Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

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

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
51,541
13,166


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.


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"
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
 

Zdigital2015

macrumors 68030
Jul 14, 2015
2,726
3,344
East Coast, United States
Now let me eGPU this and leeeets go!

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.
 
Comment

mediacomposer

macrumors member
Jun 21, 2010
32
24
Boston, MA
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...
 
Comment

MacLawyer

macrumors demi-god
Aug 1, 2009
529
1,230
U.S.A.
Now let me eGPU this and leeeets go!
I don't understand this. The Afterburner card is for the Mac Pro. Why use an eGPU with the Mac Pro when you can just throw in the AMD GPU of your choice?
 
Last edited:
Comment

amartinez1660

macrumors 6502a
Sep 22, 2014
758
682
Let me answer that, because FCP X is a hot mess
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?
 
Comment

amartinez1660

macrumors 6502a
Sep 22, 2014
758
682
Because the number of people with these boards and adobe number maybe in a few thousands?
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.
 
Comment

SuperMatt

macrumors 6502a
Mar 28, 2002
939
7,082
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.
 
Comment

VictorTango777

macrumors 6502a
Oct 28, 2017
586
1,172
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?
It's the industry's job to serve Apple, not the other way around. :D
 
Comment

Internet Enzyme

macrumors 6502a
Feb 21, 2016
943
1,510
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.

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.
 
Comment

thebmall

macrumors newbie
Feb 11, 2014
22
0
None of my gigs would allow
Have you used FCPX lately? I find it much more stable than PP, and the speed in both editing and exporting is unmatched.

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.
 
Comment

robsp2000

macrumors member
Jun 7, 2005
89
198
Have you used FCPX lately? I find it much more stable than PP, and the speed in both editing and exporting is unmatched.
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 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?
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:
Comment

MacPoulet

macrumors 6502
Dec 11, 2012
381
180
Canada
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.
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.
 
Comment

ekwipt

macrumors 6502a
Jan 14, 2008
848
246
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.

I don't think clients dictate what editing program you're using?
 
Comment

Morgenland

macrumors 6502a
May 28, 2009
928
874
Europe
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.
You obviously didn’t try it :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: daley
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.