit where’s credit is due, it is NOT garbage... far from it, it kicks ass in its own way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Morgenland, Average Pro and daley
This news will lead to the purchase of thousands of Mac Pros with the card. Love or hate them, Adobe is a heavy hitter in the industry.
 
amartinez1660 said:
I lived indirectly the despair triggered by the migration from previous Final Cut to the X one through a guy I was helping with for his short film, I was just doing compositing, keying and color correction of some of the shots that needed After Effects (slow as hell) while he was mastering a couple of his short films on final cut. He decided to give the FCPX a try and myself I couldn’t believe his side by side comparison between the previous one and the new one... half the features ready, some of them broken, file annotations mess, etc
That being said, I still just recently bought FCPX and Logic Pro, since judging by the latest reviews it is snappy and finally up to standard (I mean, I would love it to be)... am I heading myself into a corner of despair too?
Click to expand...
It's the industry's job to serve Apple, not the other way around. :D
 
Zdigital2015 said:
Have to agree with you there...I can’t see the x4 PCIe 3.0 connection being that much of a bottleneck for most users who would buy a mini or a MacBook Pro. Even those who might be inclined to buy a Mac Pro, but need a MacBook Pro for whatever reason, Apple is leaving money on the table from that demographic instead of simply allowing that user base to benefit from what Afterburner offers. I would seriously plunk down the cash for the Afterburner card, but I have a 27” i9 iMac and I’m NOT buying a Mac Pro anytime soon.
Click to expand...

i think that the 4x pcie 3.0 connector is in fact a pretty substantisl bottleneck. Maybe mac mini users wont be too bothered by it, but ive heard that the afterburner card itself actually runs right into the bandwidth constraints of pcie 3.0 and that it could do way more concomitant streams of 8k prores raw if the mac pro had pcie 4.0.
 
None of my gigs would allow
daley said:
Have you used FCPX lately? I find it much more stable than PP, and the speed in both editing and exporting is unmatched.
Click to expand...

Sure. But, I've never worked for a company that didn't use Premiere or Avid. It can be the greatest software in the world but if small businesses aren't using it, it becomes a hobbyist tool unfortunately.
 
daley said:
Have you used FCPX lately? I find it much more stable than PP, and the speed in both editing and exporting is unmatched.
Click to expand...
I gave FCPX a solid try last year but Davinci Resolve has taken all the best parts of FCP 7 and moved forward with it.
[automerge]1590114712[/automerge]
amartinez1660 said:
I lived indirectly the despair triggered by the migration from previous Final Cut to the X one through a guy I was helping with for his short film, I was just doing compositing, keying and color correction of some of the shots that needed After Effects (slow as hell) while he was mastering a couple of his short films on final cut. He decided to give the FCPX a try and myself I couldn’t believe his side by side comparison between the previous one and the new one... half the features ready, some of them broken, file annotations mess, etc
That being said, I still just recently bought FCPX and Logic Pro, since judging by the latest reviews it is snappy and finally up to standard (I mean, I would love it to be)... am I heading myself into a corner of despair too?
Click to expand...
I really gave it a shot but there were so many unintuitive aspects that it made simple editing so frustrating. I ended up going with Davinci Resolve and I couldn't be happier. It's really similar to FCP 7 and is very solid. I'm really not sure who FCP X is geared for. I am a video editor and started on Avid and Media 100 a very long time ago and I've never seen anything like it. I'm sure for certain tasks it might be great but it really felt like it was based on iMovie when I tried it.
 
Last edited:
thebmall said:
None of my gigs would allow


Sure. But, I've never worked for a company that didn't use Premiere or Avid. It can be the greatest software in the world but if small businesses aren't using it, it becomes a hobbyist tool unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Guess it depends where your email located. A bunch of local production houses use a mix of Premiere, Resolve, and FCP X. Basically whatever the client wants or what’s best for the project.
 
MacPoulet said:
Guess it depends where your email located. A bunch of local production houses use a mix of Premiere, Resolve, and FCP X. Basically whatever the client wants or what’s best for the project.
Click to expand...

I don't think clients dictate what editing program you're using?
 
robsp2000 said:
I gave FCPX a solid try last year but Davinci Resolve has taken all the best parts of FCP 7 and moved forward with it.
[automerge]1590114712[/automerge]

I really gave it a shot but there were so many unintuitive aspects that it made simple editing so frustrating. I ended up going with Davinci Resolve and I couldn't be happier. It's really similar to FCP 7 and is very solid. I'm really not sure who FCP X is geared for. I am a video editor and started on Avid and Media 100 a very long time ago and I've never seen anything like it. I'm sure for certain tasks it might be great but it really felt like it was based on iMovie when I tried it.
Click to expand...
You obviously didn’t try it :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: daley
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back