MP All Models AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT / 6900 XT for macOS?

[Grilled Cheese]

Forgive my GPU ignorance, but why are the Radeon Pro versions of AMD's GPUs so much more costly than the other variants? For example (comparing prices in Australia):

Radeon RX 6800 XT: $1,800.
Radeon Pro W6800: $4,500.
Apple's W6800X MPX: $4,200.

I know the Pro versions have more memory, but is that all? AFAIK the 6800 XT performs better in benchmarks, so from a price/performance perspective it's the better choice.

My Mac resides in a totally silent music studio so I greatly prefer the fanless MPX options, but they are hard to justify when higher performance options are available at a cheaper price.

 

[mattspace]

Forgive my GPU ignorance, but why are the Radeon Pro versions of AMD's GPUs so much more costly than the other variants? For example (comparing prices in Australia):

Peace of mind - that's largely what any "pro" gear designation is doing. You can look at various stats, back and forth on performance comparisons etc, but what you're really paying for is "this is the best, most reliable we could make it, and provides the lowest risk of something going wrong, or the worry that you bought the wrong tool, when in use"

 

[DFP1989]

I had a 6900 XT in my system for about a month, and was only ever audible when playing 4K games. During editing and rendering, it was effectively silent.

 

[Grilled Cheese]

Peace of mind - that's largely what any "pro" gear designation is doing. You can look at various stats, back and forth on performance comparisons etc, but what you're really paying for is "this is the best, most reliable we could make it, and provides the lowest risk of something going wrong, or the worry that you bought the wrong tool, when in use"

Thank you.

Still…it’s hard to know just how “unreliable” the non-pro versions are by comparison. I guess the question I’m left with is, “Does the average Mac Pro user consider the improved reliability worthwhile?” 2.5 times the price seems like a hell of a premium for extra reliability.

 

[Grilled Cheese]

I had a 6900 XT in my system for about a month, and was only ever audible when playing 4K games. During editing and rendering, it was effectively silent.

I hear you (excuse the pun) but I’ve learned the hard way that what most people consider silent is usually too noisy for my studio. In a typical room, even a quiet one, ambient background noise masks the sound of case/GPU fans so they seem silent. The same fan in my recording studio may be very audible.

For example my trashcan Mac is very quiet, but I can hear it from 6 feet away when it’s just idling. I’ve got it in a ventilated soundproof enclosure for that reason. Yeah, it’s REALLY quiet in here and I love it.

I could put a new Mac Pro in a similar enclosure but they are handsome computers so it seems a shame to lock it away. ?

 

[ondioline]

Forgive my GPU ignorance, but why are the Radeon Pro versions of AMD's GPUs so much more costly than the other variants?

It’s not an issue in MacOS, but Radeon Pro and nVidia Quadro are generally required to use the certified drivers on Windows. That means AMD went through the effort to test and definitively say “the W6800 absolutely works with Maya” etc

AMD Radeon™ PRO Software Certified ISV Applications

www.amd.com

 

[deconstruct60]

Forgive my GPU ignorance, but why are the Radeon Pro versions of AMD's GPUs so much more costly than the other variants? For example (comparing prices in Australia):

Radeon RX 6800 XT: $1,800.
Radeon Pro W6800: $4,500.
Apple's W6800X MPX: $4,200.

I know the Pro versions have more memory, but is that all? AFAIK the 6800 XT performs better in benchmarks, so from a price/performance perspective it's the better choice.

The MPX variant has Infinity Fabric (IF) link. You would need to have software that took advantage of Metal's interface to sharing/copying memory over IF , but that is part of the price increase. AMD's mainstream cards don't have that link. ( the Pro W6800 doesn't either apparently ).

If have two PCI-e v4 cards communicating between each other over a PCI-e v3 bus (at half potential speed) there is definitely a downside that to versus a "back channel" bus that is faster than PCI-e v4. But again, at some point need to have more than one MPX module and also software that is aware of the substantially faster path. Only one card and/or "clueless" software and there isn't a big value add for the price charged.


P.S. Not a "going to break the bank" price difference but MPX module is "plug and go". No new wires required. The non MPX module requires wires to the AUX power plug which consumes space if trying to maximally dense pack all of the slots.

 

[h9826790]

Forgive my GPU ignorance, but why are the Radeon Pro versions of AMD's GPUs so much more costly than the other variants? For example (comparing prices in Australia):

Radeon RX 6800 XT: $1,800.
Radeon Pro W6800: $4,500.
Apple's W6800X MPX: $4,200.

I know the Pro versions have more memory, but is that all? AFAIK the 6800 XT performs better in benchmarks, so from a price/performance perspective it's the better choice.

My Mac resides in a totally silent music studio so I greatly prefer the fanless MPX options, but they are hard to justify when higher performance options are available at a cheaper price.

That price difference isn't for performance, but more for the work station driver development, and the 24/7 professional support.

The demand for workstation card is relatively low (compare to gaming card), but the cost to develop its driver won't be lowed. In fact, it require more time to make sure the driver stability. May even cost more than the gaming card. Therefore, the cost affected on the card's price.

Also, AMD provide 24/7 professional support for its work station card. This kind of support doesn't exist on gaming card. This also push the work station card's price higher.

For the MPX card, AMD won't provide any support, and there is no special driver in macOS. So, what you are paying for is pretty much the Apple tax. Of course, if you believe that cableless design is worth that much, or you prefer passive cooling (even that has much higher change to get into thermal throttling, which further lower the GPU performance if compare to the gaming card). Then of course you may able to justify that extra cost.

For me, unless I really need that amount of VRAM on a single card, otherwise, I will go for the gaming 6800XT, or even dual 6800XT.

Still…it’s hard to know just how “unreliable” the non-pro versions are by comparison. I guess the question I’m left with is, “Does the average Mac Pro user consider the improved reliability worthwhile?” 2.5 times the price seems like a hell of a premium for extra reliability.

IMO, the reliability isn't that difference in macOS.

TBH, as far as I can see, most problems are driver / software issues, hardware issue is relatively rare. Of course, it can still happen, but use a gaming card (usually has better cooling if compare to work station cards. Or stronger VRM due to the potential for overclocking...) in professional software isn't that stressful actually.

Therefore, hardware failure even may happen more on gaming cards, but IMO, not that significant. For software issues, the same problem will affect both workstation card and gaming card in macOS (due to share use the same driver). So, the reliability is pretty much the same.

Someone may argue the workstation card has better build quality etc. But an average gaming card can also live for more than 5 years anyway. And many gaming cards are 10 years old but still working fine. So, even a workstation card can work for 20 years. But is that really matter? I personally won't care about it that much.

I could put a new Mac Pro in a similar enclosure but they are handsome computers so it seems a shame to lock it away. ?

I think you better still put it in an enclosure, then forget about its noise.

 

[th0masp]

Thank you.

Still…it’s hard to know just how “unreliable” the non-pro versions are by comparison. I guess the question I’m left with is, “Does the average Mac Pro user consider the improved reliability worthwhile?” 2.5 times the price seems like a hell of a premium for extra reliability.

I think Pro-cards are targeted to be run continuously (data centers, etc). Consumer models can be expected to fail earlier under such conditions. If you are simply looking to use the card in your desktop machine during work hours then it shouldn't be a problem at all.

Also the Radeon XT may currently be selling for 1800 in your area but MSRP is a lot lower. I think these cards were introduced at 6-700$? So the price difference minus pandemic-pricing is far more extreme.

 

[DFP1989]

IMO, the reliability isn't that difference in macOS.

Yep, my W5700X was just as unreliable back in the Catalina days as a gaming card ?

 

[jasonmvp]

Peace of mind - that's largely what any "pro" gear designation is doing. You can look at various stats, back and forth on performance comparisons etc, but what you're really paying for is "this is the best, most reliable we could make it, and provides the lowest risk of something going wrong, or the worry that you bought the wrong tool, when in use"

Unless I'm mistaken:

There's also the video channels via Thunderbolt 3, if that's an important feature for you. With an MPX in place, any of the TBolt ports on the system can output video. If you replace that MPX with an aftermarket, you'll lose video out of the Thunderbolt ports on the case.

This, again, may not be important to you; it's up to you whether that feature is worth the increased price.

 

[triton100]

can you use the 6800x module in tandem with a 5700x module. Or will the Mac only use one ?

 

[randy85]

can you use the 6800x module in tandem with a 5700x module. Or will the Mac only use one ?

Think it depends a bit on the software but FCP and Resolve can use multiple GPUs no problem:

From the FCP product page:

For the ultimate editing experience, run Final Cut Pro on the world’s fastest Mac, the new Mac Pro. Final Cut Pro takes advantage of all the GPUs in Mac Pro and uses multi-threading to spread tasks across up to 28 cores.

Resolve uses my W5700X MPX and my 6800 XT gaming card with no issues. So will definitely be fine with different MPX modules. You could argue that it's more optimised if they're two of the same card, but it will ultimately work.

 

[triton100]

Think it depends a bit on the software but FCP and Resolve can use multiple GPUs no problem:

From the FCP product page:


Resolve uses my W5700X MPX and my 6800 XT gaming card with no issues. So will definitely be fine with different MPX modules. You could argue that it's more optimised if they're two of the same card, but it will ultimately work.

Thanks

 

[DFP1989]

can you use the 6800x module in tandem with a 5700x module. Or will the Mac only use one ?

Resolve took advantage of both my W5700X and 6900 XT when I had it installed.

FCP would only use one or the other (depending one which was selected in the preferences). I think FCP only likes identical dual card setups. Not even my W5700X and 5700 XT would operate together in FCP.

 

[triton100]

Resolve took advantage of both my W5700X and 6900 XT when I had it installed.

FCP would only use one or the other (depending one which was selected in the preferences). I think FCP only likes identical dual card setups. Not even my W5700X and 5700 XT would operate together in FCP.

Thanks. What performance increase did you notice between the 5700 and the 6900?

 

[DFP1989]

In my workflow based on FCP, not a lot.

Main thing I was chasing improved performance with HEVC 10-bit 4:2:2, but it became clear that the newer card didn’t have the hardware decoding capability, nor was it “brute force” decoding it either.

Sold the card while the market remains nuts.

 

[Grumply]

Can anyone recommend particular models of the 6800xt and 6900xt that will actually fit the 7,1?

I can't find the reference cards anywhere, and it seems almost every manufacturer has made them idiotic sizes. The smallest one I can readily find available earby seems to be the Sapphire Pulse RX 6800 XT, and that's 313mm long.

Has anyone managed to make a card that long fit inside their machine?

 

[DFP1989]

Gigabyte GAMING cards fit with plenty of room, well under 300mm.

 

[Tala]

Can anyone recommend particular models of the 6800xt and 6900xt that will actually fit the 7,1?

I can't find the reference cards anywhere, and it seems almost every manufacturer has made them idiotic sizes. The smallest one I can readily find available earby seems to be the Sapphire Pulse RX 6800 XT, and that's 313mm long.

This is my list (extracted from my notes) about the card sizes, not a lot that will fit in the Mac Pro unfortunately:

• Card has to be under 300mm to fit.
• Reference RX 6800 / 6900 XT are 267mm and fit easily.
• ASRock RX 6800 Challenger Pro: 305x131x55mm, might just fit
• Gigabyte Radeon RX 6800 XT & RX 6900 XT 16G: L=267 W=120 H=49 mm, should fit
• Gigabyte Radeon RX 6800 XT & RX 6900 XT GAMING OC 16G: L=286 W=118 H=58 mm, should fit
• AORUS Radeon™ RX 6800 XT AORUS MASTER TYPE C 16G: L=324 W=140 H=60 mm, TOO BIG
• PowerColor Radeon RX 6800 XT - Red Devil: 320mm*135mm*62 mm - TOO BIG: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-6900-xt-for-macos.2262295/post-29751958
• Sapphire Nitro+ 6900XT ~2500 SGD: 310(L)X 134.3(W)X 55.3 (H)mm - TOO BIG - the 32cm PowerColor RedDevil is too big. From MacRumors forum: "Sapphire Nitro+ 6900XT is listed as 310mm and it will not fit. So either the car is longer or I think we have to be under 300mm to fit."
• Sapphire Nitro+ 6800XT ~1899 SGD: 310(L)X 134.3(W)X 55.3 (H)mm - TOO BIG - the 32cm PowerColor RedDevil is too big
• Asus Tuf Gaming RX 6900 XT: 32 x 14.02 x 5.78 Centimeter: TOO BIG
• Asus Tuf Gaming RX 6800 XT: 32 x 14.02 x 5.78 Centimeter: TOO BIG

The Sapphire cards are too big unfortunately, those are the ones I can buy here

Getting the reference cards - which seem to be the only ones that fit for sure - is almost impossible right now...

 

[rondocap]

Has anyone bought or considered the w6900x? Curious if so.

‘’I went for the w6800x duo - seems just better priced for the performance. If 4 gpus work in FCP, two duos, will be interesting. If not, then 2 w6900x will still be fastest.

 

[triton100]

Has anyone bought or considered the w6900x? Curious if so.

‘’I went for the w6800x duo - seems just better priced for the performance. If 4 gpus work in FCP, two duos, will be interesting. If not, then 2 w6900x will still be fastest.

Mines arriving tomorrow

 

[rondocap]

 

[rondocap]

Mines arriving tomorrow

Nice, what made you go for the W 6900 X versus the duo? Do you plan on adding two?

 

[avkills]

Forgive my GPU ignorance, but why are the Radeon Pro versions of AMD's GPUs so much more costly than the other variants? For example (comparing prices in Australia):

Radeon RX 6800 XT: $1,800.
Radeon Pro W6800: $4,500.
Apple's W6800X MPX: $4,200.

I know the Pro versions have more memory, but is that all? AFAIK the 6800 XT performs better in benchmarks, so from a price/performance perspective it's the better choice.

My Mac resides in a totally silent music studio so I greatly prefer the fanless MPX options, but they are hard to justify when higher performance options are available at a cheaper price.

Those prices are off.

A retail Radeon Pro W6800 is only like $2500
Apple's single W6800x is only like $2500
Apple's W6800x Duo (2 GPUS) is around $4500-$5000.

I believe the extra cost vs. the gaming card is worth it; just based on the cleaner install and thunderbolt routing.