Mac Pro 5,1 "Build"

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by devon807, Jun 17, 2017.

  1. fendersrule macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    #26
    Doesn't the RX 560 suck from a gaming perspective? I guess renders decently though?
     
  2. devon807 thread starter macrumors 6502

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #27
    Yes. In fact it's about 25% slower in gaming than the GTX 960. But renders/exports in half the time of the 960.
     
  3. devon807 thread starter macrumors 6502

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #28
    Ok, second RX 560 came in today. Pretty decent result. Runs BruceX is ~19-22 seconds. Performs really well.
    DUAL RX560 .jpeg 20170909_143156-squashed.jpg
     
  4. neomorpheus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    #29
    I might be reading this wrong, but those geekbench scores are actually lower than an ipad pro 10.5?

    Well, at least the single core seems to be.
     
  5. devon807 thread starter macrumors 6502

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #30
    In which one? The first or second post?
     
  6. neomorpheus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    #31
    Both, but im just looking at the plain geekbench score.

    Like this one: https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks

    Dont get me wrong, not raining on your parade, since i have the exact Mac with a quad core 2.93 ghz cpu, two gt120 and a 5770, but i barely use it and out of curiosity, compared the scores you posted to what i saw online and ended up confused.

    I mean, are those Fusion chips or whatever they are called really that good?
     
  7. h9826790 macrumors 604

    h9826790

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #32
    AFAIK, the A10X single core performance is really that good. However, it's also very single thread optimised because iOS obviously cannot do any heavy multi tasking job.
     
  8. devon807 thread starter macrumors 6502

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #33
    I believe so. Good observation. But at the end of the day. It is in a iPad, which runs iOS and not macOS
     
  9. neomorpheus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    #34
    A shame really, since you, for example, can do so much with your mac with the performance of a tablet.

    If only apple stopped gimping ios devices.
     
  10. mennobroere macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2017
    #35
    Did you have to hange/hack anything to make the RX 560’s work in Sierra?
     
  11. devon807 thread starter macrumors 6502

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #36
    Nope. Works right out of the box!
     
  12. AfterglowMP macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    #37
    Hey Devon807

    I have a mid 2010 (5,1) 6 core 3.33ghz that I use for editing (FCP7, Premiere and Resolve, sometimes FCPX).

    I've upgraded the drives to SSDs, have 24gb and am keen to order something like GPU Nvidia 980Ti. I've been looking into replacing the single processor to end up with a dual 12 core 3.46 and throw in heaps more ram.

    It's my work so I'm okay about investing the money but from your experience, is it worth it? I've read through the posts here and really can't make out if there's significant enough a boost. Or maybe I should just opt for the less expensive 3.46ghz processor?
     
  13. devon807 thread starter macrumors 6502

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #38
    Not sure about Resolve and Premiere but depending on what engine you use to export i.e. CUDA, OpenCL, or Metal etc. It may or may not make a difference. the 3.46 will give you an improvement, but not as drastic as the jump from 6 to 8 cores or from to 12 cores. Im not the biggest expert in Premiere, but the 980Ti will be a really good upgrade. I primarily edit on FCPX, so AMD is a must for me due to the OpenCL performance. My reccoemndtaion is to do the 3.46 GHz upgrade, see of performance is on par, and if not buy a 8-core 4,1 or 5,1.
     
  14. AfterglowMP macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    #39
    Thanks for the reply. I just bought an inexpensive dual 3.33ghz tray on ebay! Now I'm thinking of best way to upgrade it to 3.46. Any thoughts?
     
  15. h9826790 macrumors 604

    h9826790

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #40
    My suggestion is don't do it. If your job really need that very very last bit of performance. You should not still with the cMP but something much newer. If that ~3% difference doesn't really matter. Then I think it's better to stick to your current config and save some money and trouble.
     
  16. kschendel macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    #41
    If you do hour long, 100% CPU bound jobs, the 3.46 ghz upgrade will save you about 2 minutes. I'm with h9826790, don't bother with it. The difference between these two CPU's is very nearly pure clock speed, so not enough to really matter unless you're running multi-hour jobs. In which case you probably should be working on an overclocked kaby lake setup!
     
  17. Blakehoo, Sep 21, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2017

    Blakehoo macrumors member

    Blakehoo

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2016
    #42
    Don't forget ....RAM

    It is cheap at the moment!

    Just checked: Fast 16GB RAM is still only US$60 a stick
     
  18. AfterglowMP macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    #43
    Thanks, have a Nvidia 980Ti on the way as well.

    Speaking of RAM, I've been cruising along with 2 x 8gb and 2 x 4gb and was about to buy more for the new dual tray but I saw on OWC that the 16gb RAM won't run with other RAM. So chuck out the existing RAM and replace with 4 x 16gb? From OWC? Or maybe just add 4 x 8gb sticks for a total of 56gb?

    What other RAM suppliers should I try?
     
  19. kschendel macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    #44
    datamemorysystems.com has been a good vendor for a number of posters here including myself. They can probably suggest the best answer for your memory setup.
     
  20. fendersrule macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    #45
  21. AfterglowMP macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    #46
    Thanks, but is it right that 16gb sticks cannot be mixed with other level RAM sticks, ie 2, 4, 8gb sticks??
     
  22. fendersrule macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    #47
    I never heard of that.

    To maximize performance, only fill the front 3 slots. That will enable the triple channel. Tiny difference, if any, but I’ll take anything I can get with nearly 8 year old hardware. I have a brand new Samsung 8GB stick doing nothing because of that.

    My workflow is simple. When I was exporting a video, my system used 12 out of the available 24GB. 24GB is copious for probably 99% of people.
     
  23. AfterglowMP macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    #48
    The 16gb rule is on the OWC RAM catalogue page - see asterix note below table.Mac Pro Memory
    Has anyone mixed 16gb sticks with other RAM and not noticed anything??

    Speaking of not knowing... I'll have to backtrack to discussions about the triple channel.

    I've hummed along with 24gb simply because most of the editing has been in FCP7 but now using Resolve, Premiere, etc.
     
  24. OS6-OSX macrumors 6502a

    OS6-OSX

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Location:
    California
    #49
    I have the MSI 6GB 980Ti. Try and use Davinci 14 Studio if possible. Major difference from 12.5. Studio 14 can use multiple GPU's for CUDA if you ever need to go that route.
     
  25. AfterglowMP macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    #50
    Thanks, I've used Resolve for editing and am hopeful 14 has improved on a few issues I struggled with. How do you find it?
     

Share This Page