MP 7,1 Afterburner video accelerator card for new Mac Pro

[PowerMike G5]

So fortunately I got to quickly test the Afterburner today. I had to drop off my iPhone for a quick replacement battery and they had a full Mac Pro setup in the NYC Apple store.

I took an H.264 file and transcoded it to ProRes 4444. It used over 1600% CPU on the 12-core on display and didn't touch the Vega II. This was using the latest Compressor.

So it seems that AB doesn't accelerate transcoding, but I can't confirm. I just figured it wouldn't use that much CPU usage.

But perhaps I could be very wrong, because the file was like an 80 minute h.264 and it did the transcode in like a minute. There was nothing in activity monitor that showcased the AB usage and the Apple tech employee who specialized on the Mac Pro couldn't confirm the AB's usage. Everyone was pretty much lost on how the AB worked.

When I have more time, I'll try to go back and do more tests.

 

[chfilm]

So fortunately I got to quickly test the Afterburner today. I had to drop off my iPhone for a quick replacement battery and they had a full Mac Pro setup in the NYC Apple store.

I took an H.264 file and transcoded it to ProRes 4444. It used over 1600% CPU on the 12-core on display and didn't touch the Vega II. This was using the latest Compressor.

So it seems that AB doesn't accelerate transcoding, but I can't confirm. I just figured it wouldn't use that much CPU usage.

But perhaps I could be very wrong, because the file was like an 80 minute h.264 and it did the transcode in like a minute. There was nothing in activity monitor that showcased the AB usage and the Apple tech employee who specialized on the Mac Pro couldn't confirm the AB's usage. Everyone was pretty much lost on how the AB worked.

When I have more time, I'll try to go back and do more tests.

Cool thanks for this!
Haha i was almost expecting that no one at the store would be able to answer anything about this card..
it’s a bit crazy that it’s such a “wildcard” right now. I feel they should’ve put up a page with better particular workflow examples for the AB.
I’ll have my Mac Pro -sadly without afterburner - on Monday (if DHL doesn’t a few up ??)
I’m gonna run some conversion tests and then will see if they have the card Installed in the demo machine in our local store. Hopefully that machine will also be a 16core with a Vega so that I can compare. I doubt they would let me remove the card at the store for a direct comparison but who knows, I have a direct contact at the store who wanted to give me a personal tour of the device, so maybe..

And yea, if it really went insanely fast you could in fact be wrong- It’s expected that the CPU would be used to decode the h264- so maybe it did that and then the afterburner immediately encoded the Prores in no time at all- that’s what we need to figure Out really.

 

[deconstruct60]

....

I took an H.264 file and transcoded it to ProRes 4444. It used over 1600% CPU on the 12-core on display and didn't touch the Vega II. This was using the latest Compressor.

So it seems that AB doesn't accelerate transcoding, but I can't confirm.

Only in that particular direction. If have had gone ProRes 4444 to H.264 then it would have.
That transcoding actually involves a ProRes decode. Creating a ProRes 4444 file that doesn't exist yet can't possibly involve a decode ( on a non existent yet object).

 

[PowerMike G5]

Only in that particular direction. If have had gone ProRes 4444 to H.264 then it would have.
That transcoding actually involves a ProRes decode. Creating a ProRes 4444 file that doesn't exist yet can't possibly involve a decode ( on a non existent yet object).

I know, but the question I was trying to answer for myself was whether transcodes to ProRes were accelerated. I understand the benefits once in the codec for decode purposes. With Apple's nomenclature stating it accelerates transcoding but not encoding, I was still rather unclear about what it ultimately can do.

Since I work with many different camera formats, I wanted to see whether transcode times would be accelerated by the card for the purposes of ultimately editing in ProRes for it's decode benefits. So batch transcoding from XF-AVC to ProRes or CRM to ProRes is of interest. I'm hoping I can test more.

 

[DearthnVader]

I wanted to see whether transcode times would be accelerated by the card for the purposes of ultimately editing in ProRes for it's decode benefits.

Put out a few grand for WWDC next year and I'm sure someone from Apple will answer you questions. / sarcasm ( we seem to have lost the emoji for this? )

Really, Apple needs to let it's engineers answer questions, at least at the pubic forums on Apple.com. It's poor customer service and leads to lost sales to allow unanswered questions to linger on a $2k add in card.

 

[bxs]

Put out a few grand for WWDC next year and I'm sure someone from Apple will answer you questions. / sarcasm ( we seem to have lost the emoji for this? )

Really, Apple needs to let it's engineers answer questions, at least at the pubic forums on Apple.com. It's poor customer service and leads to lost sales to allow unanswered questions to linger on a $2k add in card.

I absolutely agree..... Apple needs to do a lot more explaining how the Afterburner is supposed to work. Some examples would be very helpful. If nothing else, an addition to Activity Monitor showing the Afterburner's use would give the user some idea, along with some tool-tips.

 

[PowerMike G5]

Yup agree on all of this. It’s the reason why I haven’t bought the card with my Mac Pro purchase. I’ll see when I can do more tests at the Apple store next and hopefully try to shed more light on this card.

 

[chfilm]

I know, but the question I was trying to answer for myself was whether transcodes to ProRes were accelerated. I understand the benefits once in the codec for decode purposes. With Apple's nomenclature stating it accelerates transcoding but not encoding, I was still rather unclear about what it ultimately can do.

Since I work with many different camera formats, I wanted to see whether transcode times would be accelerated by the card for the purposes of ultimately editing in ProRes for it's decode benefits. So batch transcoding from XF-AVC to ProRes or CRM to ProRes is of interest. I'm hoping I can test more.

Yes yes and yes this is my main question to this card as well. Either they’re trying to hide the uselessness of the card with their shadowy description or it’s just really bad Marketing.

 

[deconstruct60]

I know, but the question I was trying to answer for myself was whether transcodes to ProRes were accelerated. I understand the benefits once in the codec for decode purposes. With Apple's nomenclature stating it accelerates transcoding but not encoding, I was still rather unclear about what it ultimately can do.

Decoding is the first half of the transcoding process. It can help in that half (and thereby contributes to transcoding). But if Apple explicitly says that it has a range only of decode abilities ... assigning it a wide ranging of encoding tasks is largely a waste of time. It doesn't slice potatoes into french fries either.

Since I work with many different camera formats, I wanted to see whether transcode times would be accelerated by the card for the purposes of ultimately editing in ProRes for it's decode benefits. So batch transcoding from XF-AVC to ProRes or CRM to ProRes is of interest. I'm hoping I can test more.

It would eventually make sense for Apple to extend the AV Foundation API coverage assigned to Afterburner to cover creation as well as decode. It isn't there yet. Folks keep pointing to the Afterburner's FPGA and hoping that it does "every format". That is probably never going to be true. Its focus is most likely going to be what AV Foundation puts the most effort on using only Apple developers. (i.e., FCPX RAW/codec coverage that comes from camera vendors supplying Apple with codec decoders probably isn't good fit for Afterburner. It is jus far more cleaner for Apple to put their own intellectual property into FPGA encoding than to snarf someone else's. )

Right now, it appears they are targeting end of project transcodes, not the start of a project. Yeah that is a bit of a disconnect with the "end of proxies" marketing hype.

The "end of proxies" over a variety of camera types will probably involve an Atmos (or something similar) external recorders pumping RAW into a ProRes variant ( or the camera absorbing that mode. )

 

[joema2]

...Right now, it appears they are targeting end of project transcodes, not the start of a project. Yeah that is a bit of a disconnect with the "end of proxies" marketing hype...

ProRes RAW (while fast by typical RAW standards) entails significantly more CPU to decode. Even a Mac Pro if editing multiple layers of 8k RAW would be impacted and possibly require proxies. The AB card enables direct editing in situations like that, thereby bypassing proxies.

As you stated, Apple has never said AB avoids proxies except in the ProRes and ProRes RAW cases.

 

[chfilm]

ProRes RAW (while fast by typical RAW standards) entails significantly more CPU to decode. Even a Mac Pro if editing multiple layers of 8k RAW would be impacted and possibly require proxies. The AB card enables direct editing in situations like that, thereby bypassing proxies.

As you stated, Apple has never said AB avoids proxies except in the ProRes and ProRes RAW cases.

I tested the card yesterday in the Apple store against my own results during transcoding.
I’m not sure what to make of it, I tested transcoding TO prores if several formats, including prores 422 4K and 2k to Prores 422 HD, and other formats to the same Prores 422 HD and the 12 core with afterburner in the store was absolutely EXACTLY as fast as my 16 core at home.
Not sure if the additional 4 cores weren’t leveraged on my machine or if the afterburner did help in fact a bit with the transcoding to prores. They wouldn’t let me remove the card and suggested when it becomes available I have to order one and try for myself and send back if I don’t like it.

Export from / to prores from FCPX was INSANELY fast, like in the blink of an eye.

 

[deconstruct60]

ProRes RAW (while fast by typical RAW standards) entails significantly more CPU to decode. Even a Mac Pro if editing multiple layers of 8k RAW would be impacted and possibly require proxies. The AB card enables direct editing in situations like that, thereby bypassing proxies.

My comments were in the context if the transcode issue. In no way was I trying to say AB was only useful solely for transcode. This major disconnect in these forums has been to over generalize Apple quotes that AB is useful for transcode to AB being useful for any transcode imaginable. It isn't that broad.


'

As you stated, Apple has never said AB avoids proxies except in the ProRes and ProRes RAW cases.

Errrr. From Mac Pro marketing page

"
Apple Afterburner. Blaze through 8K video. ... Proxy workflows, RIP .
..."
https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

AB is being oversold. "rest in peace" (RIP) is an implication that you don't need them anymore. That is a hugely overly broad sweeping generalization. And it is directly leading to the confusion problems around the AB product. Narrowing down to ProRes occurs no where in the hype blurb at all. That is all that was out there from Apple for around 5-6 months. It is still there.

Does Apple have some other docs that don't go quite so overboard? Now yes,

About the Afterburner accelerator card for Mac Pro (2019)

But Apple overstated the case for a long time. ( there is no link at all on the marketing page to the more specific information ). There is even a FAQ entry there for "does AB do ProRes encoding" where essentially Apple says no (but stating it only does decoding). .... And yet there are several folks running around these forums assigning testing timing to xyz -> prores transcoding tasks for AB. (when the FAQ clearly says it doesn't. ). Part of that was the ground work Apple laid in that 5-6 months of hype selling.

 

[MaxYuryev]

I finally finished my video on the afterburner. I could try to write up a lot of the info but a lot of your questions are answered in there with proof to back it up.

 

[OkiRun]

I finally finished my video on the afterburner. I could try to write up a lot of the info but a lot of your questions are answered in there with proof to back it up.

I posted on your youtube video !
First, thanks for all your effort! You are appreciated!
Secondly ~ I'm confused.
It's my impression that FCPX changes uploaded files to ProRes natively. At this point, the AB Card takes over rendering. Am I wrong?
=====

Just saw your response on youtube. Thanks!
Clears things up!

 

[cable]

Max,

That video is EXCELLENT. Thank you!

I noticed you mentioned in the comments regarding support for ProRes in Resolve which is great news. I wonder if in the future Blackmagic Raw could be supported by Afterburner? Or do you speculate it will only be ProRes specific?

Also, do you think Blackmagic might come out with their own version of “Afterburner” to supper BRAW?

What do you think?

 

[MaxYuryev]

Max,

That video is EXCELLENT. Thank you!

I noticed you mentioned in the comments regarding support for ProRes in Resolve which is great news. I wonder if in the future Blackmagic Raw could be supported by Afterburner? Or do you speculate it will only be ProRes specific?

Also, do you think Blackmagic might come out with their own version of “Afterburner” to supper BRAW?

What do you think?

Thanks! I don’t know if Apple would want to reprogram it or add programming (if that can be done) but who knows. Blackmagic raw already works quite well since it has GPU Metal acceleration (which ProRes Raw doesn’t) so I don’t think they will want to create a specific card with a smaller market instead they would just suggest a better video card.
[automerge]1578217549[/automerge]
As and update, I tested it out and Resolve is in fact using Afterburner right now! ?

 

[Bradleyone]

Another ? for the great video. Very helpful to see these things put through their paces.

As to future Afterburner FPGA use, at Gruber's The Talk Show WWDC 2019, Craig Federighi tantalisingly said, "There's more to come." (Link to specific part where they chat about Afterburner.)

He seemed quite sincere, but I guess time will tell how far they push it.

 

[Stanly.ok]

It's my impression that FCPX changes uploaded files to ProRes natively. At this point, the AB Card takes over rendering.

Afterburner doesn't speed up encoding from other formats, so the Background render won't happen quicker and playback of pre-rendered timeline should not be an issue on any Mac Pro config.

Craig Federighi tantalisingly said, "There's more to come."

Thanks for bringing this up, now I remember when I first saw this promise of more capabilities! Craig Federighi also said "absolutely" about possibility to reprogram Afterburner. Considering their legal process with RED at the same time and "working on great things together" quote by Jarred, I would guess they were working on RED files optimization, but might've changed their plans ... or not!

 

[chfilm]

That’s a great piece of Information there by Federighi. I would bet that there’ll be more features announced throughout the year! Either prores encoding, or they will open it up to decode other compressions.

 

[bsbeamer]

Wait for NAB 2020 before you make such bold bets with Afterburner. Afterburner is too niche of a product when it does not do anything but ProRes. Apple has a lot of work to do with opening it up before “industry” will embrace it.

RED optimized for METAL acceleration with R3D. Adobe optimized Mercury engine for METAL. METAL is the future on macOS with multiple GPUs and eGPU. That is where vendors are spending time optimizing software and one “advantage” of Mac vs PC that people should be leaning in towards in the future.

 

[edgerider]

@MaxYuryev,
cool video!
do you happend to have a way to test it in slot 2 in a cMP, it might not work in a t3 egpu chassis because it doesn’t have the needed 16 x pcie lanes...
but a 5.1 might indeed be avle to run it.
if it is, by the way it is offloading the cpu, our 5.1 might actually still be very well able to edit 8k all day....

 

[chfilm]

Wait for NAB 2020 before you make such bold bets with Afterburner. Afterburner is too niche of a product when it does not do anything but ProRes. Apple has a lot of work to do with opening it up before “industry” will embrace it.

RED optimized for METAL acceleration with R3D. Adobe optimized Mercury engine for METAL. METAL is the future on macOS with multiple GPUs and eGPU. That is where vendors are spending time optimizing software and one “advantage” of Mac vs PC that people should be leaning in towards in the future.

Yea I wouldn’t expect any news before NAB either. What I’m hoping for is Apple just putting the effort themselves to enable the card to decode more and more hard codecs just to make FCP more attractive.

 

[bxs]

Yea I wouldn’t expect any news before NAB either. What I’m hoping for is Apple just putting the effort themselves to enable the card to decode more and more hard codecs just to make FCP more attractive.

Yea.... I'm getting more and more concerned about the cost of using Adobe subscription vs. a one time cost for FCPX.

We are paying out some $360 annually to Adobe at this time, and we purchased FCPX for $400. So over a 10 yr period we pay out to Adobe some $3,600 vs. just the one time cost of $400 for FCPX. That's a $3,200 difference.

 

[deconstruct60]

....

As to future Afterburner FPGA use, at Gruber's The Talk Show WWDC 2019, Craig Federighi tantalisingly said, "There's more to come." (Link to specific part where they chat about Afterburner.)

He seemed quite sincere, but I guess time will tell how far they push it.

That was also the point where he pointed out that 'access' to the Afterburner card was through the basic AV libraries that Apple provides. That is a dual edged sword. Will get broad , quick adoption by the 3rd party developers who use the library. It won't get much from those who have almost completely ignored it t date.
[automerge]1578325044[/automerge]

...
Thanks for bringing this up, now I remember when I first saw this promise of more capabilities! Craig Federighi also said "absolutely" about possibility to reprogram Afterburner. Considering their legal process with RED at the same time and "working on great things together" quote by Jarred, I would guess they were working on RED files optimization, but might've changed their plans ... or not!

I wouldn't bet on RED. RED isn't going to just hand Apple their code. Nor are they particularly likely to hand it for free.

The other pressing issue is that Apple hasn't covered ProRes yet. The card still only decodes. It doesn't encode. Apple is far more highly likely to cover the rest of their own codec problem solution space, before move onto someone else's. Depending upon how long that encode takes and what uptick of adoption they have from camera vendors there could be more work in the ProRes and custom log processing than leaves more "unfinished" work just in the ProRes orbit.

The "open access" solution for third party camera that doesn't involve direct 98% Apple work is to use Metal and the GPU to get the work done. If Apple opens up encode that is fine for transcode to ProRes because the 3rd party decode could run on GPU and ProRes encode would run on the Afterburner. Would get two accelerations.

Afterburner's only access through Apple standard AV libraries is a value add for that library. Putting high value add on RED's library is extremely likely going to take second place to Apple's. Apple's primary job isn't selling more RED cameras.


P.S. Next up after finishing ProRes , I would expect Apple to work on some open standards codec. (e.g., special mode which goes from ProRes straight to "HDR" quality HEVC ( H.265) solely on the card. Something akin to what Intel has had with Quicksync only on a 4-8K HDR level and all prepped for future broadcast standards ( like Apple TV+ high end streaming ). That's what I'd expect next before something like augments to sell other people's stuff. ( if there was a just big enough buffer for a couple of scan lines then wouldn't need to copy data on/off the card to do the whole transform which could radically increase that step at the cost of being able to do multiple decodes. )

 

[chfilm]

That was also the point where he pointed out that 'access' to the Afterburner card was through the basic AV libraries that Apple provides. That is a dual edged sword. Will get broad , quick adoption by the 3rd party developers who use the library. It won't get much from those who have almost completely ignored it t date.
[automerge]1578325044[/automerge]


I wouldn't bet on RED. RED isn't going to just hand Apple their code. Nor are they particularly likely to hand it for free.

The other pressing issue is that Apple hasn't covered ProRes yet. The card still only decodes. It doesn't encode. Apple is far more highly likely to cover the rest of their own codec problem solution space, before move onto someone else's. Depending upon how long that encode takes and what uptick of adoption they have from camera vendors there could be more work in the ProRes and custom log processing than leaves more "unfinished" work just in the ProRes orbit.

The "open access" solution for third party camera that doesn't involve direct 98% Apple work is to use Metal and the GPU to get the work done. If Apple opens up encode that is fine for transcode to ProRes because the 3rd party decode could run on GPU and ProRes encode would run on the Afterburner. Would get two accelerations.

Afterburner's only access through Apple standard AV libraries is a value add for that library. Putting high value add on RED's library is extremely likely going to take second place to Apple's. Apple's primary job isn't selling more RED cameras.


P.S. Next up after finishing ProRes , I would expect Apple to work on some open standards codec. (e.g., special mode which goes from ProRes straight to "HDR" quality HEVC ( H.265) solely on the card. Something akin to what Intel has had with Quicksync only on a 4-8K HDR level and all prepped for future broadcast standards ( like Apple TV+ high end streaming ). That's what I'd expect next before something like augments to sell other people's stuff. ( if there was a just big enough buffer for a couple of scan lines then wouldn't need to copy data on/off the card to do the whole transform which could radically increase that step at the cost of being able to do multiple decodes. )

sounds very plausible to me! It's gonna be exciting, that's for sure. I'm kinda glad that the card is still so limited right now but with a positive outlook. I couldn't afford it right now anymore anyways