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

Eddo234

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jul 27, 2018
7
2
I Posted this on the NVidia site too:
Just installed a GTX 1060 6GB card in my 2010 Mac Pro 3.46Ghz 12 core, SATA SSD boot drive, 2TB NVMe blade scratch disk, 48GB RAM, and 4-4TB HDD's in bays, RAID 0
I had OSX 10.13.5 installed and was having problems getting Premiere Pro to export,
PP kept crashing a minute or so into exporting. I found multiple sources showing the correct
NVidia and Cuda drivers, but the problem persisted, even after multiple combinations
(deleting all trace of drivers each time). And I had no CUDA enabled in PP, the only choices were
Open CL, Metal, or Software. So I updated the OS to the latest 10.13.6, then updated the NVidia and Cuda drivers to the latest version and exports are fine in PP now. I put my old ATI Radeon 4870 OEM card in to do the updates, and while it was in I checked PP's render speed. With that card's 512MB of VRAM I had to use Software Only and render the 1080P 29.97 test video before exporting. The results for the 3 minute video (every clip had Lumetri CC applied) are: With old card- Render 3 minutes with Lumetri color correction- 26:28
Export to ProRes- To NVMe Blade- 26:32
That's right, 53 minutes for a 3 minute clip! With the 6GB GTX 1060 set to Cuda the results were (no rendering before export needed)- Export 3 Minute video with Lumetri applied to every clip to ProRes- 1:45
Export 15:04 video with Lumetri applied to every clip to Pro Res- To NVMe blade- 7:03

CUDA Driver Version: 396.148 Nvidia Web Driver: 387.10.10.10.40.105
 
Replying to my own post :)

The GeekBench score for my setup is pretty amazing, not for the single-core performance, at 2797 it's equal to a 2010 iMac 3.6Ghz, but the multi-core is 31131 which is higher than the new iMacPro 8 core (30547). The new iMac Pro with 32GB RAM and the 8GB Vega 56 (and, of course, a monitor) is $5,000. My upgrade cost $1,100-1,200. I could have spent more on a graphics card, and I could have bought a new monitor, but it still would have been $3,000 cheaper than the new iMac Pro. And since my setup will work with Mojave, I'll get at least a couple more years out of my system.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-08-02 at 11.52.29 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-08-02 at 11.52.29 AM.png
    196.5 KB · Views: 372
HI Eddo234 - can you run the latest Final Cut Pro X 10.4.3 on that video card?
 
Replying to my own post :)

The GeekBench score for my setup is pretty amazing, not for the single-core performance, at 2797 it's equal to a 2010 iMac 3.6Ghz, but the multi-core is 31131 which is higher than the new iMacPro 8 core (30547).
Very nice upgrade, but you are comparing GeekBench 3 (Mac Pro) to GeekBench 4 (iMac Pro) scores. They are not the same.

GB4 for Mac Pro should appear somewhere at 3000+ single and ±27000 multicore.
Quite cheap CPU-points still for an 8 year old computer.

ps. If I were You I would update the firmware to 0089.B00. There are reports of nasty problems with 0087.B00. They might be mostly about 4.1 and 4.1->5.1 related, but just to be sure. Instructions for updating firmware (BIOS) can be found with forum search.
 
Last edited:
Very nice upgrade, but you are comparing GeekBench 3 (Mac Pro) to GeekBench 4 (iMac Pro) scores. They are not the same.

GB4 for Mac Pro should appear somewhere at 3000+ single and ±27000 multicore.
Quite cheap CPU-points still for an 8 year old computer.

ps. If I were You I would update the firmware to 0089.B00. There are reports of nasty problems with 0087.B00. They might be mostly about 4.1 and 4.1->5.1 related, but just to be sure. Instructions for updating firmware (BIOS) can be found with forum search.
I didn't realize they would give different scores, I'll have to upgrade. :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.