It's not supported out of the box, it's currently powered by the same driver as the RX 480.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Dual RX 480s in Mac Pro 5,1 running MacOS (w/ How-to)
- Thread starter theitsage
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hmmm... I saw you were on 3.1 so I downloaded and did it again with my R9 280X:
What's going on here? I want to UPGRADE my card, not the other way around?
What's going on here? I want to UPGRADE my card, not the other way around?
I honestly don't see the appeal of the R9 Nano. This was a $649 GPU at launch, only 12 months ago. It was a terrible value. At 55% off currently, it's more in line with Polaris GPUs in terms of value.
The short board is perfect for smaller PC builds and eGPUs. I tried it with my eGPU enclosure which has a 220W power brick. It fits great inside the enclosure. Problem is, it draws too much power; crashing when ran hard.
Using the R9 Nano in the tower Mac Pro takes both mini PCI power cables. It looks odd having such a small card with a bundle of cables + adapter.
[doublepost=1474896119][/doublepost]
If you want to upgrade, wait until Apple announces a new Mac with Polaris GPU then get a pair of RX 470/480.
The short board is perfect for smaller PC builds and eGPUs. I tried it with my eGPU enclosure which has a 220W power brick. It fits great inside the enclosure. Problem is, it draws too much power; crashing when ran hard.
Using the R9 Nano in the tower Mac Pro takes both mini PCI power cables. It looks odd having such a small card with a bundle of cables + adapter.
[doublepost=1474896119][/doublepost]
If you want to upgrade, wait until Apple announces a new Mac with Polaris GPU then get a pair of RX 470/480.
I also haven't completely given up hope that Nvidia will release a web driver to allow for a GTX 1080 in a 5.1. I'd like that for both Arnold and Maxwell in GPU supported rendering, as well as general Resolve performance.
But… if Apple could just pull their thumbs out and release a new Mac Pro already....
By the way, Rob over at Barefeats.com has a number of GPUs tested in Geekbench 4. And in that case the 480X takes a more comfortable lead over the 280X.
EDIT: less than I thought. I was looking at the HD 7950, but my 280X scores 108364 compared to 125559 for the 480X (84175 for the HD 7950).
And:
Last edited:
I read the Barefeats comparo. If you look at the GPUs scored higher than the RX 480, you can't help but notice they all were priced at least twice the cost of RX 480 at launch.
For our tower Mac Pro in particular, a pair of RX 480 can be ran with the two mini PCI 6-pin power cables. The value card from green team is the GTX 1070.
For our tower Mac Pro in particular, a pair of RX 480 can be ran with the two mini PCI 6-pin power cables. The value card from green team is the GTX 1070.
I do like that the RX 480 comes in cheap and energy efficient. But for us locked into the cMP, I think most of us would take brute force and (real life) performance over those things.
Still, the efficiency we're seeing now is what will allow the iMac to come closer in performance to traditional desktop class gfx.
Hmmm... I saw you were on 3.1 so I downloaded and did it again with my R9 280X:
What's going on here? I want to UPGRADE my card, not the other way around?
You "upgrade" (improve) the efficiency, but not compute performance.
It's almost impossible to drive 2x 280x with just the slots and mini 6pins in the cMP, but it's very easy to do that for the RX4xx card.
So, if you want a real upgrade, get 2 cards instead of one. However, since lack of proper driver support. These new cards seems still unable to release it's full under OSX.
However, TBH, the 2x RX480 Luxmark score is not much higher than my 2x 7950, which also only powered by the slots and 2x mini 6pins. And I can OC the 7950s a bit to match that score (still with the mini 6pins only). So, there is almost no real reason for me to upgrade, apart from I can have more VRAM.
Like I said above, the efficiency is a 'nice to have' for me but I wouldn't swap cards for it. I'm looking strictly for performance in specific apps.
I've modded my Mac Pro to supply two 8 pin in addition to what is already there. My problem with two hfs cards is that I would have to give up either USB3 or my SSUBX boot. Not really ready to do that just yet.
@AndreeOnline you modded the PSU in your tower Mac Pro which is very handy for your use but the majority of tower Mac Pros aren't this way. I don't think we'll have a more complete modded GPU as the R9 280x anytime soon.
You should try the Radeon Pro Duo. It's a Fiji card so the kext mod for RX 480/R9 Nano should work.
You should try the Radeon Pro Duo. It's a Fiji card so the kext mod for RX 480/R9 Nano should work.
Hehe.. another card I didn't know existed! =)
When I saw how small the Nano was, I was thinking someone should make a dual card like this. And here we have it. Even if I could power it, the power consumption and $1500 price tag is a turn-off.
But the same concept with dual 480X with 16GB for $500? Well, yes sir!
You can run the PICe SSD via a PCIe extension cable. So that, you can still use all 4 slots, since there is no port on the PCIe SSD adaptor, so the card can run via a cable without any issue.
I also haven't completely given up hope that Nvidia will release a web driver to allow for a GTX 1080 in a 5.1. I'd like that for both Arnold and Maxwell in GPU supported rendering, as well as general Resolve performance.
But… if Apple could just pull their thumbs out and release a new Mac Pro already....
By the way, Rob over at Barefeats.com has a number of GPUs tested in Geekbench 4. And in that case the 480X takes a more comfortable lead over the 280X.
EDIT: less than I thought. I was looking at the HD 7950, but my 280X scores 108364 compared to 125559 for the 480X (84175 for the HD 7950).
And:
Just note that Rob tested on Windows 10.
Do you mean like fitting a flat adapter cable into one of the blocked "free" PCIe slots?
That sounds interesting. I haven't really checked how much room there is... sort of given them up as 'blocked'.
10.12.1 apparently bring full RX 480 support with new .kext....
https://www.tonymacx86.com/threads/macos-sierra-pb-need-testers-for-new-amd-radeon-drivers.197273/
[doublepost=1475019421][/doublepost]WooooHooo!!! Running gputest now!!!
OpenGL 4.0 Tessmark x64 with 4xMSAA - 7858
https://www.tonymacx86.com/threads/macos-sierra-pb-need-testers-for-new-amd-radeon-drivers.197273/
[doublepost=1475019421][/doublepost]WooooHooo!!! Running gputest now!!!
OpenGL 4.0 Tessmark x64 with 4xMSAA - 7858
How? I like that lol
Fl0r!an did update the original post, all info you need to know is in there, no need to go through entire 61 pages.
This has been the case since 10.12.1 Beta 1 last Wednesday. The drivers in Beta 2 are two days newer and not much has changed which is good news.
This feels even more complete
