Sonnet Shipping First New Thunderbolt 2 PCIe Expansion Chassis

[miguel cortez]

Clueless? Hardly.

An application must be specifically written to take advantage of multi-GPU setups. As as the time of the post (4+ months back...), FCP 10.1 was the only program that could take advantage of the dual GPUs. Hence the conclusion -- adding more GPUs will likely not do anything, as not even 2 are supported.

Additionally, the FCP link doesn't answer either of the OP's questions. It neither tells whether you can install (or expect to use) additional GPUs, nor whether FCP will take advantage of additional GPUs, even if they can be installed and linked properly.

You responded "Doubt it. Getting support for dual GPUs is going to be hard enough." FCPX already utilized dual GPUs when you claimed that getting support for that would be hard enough. That link was for you, not the OP.

BTW Resolve utilizes multiple GPUs (more than 2) and had been doing so for months prior to FCPX and Motion added support.

 

[wiz329]

You responded "Doubt it. Getting support for dual GPUs is going to be hard enough." FCPX already utilized dual GPUs when you claimed that getting support for that would be hard enough. That link was for you, not the OP.

BTW Resolve utilizes multiple GPUs (more than 2) and had been doing so for months prior to FCPX and Motion added support.

I can't believe I'm still indulging you here ... but if you bothered to actually read the post to which you were responding in this ridiculously old thread, you would have noticed that I have clearly stated [multiple] times that FCP 10.1 does indeed support dual GPUs.

What exactly is this supposed to show?

At this point FCP X is literally the only application that supports x2 GPUs ...

So good luck with putting in x3 or x4 GPUs and it being any use.

My point was that getting widespread support for even 2 GPUs is not a trivial task. As an example of the difficulty of re-configuring software, CS stilldoes a horrendous job of multithreading on the CPU side, even in this day and age with high core counts, even with tasks that are fairly easy to parallelize.

 

[miguel cortez]

I can't believe I'm still indulging you here ... but if you bothered to actually read the post to which you were responding in this ridiculously old thread, you would have noticed that I have clearly stated [multiple] times that FCP 10.1 does indeed support dual GPUs.



My point was that getting widespread support for even 2 GPUs is not a trivial task. As an example of the difficulty of re-configuring software, CS stilldoes a horrendous job of multithreading on the CPU side, even in this day and age with high core counts, even with tasks that are fairly easy to parallelize.

You're only indulging yourself...

This post?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4God View Post
Does this mean I can add more GPU's to the new Mac Pro??? Can FCPX 10.1 handle 4 GPU's???

Doubt it. Getting support for dual GPUs is going to be hard enough.
-----

FCPX had already shipped dual GPU support. Apparently you didn't know.

I'm sure it was hard to do, that was never the point. The point was it had already been done.

 

[wiz329]

You're only indulging yourself...

This post?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4God View Post
Does this mean I can add more GPU's to the new Mac Pro??? Can FCPX 10.1 handle 4 GPU's???

Doubt it. Getting support for dual GPUs is going to be hard enough.
-----

FCPX had already shipped dual GPU support. Apparently you didn't know.

I'm sure it was hard to do, that was never the point. The point was it had already been done.

Getting widespread software support. That should have been clear from context, as (again, I'm tell you for the third time now) I stated (multiple) times that FCP 10.1 had dual GPU support.

There's still nothing incorrect about that statement you keep quoting (and leaving everything else said out conveniently).

 

[miguel cortez]

Getting widespread software support. That should have been clear from context, as (again, I'm tell you for the third time now) I stated (multiple) times that FCP 10.1 had dual GPU support.

There's still nothing incorrect about that statement you keep quoting (and leaving everything else said out conveniently).

Nope, not clear at all.

Multiple times? Perhaps you can link to them since I'm obviously having a difficult time finding them.

For reference, my original post that threw you for a loop was for your initial response here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/18650389/

See above post. I have never left anything out.

 

[jblagden]

The T004 Is On Hold

It's not the first...Silverstone and ASUS just announced their XG2 external gpu solution on CES2014.



This is definitely to pricey.

I agree, the Thunderbolt GPU enclosures which are currently available are way too expensive. Silverstone's enclosure will be much more affordable, at $200-250. However, Silverstone temporarily shelving the T004 project due to licensing and certification issues from Intel. To try to convince Intel to give Silverstone/Asus licensing and certification for their GPU enclosure, I've started a petition on change.org: https://www.change.org/petitions/in...-allow-the-sale-of-affordable-egpu-enclosures