Best graphics card for 2010 Mac Pro that is supported out of box

[h9826790]

Hey I'm in the same boat here. Trying to squeeze some more 4K power out of my 2010 Mac Pro 5,1 with some upgrades. Does anyone have experience with the Nvidia 1070 or 1080?
They will work with the Nvidia Mac driver? Or do they have to be flashed?

Also considering the Sapphire PULSE RX580 8GB. This will work without flashing?

I'm a video editor and use both FCP X and Premiere Pro, and I prefer FCP X.
But often my 4K work is in Premiere Pro due to client, so I'm exploring Nvidia options and price ranges too.

It's a hard decision. For PP, 1080 work better.

But for FCPX, RX580 is clearly much faster.

If you do 4K in PP more, then may be 1080 is the way to go. Especially if your rarely update the OS (as long as it's working), then web driver won't bother you much. However, if you prefer to keep the system always up to date, and install even single minor security once available, then the web driver may give you some pain.

Occasionally, some members here accidentally let the Mac installed the security update automatically (when no web driver available yet), or Apple may force update some important security update (without acknowledging the user). Then the Mac can only boot with black screen and doing nothing. Even with flashed card, still won't help without web driver. It only make you easier to know what's happened or recovery from backup etc. Web driver is a requirement to make the card work properly. If you install the OS update before web driver available, then you can either wait or recover, no way to make it work (of course, you can always swap another OOTB GPU back in as temporary card to use).

 

[thomasthegps]

Now that the RX 580 is officially recommended by Apple its hard to recommend anything else. Apple seems willing to give us HEVC decode/encode at least for the RX 580. There is no guarantee that an Nvidia card will support that feature and that renders the cMP pretty much useless for video editing, as GPU encoding should speed things up significantly. Also the Nvidia driver on Mac OS really isn't good. TBH a 1070,1080 seems like a waste of money especially since it will not be well supported. I would wait until further beta releases to see where Apple is heading with cMP, before investing any money in a GPU whether its AMD or NVIDIA.

 

[mattspace]

curious to hear from folks who put a 580 (Pulse 8gb) in their cMP, as to how it performs for OpenGL (Sketchup, Autopano Giga two of my major work apps use it), compared to alternatives.

 

[pat500000]

curious to hear from folks who put a 580 (Pulse 8gb) in their cMP, as to how it performs for OpenGL (Sketchup, Autopano Giga two of my major work apps use it), compared to alternatives.

I don’t have opengl based apps...but my fcpx is crazy fast. I know it’s not much help...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/66f7nf/rx_580_cinebench_opengl_benchmark_spotted_in_amd/

Maybe this helps?

 

[kohlson]

It's a hard decision. For PP, 1080 work better.

I have a longtime friend who learned CS6 PP, and prefers that. We do a lot of pro bono work together, and I use FCPX. (I told him I wasn't paying subscription, and wasn't investing in 5-year old software). We both have 5,1 cMPs with 3.33 CPU. Later this year I plan to get an RX580. I have great expectations...

My question: Will the same card also provide any performance improvement over his existing 5770 in CS6 PP?

 

[h9826790]

I have a longtime friend who learned CS6 PP, and prefers that. We do a lot of pro bono work together, and I use FCPX. (I told him I wasn't paying subscription, and wasn't investing in 5-year old software). We both have 5,1 cMPs with 3.33 CPU. Later this year I plan to get an RX580. I have great expectations...

My question: Will the same card also provide any performance improvement over his existing 5770 in CS6 PP?

I believe so, but has zero prove. RX580 is few times faster and more capable in almost any aspect if compare to the 5770. Unless the CS6 PP is never GPU limiting, otherwise, the RX580 should able to provide at least some performance improvement.

 

[pat500000]

I have a longtime friend who learned CS6 PP, and prefers that. We do a lot of pro bono work together, and I use FCPX. (I told him I wasn't paying subscription, and wasn't investing in 5-year old software). We both have 5,1 cMPs with 3.33 CPU. Later this year I plan to get an RX580. I have great expectations...

My question: Will the same card also provide any performance improvement over his existing 5770 in CS6 PP?

Good choice on 580

 

[mikas]

curious to hear from folks who put a 580 (Pulse 8gb) in their cMP, as to how it performs for OpenGL (Sketchup, Autopano Giga two of my major work apps use it), compared to alternatives.

ArchiCAD 21, Rhinoceros, Cinema 4D. Sapphire Pulse RX 580 8GB performs quite decent with OpenGL. Apple is deprecating OpenGL though, and it is to be seen who, when and how makes new Metal versions of their apps for MacOS. I really want to believe this policy change doesn't effect my workflows in a negative way. They say it's about time already to abandon OpenGL, but I don't know.

 

[Dr. Rek]

Now that the RX 580 is officially recommended by Apple its hard to recommend anything else. Apple seems willing to give us HEVC decode/encode at least for the RX 580. There is no guarantee that an Nvidia card will support that feature and that renders the cMP pretty much useless for video editing, as GPU encoding should speed things up significantly. Also the Nvidia driver on Mac OS really isn't good. TBH a 1070,1080 seems like a waste of money especially since it will not be well supported. I would wait until further beta releases to see where Apple is heading with cMP, before investing any money in a GPU whether its AMD or NVIDIA.

Thanks for the advice. =)

I did find some data on 1080s in 2010 Mac Pros
http://www.greggant.com/posts/2018/...-gtx-1060-1070-1080-on-mac-pro-2010-2012.html

These benchmarks are particularly interesting
http://barefeats.com/hic2_nv_vs_vega.html

So a Radeon Vega 64 sounds like a great option too, far surpassing a 580. And the 1080 far surpassing the 580 as well. However it seems like a power mod, or using several sata slots for additional power would be needed for both a 1080 or a Vega 64...

My only issue is tracking down data or user reports about Premiere Pro performance.
[doublepost=1530561257][/doublepost]I wonder if one could also consider the Vega 56, as the Vega 64 is fully supported both on iMac Pro
https://www.apple.com/imac-pro/specs/

Additional research shows that 64's often go for a similar price to a 56, so might as well not consider a 56.

 

[Dr. Rek]

So Premiere Pro's site supports all the Radeon cards as well with OpenCL/Metal, so that basically eliminates the main reason to consider Nvidia. I'm no expert, but I wonder if CUDA has any advantage for Premiere anymore?
https://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-pro/system-requirements.html

I wonder if the benefits of spending much more on a vega 56/64 would be worth it?
I'd like to find some comparisons in Premiere Pro / FCP X / After Effects render times and performance with these three radeon options.
Perhaps the 580 is the way to go when it comes to price and real world performance considerations.

 

[h9826790]

So Premiere Pro's site supports all the Radeon cards as well with OpenCL/Metal, so that basically eliminates the main reason to consider Nvidia. I'm no expert, but I wonder if CUDA has any advantage for Premiere anymore?
https://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-pro/system-requirements.html

I wonder if the benefits of spending much more on a vega 56/64 would be worth it?
I'd like to find some comparisons in Premiere Pro / FCP X / After Effects render times and performance with these three radeon options.
Perhaps the 580 is the way to go when it comes to price and real world performance considerations.

IMO, it's not just performance to cost ratio, but the driver maturity / stability issue.

RX580 definitely has better support, especially the Sapphire PULSE 8GB model.

 

[Dr. Rek]

IMO, it's not just performance to cost ratio, but the driver maturity / stability issue.

RX580 definitely has better support, especially the Sapphire PULSE 8GB model.

Right, but the Vega 56/64 is native support as well due to the iMac Pro.

The big question for me right now, is if the raw performance upgrade of a 56/64 over a 580 would matter enough to be worth an additional ~$300 in my case as a video editor doing 4K.

 

[h9826790]

Right, but the Vega 56/64 is native support as well due to the iMac Pro.

The big question for me right now, is if the raw performance upgrade of a 56/64 over a 580 would matter enough to be worth an additional ~$300 in my case as a video editor doing 4K.

The GPU has native support, not the whole graphic card. There is a bit difference. And this is exactly why some card can work, some card cannot. And sometimes the Vega's fan may go 100% for no reason.

TBH, if just consider the raw performance, I prefer Vega. It's about 70% faster in real world (If no other hardware limitation, and the software has proper support). Even though the RX580 still has better "per dollar" performance, but the difference isn't that big. I always prefer a single powerful card. That's why I went for the 1080Ti before I got my RX580.

But if also consider the stability. Sapphire PUSLE RX580 is the way to go at this moment.

P.S. I am not trying to downgrade from 1080Ti to RX580, but my 1080Ti now goes into the Hackintosh. With a 8700k, it works better at there. And I give the 5,1 a new RX580 for better FCPX performance, which also make my life easier

 

[Dr. Rek]

But if also consider the stability. Sapphire PUSLE RX580 is the way to go at this moment.

Thank you, is there any reason a pulse would be better than a nitro+ version?
Nitro+ less supported?
Seems like the Nitro+ is quieter.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...VFMZkCh2oRQUXEAYYASABEgLHF_D_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

 

[h9826790]

Thank you, is there any reason a pulse would be better than a nitro+ version?
Nitro+ less supported?
Seems like the Nitro+ is quieter.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202280&ignorebbr=1&nm_mc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC&cm_mmc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC-_-pla-_-Video+Cards+-+AMD/ATI-_-N82E16814202280&gclid=EAIaIQobChMItbmpnf-I3AIVFMZkCh2oRQUXEAYYASABEgLHF_D_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

TBH, if not for cMP, the Nitro+ is a better card.

It has better cooler, dual ROM design, higher clock speed, and sometimes cheaper than the PULSE.

However, the better cooling actually come from the bigger cooler. Rather than make the card longer, Sapphire make the card wider. Therefore, the Nitro+ is a 2.2 slot card, which physically block slot 2 on the cMP.

The higher clock speed also backup by the extra 6pin input. The good news is that's optional, so, you can still only connect the 8pin and use it like the PULSE.

Since both the PULSE and Nitro+ has the same port layout. I expect they can share use the same framebuffer / personality. So, compatibility should not be an issue in macOS.

I actually prefer the Nitro+ more, however, due to its 2.2 slots size, I went for the PULSE. All I need is just down volt the card to 1000mV, then it can always stay at the max boost clock, no throttling, and no noticeable fan noise (its fan is quieter than the cMP's PCIe / PSU fan. So, in real world, can hardly hear the PUSLE fan noise).

 

[Dr. Rek]

TBH, if not for cMP, the Nitro+ is a better card.

It has better cooler, dual ROM design, higher clock speed, and sometimes cheaper than the PULSE.

However, the better cooling actually come from the bigger cooler. Rather than make the card longer, Sapphire make the card wider. Therefore, the Nitro+ is a 2.2 slot card, which physically block slot 2 on the cMP.

Ah yes, this part is pretty important, I need slot 2. Thank you!
Considering getting one of these for 4K projects, and they need that 16x
https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/ssd/owc-mercury-accelsior-pro-q

 

[MarkC426]

TBH, if not for cMP, the Nitro+ is a better card.

It has better cooler, dual ROM design, higher clock speed, and sometimes cheaper than the PULSE.

However, the better cooling actually come from the bigger cooler. Rather than make the card longer, Sapphire make the card wider. Therefore, the Nitro+ is a 2.2 slot card, which physically block slot 2 on the cMP.

The higher clock speed also backup by the extra 6pin input. The good news is that's optional, so, you can still only connect the 8pin and use it like the PULSE.

Since both the PULSE and Nitro+ has the same port layout. I expect they can share use the same framebuffer / personality. So, compatibility should not be an issue in macOS.

I actually prefer the Nitro+ more, however, due to its 2.2 slots size, I went for the PULSE. All I need is just down volt the card to 1000mV, then it can always stay at the max boost clock, no throttling, and no noticeable fan noise (its fan is quieter than the cMP's PCIe / PSU fan. So, in real world, can hardly hear the PUSLE fan noise).

As H98 says......I went from dual 5770 to RX580 and first time I started up my mac I couldn’t believe how much quieter it was (so used to the 5770’s). Plus the RX580 fans only spin up when needed, whereas other cards are on 100%.

 

[Hater]

Is an RX580 going to give me much of a boost over the Quadro K4000 I have at the moment?

Machine is pure FCPX.

 

[h9826790]

Is an RX580 going to give me much of a boost over the Quadro K4000 I have at the moment?

Machine is pure FCPX.

For pure FCPX, K4000 is a very very bad choice at the very beginning. And yes, RX580 can easily make FCPX few times faster.

 

[Hater]

For pure FCPX, K4000 is a very very bad choice at the very beginning. And yes, RX580 can easily make FCPX few times faster.

Just what it came with.

Cool, I'll go find an RX580 then.

 

[slamjack]

I have Radeon RX 580 Pulse (AMD (0 x 1002) 0x67df, 0x00e7). It works natively, is detected with no issues, but sometime FCPX shows graphic glitches. They disappears after relaunching FCPX. FCPX is only app to have such problems. Did anybody run it to this?

 

[AcesHigh87]

Wouldn’t gt 120 just work with non booting gpu?

That’s what I do. GT 120 for the boot screen and a GTX 1070 Ti for the main drive. Works like a charm and didn’t need any kind of crazy power setup because the card uses only 1x 8pin connector.

 

[h9826790]

I have Radeon RX 580 Pulse (AMD (0 x 1002) 0x67df, 0x00e7). It works natively, is detected with no issues, but sometime FCPX shows graphic glitches. They disappears after relaunching FCPX. FCPX is only app to have such problems. Did anybody run it to this?

I only occasionally use FCPX now, but never see that issue

Which version of OS and FCPX?

 

[slamjack]

I only occasionally use FCPX now, but never see that issue

Which version of OS and FCPX?

10.13.5 and FCPX 10.4.3. Also realtime timeline performance in FCPX is not as good as it should be with 8Gb of Vram.

 

[Squuiid]

I have Radeon RX 580 Pulse (AMD (0 x 1002) 0x67df, 0x00e7). It works natively, is detected with no issues, but sometime FCPX shows graphic glitches. They disappears after relaunching FCPX. FCPX is only app to have such problems. Did anybody run it to this?

Do you have a GT120 installed also?