BigSteel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Dec 13, 2019
9
5
I have a Mac Pro 4,1 flashed to 5,1 running 2x3680s, 48GB ram, and the 2GB 680 GTX.
Primary usage is FCPX.
BruceX takes about a minute, just under I think, the last time I timed it.
I'd like to upgrade to a 5700 XT, but am wondering about CPU and GPU usage when rendering and exporting.
Never are either pinned, and it seems that only 12 out of 24 threads are ever being used by Final Cut. GPU usage seems to only hover around 50%. I know this depends on the program, codecs, architecture, not having Quicksync, etc., but I thought that the latest release of FCPX, with the updates to take more advantage of the GPU, might change things. Doesn't seem like it.
Is FCPX just much better able to take advantage of the much newer architecture of the 5700?
I just like to know that everything is being used to its max potential before I upgrade! haha
Actually, the only program which seems to take advantage of all 24 threads is when I do a big Lightroom export.
 

casperes1996

macrumors 603
Jan 26, 2014
6,169
4,039
Horsens, Denmark
A GPU (and a CPU too for that matter) has many different parts. Not all parts can be used for all types of things. If you're seeing, let's say 50% utilisation on your GPU, a faster GPU might still be 50% utilised, but those 50% will do more work faster. But it may only be able to use certain parts of the GPU, and not, let's say, the texture mapping units or geometry hardware.
 
Comment

tsialex

macrumors G3
Jun 13, 2016
9,138
9,778
I have a Mac Pro 4,1 flashed to 5,1 running 2x3680s, 48GB ram, and the 2GB 680 GTX.
Primary usage is FCPX.
BruceX takes about a minute, just under I think, the last time I timed it.
I'd like to upgrade to a 5700 XT, but am wondering about CPU and GPU usage when rendering and exporting.
Never are either pinned, and it seems that only 12 out of 24 threads are ever being used by Final Cut. GPU usage seems to only hover around 50%. I know this depends on the program, codecs, architecture, not having Quicksync, etc., but I thought that the latest release of FCPX, with the updates to take more advantage of the GPU, might change things. Doesn't seem like it.
Is FCPX just much better able to take advantage of the much newer architecture of the 5700?
I just like to know that everything is being used to its max potential before I upgrade! haha
Actually, the only program which seems to take advantage of all 24 threads is when I do a big Lightroom export.
Navi GPUs are only supported with Catalina and the drivers seems not optimised at all. All macOS benchmarks show very low METAL scores.
 
Comment

bsbeamer

macrumors 68040
Sep 19, 2012
3,999
2,103
RX580 in Mojave is benchmarking 15-20% faster than RX 5700 XT in Catalina for METAL. Real world RX580 is about 33% faster right now.

I’m REALLY hoping the W5700X drivers will fix or improve the situation. Hopefully for 10.15.3.
 
Comment

BigSteel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Dec 13, 2019
9
5
Cool. Thanks for the info, folks.
I was checking out the barefeats update they did with what is essentially my system (minus the RAM), and it does seem to be give-and-take with the 580. I see this upgrade as more or less a end-of-the-road for the MP, and I don't mind spending a bit more to get a faster, more modern card in there. Especially as I can use it for gaming later on with a Windows system.
I guess I'll wait a bit and see how drivers mature!
 
Comment

h9826790

macrumors P6
Apr 3, 2014
15,233
7,532
Hong Kong
Please read this thread before you decide which GPU or macOS version you want to run.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/activate-amd-hardware-acceleration.2180095/

In post #1 Q&A, there is video shows BruceX test (H264) by RX580, about 30s. If export ProRes, of course will be faster. But you can see how good the new AMD GPU can do if you enable HWAccel.

For Radeon VII, BruceX (ProRes) 11s, BruceX (H264) 18s.

cMP spec as per my signature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ActionableMango
Comment

BigSteel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Dec 13, 2019
9
5
Ok, thanks h9826790. Looks like you're put in a ton of work in regards to hardware acceleration! I'll be away till near the end on January anyway, so hopefully in that time the drivers will mature somewhat.
 
Comment

Warriors Photo

macrumors newbie
Jun 6, 2011
11
1
San Diego, Ca
Ok, thanks h9826790. Looks like you're put in a ton of work in regards to hardware acceleration! I'll be away till near the end on January anyway, so hopefully in that time the drivers will mature somewhat.
I did the AMD hardware acceleration that h9826790 is talking about. I will say that with one RX480/580, you'll see such an improvement in render time and smoothness of the timeline. Plus that mod activates H.264 playback. If you want to get a little more life from your 4,1/5,1 Mac Pro, that's the best mod for us at this time. Good luck either way.

And I will also add that if you want dual GPUs still? There's always the WX7100 cards. That'll be two 8GB of VRAM per card. More than enough for most prosumer editors. :)
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.