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

New Mac Pro: Simultaneous Real-Time 4K Effect Rendering, +900MB/s Read/Write

Spinland said:
I already edited my response, it was made based on an inaccurate read of your post. My bad.
Click to expand...

Yeah I saw that after I had already replied.

I am curious though. But I'm going to go ahead and take a guess that probably only a handful, if that, were edited on FCPX. After FCPX came out, most editors stuck with FCP7, which some still are using, or switched to either Avid or Premiere. Maybe we will start seeing a few more, but I don't know if I could see that happening for big budget films that have more than just one editor.
 
parker612 said:
After FCPX came out, most editors stuck with FCP7, which some still are using, or switched to either Avid or Premiere.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my unscientific impression from the reactions I've read agrees with that. I have no data to back me up, but my gut feel is the choice of which NLE to use is partially driven by inertia--i.e., what did you learn on, and what is your shop already using? I'm biased because that's true in my case: I bought Adobe CS as a student and, since I then already had Premiere, I saw no reason to spend additional money on the "true Apple" NLE.

My stuff is orders of magnitude below the level of feature films, but even now I see no reason to get FCPX (which would undoubtedly rock my work) even with the fact it would run so much faster on the nMP when it arrives. Climbing the learning curve to gain faster render times when I'm already expecting major speed-ups on Premiere just isn't attractive to me so I'll stick with Premiere.
 
tkatz said:
A pro wants it to "just work" and work well. Considering this thing can play 4K video with 18 filters applied in real time, that will make many pro's very happy.
Click to expand...

C'mon most of those are hardly computationally expensive stuff… And I wouldn't be at all surprised if FCP optimised filter effect path behind the scenes, e. g. apply Bleach Bypass, then B+W filter, then others...
 
Spinland said:
Yeah, my unscientific impression from the reactions I've read agrees with that. I have no data to back me up, but my gut feel is the choice of which NLE to use is partially driven by inertia--i.e., what did you learn on, and what is your shop already using? I'm biased because that's true in my case: I bought Adobe CS as a student and, since I then already had Premiere, I saw no reason to spend additional money on the "true Apple" NLE.

My stuff is orders of magnitude below the level of feature films, but even now I see no reason to get FCPX (which would undoubtedly rock my work) even with the fact it would run so much faster on the nMP when it arrives. Climbing the learning curve to gain faster render times when I'm already expecting major speed-ups on Premiere just isn't attractive to me so I'll stick with Premiere.
Click to expand...

I agree. I have been using Avid for the past 6 years. I am currently a student and my school teaches Avid, which kept me using Avid even more since I had already learned it and would continue to use it in college. I have started learning Premiere because as long as I know both Avid and Premiere, I'll be set; since every post house I know uses Avid or Premiere and most feature films use Avid.

I still want to keep an open mind and try using FCPX, I have heard some good things about certain aspects of it, but since it will take awhile to learn and get used to, and the fact that the direction I am heading, no one uses FCPX, makes it harder to want to take the time to use it. But since I am a student, I think I'll just have to take the summer to learn FCPX...while I still have spare time before graduating.

Anyway, I am looking forward to the new Mac Pro and seeing how much performance gain there is. I will be editing and finishing in 4K and it will be interesting to compare the older Mac Pros my school has to this new Mac Pro that they are going to purchase.
 
Last edited:
popeofdope said:
that's one over priced soda can
Click to expand...

Your comparing the Mac Pro to a soda can ? *interesting*

Its gone by many other names. Like most who would probably say 'over-priced' including me :) ,,,, It's only really over-priced for average consumers,,,, it's not intended for. Plus, it's top hardware....

You wouldn't get cheap car that goes from 0 to 60 in 5 seconds would u ?
 
0x0x0x0 said:
Except that I suspect w9000 are not what Apple use (otherwise why would Apple price their graphics so much cheaper than AMD), I suspect D700 are rebranded 7970s (going on spec/price)...
Click to expand...

There will never be a perfect match. Really, the spirit of the post is, if you're actually looking to replicate the majority of the advantages of this computer in the mid and upper tier models, DIY won't net you much of an advantage over it price wise.
 
What I am wondering is what if ATI or Nvidia modified their top gaming card to fit in the nMP, could you simply take out one of the fire pro cards and replace it with that, and use one card for gaming and the other for rendering?
 
Does anyone know when these will arrive in the Apple stores? I just want to see/try it. I'm not someone who needs this machine.
 
chirpie said:
There will never be a perfect match. Really, the spirit of the post is, if you're actually looking to replicate the majority of the advantages of this computer in the mid and upper tier models, DIY won't net you much of an advantage over it price wise.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I know I can get e5-2697v2 over £1000 cheaper in a retail box than Apple is offering as a factory upgrade… ;)
 
0x0x0x0 said:
Perhaps, but I know I can get e5-2697v2 over £1000 cheaper in a retail box than Apple is offering as a factory upgrade… ;)
Click to expand...

Hmmm... maybe it's a european thing? It's $3,000 more through Apple and it's $2,750 to go buy it yourself here. Not quite a 1,000 difference... I suppose you could net a few bucks if there was a way to turn around and sell the chip it came with, but all of that has yet to be tried by the community.
 
chirpie said:
Hmmm... maybe it's a european thing? It's $3,000 more through Apple and it's $2,750 to go buy it yourself here. Not quite a 1,000 difference... I suppose you could net a few bucks if there was a way to turn around and sell the chip it came with, but all of that has yet to be tried by the community.
Click to expand...

I suspect so, I am told that the profit margins on computer components in the UK are very thin because of the competition...

----------
leftoverbacon said:
OK, how can I mount this thing in a rack case?

(Think audio and video pros who do remote/road work)
Click to expand...

Buy KVM-over-IP with TB connectors… Oh, never mind…

On a serious note, if you are going to be sticking it into a rack, I'd be putting the bottom of the "tube" (calling it a "box" seems perverse) towards the front of the rack with the top facing backwards so that you get a decent air flow, and only one tube deep, of course… Plenty of blue-tac/gaffer tape to hold the thing in place?..
 
CFreymarc said:
WTF do I mean? A hard engineering look at higher end desktop systems for the past few years showed that the PCIe bus was becoming the bottleneck in performance for real time video and other rendering packages.
Click to expand...

0x0x0x0 said:
Kick in the gut for your argument more like… :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Apple wisely saw that PCIe was a bloated, dead end standard, not anywhere near capable of providing enough bandwidth for high end computational tasks. So instead of tethering the new Mac Pro to yet another pointless legacy bus, Apple replaced it with about the exact same thing, but at a quarter of the bandwidth, and on a cord.

PCIe is dying, people. Get over it.
 
Last edited:
VoR said:
Workstations, the definition of form over function? - It looks like they compromised a hell of lot to squeeze it into a little can that looks good in glossy mags and cinema trailers.
External expansion might just be a bit more costly and unsightly for some circumstances, but what about the actual machine and the silly power and thermal restrictions they've imposed.
Silly compromises for a machine that people love to shout about being a 'workstation' or 'pro' - It seems 'good enough' rather than 'the best', and that's very boring to me :)
Click to expand...

What silly power and thermal restrictions? Any numbers here?

Renzatic said:
Apple wisely saw that PCIe was a bloated, dead end standard, not anywhere near capable of providing enough bandwidth for high end computational tasks. So instead of tethering the new Mac Pro to yet another pointless legacy bus, Apple replaced it with about the exact same thing, but at a quarter of the bandwidth, and on a cord.

PCIe is dying, people. Get over it.
Click to expand...

quarter the bandwidth ... because that's an improvement for a standard "not anywhere near capable of providing enough bandwidth..."
 
Renzatic said:
Apple wisely saw that PCIe was a bloated, dead end standard, not anywhere near capable of providing enough bandwidth for high end computational tasks. So instead of tethering the new Mac Pro to yet another pointless legacy bus, Apple replaced it with about the exact same thing, but at a quarter of the bandwidth, and on a cord.

PCIe is dying, people. Get over it.
Click to expand...

Luckily I've been living in the future for the past few years. I've had no problem mounting gfx cards etc externally from my motherboard with a cord. Powered is optional, mechanical connectors available from x1 to x16 on either end, backwards and future compatible with all standards and they cost about 99c (well they did before the cryptocurrency inflation).

Unfortunately ribbon cables don't look very nice :(
 
roadbloc said:
You don't know that. Actually, I was looking forward (and holding onto my money) for what Apple had to offer as a next gen Pro. Its a great machine but unfortunately not for me.

----------



What defines a Pro? I use my computers to make money (writing books, magazine articles and reviews). On my desktop computers, I like to be able to replace internal hardware with additional or newer hardware to expand the life of my machine. So am I a pro or a hobbyist? (Either way, it won't change my opinion.)

----------



External expansion not only costs more, but results in an absurd amount of clutter by the machine as the more you expand. I'd rather use the cheaper and tidier option thanks.
Click to expand...

Most us working in FCPro X, CS6 and Aperture with libraries filled with massive RAW images are already used to external storage, RAIDs and back up systems so the Mac Pro is fine for us. That said, I confess I wish there were room for two at least SSDs inside. But ... I'll live with it for that level of power. 30th of December delivery date here :cool:
 
Renzatic said:
Apple wisely saw that PCIe was a bloated, dead end standard, not anywhere near capable of providing enough bandwidth for high end computational tasks. So instead of tethering the new Mac Pro to yet another pointless legacy bus, Apple replaced it with about the exact same thing, but at a quarter of the bandwidth, and on a cord.

PCIe is dying, people. Get over it.
Click to expand...

This would affect the entire industry... What new standard do you suppose PCIe be replaced with?
 
Last edited:
wiz329 said:
What silly power and thermal restrictions? Any numbers here?
Click to expand...

I don't have numbers for the heatsink/fan combo, but I don't really need any.
The power supply is quoted at 450w on apple's site, and there's not enough room to make something (a bigger lump of metal coiled in wire) exponentially larger even if the bespoke builds are different.
Look at the power requirement of equivalent tahiti based gpus - 2 retail reference cards would reduce the nMP to a terminator 2 style puddle and a cloud of smoke without some serious load based voltage adjustment.
Slight exaggeration maybe, but there's 3 hot components in there that are all being compromised for the sake of power/heat (dictated by the form factor).
 
0x0x0x0 said:
Except that I suspect w9000 are not what Apple use (otherwise why would Apple price their graphics so much cheaper than AMD), I suspect D700 are rebranded 7970s (going on spec/price)...
Click to expand...

I think you would be incorrect on that. If you look at the performance specs of the W9000, the d700 fits nicely within that realm. Apple is assuredly getting a volume discount on the GPU's, probably at lower frequencies, and with the single fan Mac Pro handling the cooling, it isn't a straight equivalent of a PCie card for a PC.

Not being an editor, it would seem that MBP's enhanced with some nMP's in the field would be valued by the production team, with TB2 the glue for the i/o and storage systems. I suspect that this is what Apple was shooting for with the nMP package.

Perhaps more TB2 devices and ubiquitous OpenCL in applications will make that a reality.

----------
Digitalclips said:
Most us working in FCPro X, CS6 and Aperture with libraries filled with massive RAW images are already used to external storage, RAIDs and back up systems so the Mac Pro is fine for us. That said, I confess I wish there were room for two at least SSDs inside. But ... I'll live with it for that level of power. 30th of December delivery date here :cool:
Click to expand...

Do you use any TB2 MBP's in the same workflow?
 
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