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

nMP/new Mac Pro/Mac Pro 6,1 Reviews [MERGED]

MSF said:
http://www.digitalartsonline.co.uk/...re/apple-mac-pro-2013-review-with-benchmarks/
Click to expand...


Another article that makes me want to wait awhile. The MacBook Pro killed the Mac Pro in some tests and they were using a configuration out of my range.

Unless Adobe and a few others adopt Apple's dual GPU mindset, the Mac Pro won't really perform like I want. 4 hours to render a C4D is sort of unacceptable for that kind of money.

IF the software companies get on board is really the big question. It could be two years before Adobe rewrites their code. By then, there will be updated versions of the MP.
 
td2243 said:
Another article that makes me want to wait awhile. The MacBook Pro killed the Mac Pro in some tests and they were using a configuration out of my range.

Unless Adobe and a few others adopt Apple's dual GPU mindset, the Mac Pro won't really perform like I want. 4 hours to render a C4D is sort of unacceptable for that kind of money.

IF the software companies get on board is really the big question. It could be two years before Adobe rewrites their code. By then, there will be updated versions of the MP.
Click to expand...

Allthough that was a pretty specific requirement, but if that's the software you are using.. it is a very valid concern.

From the other annecdotal results we've seen sofar, I don't think the main Adobe apps would perform that poorly.. but they may not see huge gains either.

----------
wildmac said:
Another way to rank the cards...

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

Of interest here is that the 7970 and the 280x are listed as the same card, the approx 1:1 ranking of the 7970/280x shows up here, and the 7970M (if indeed the D300 matches to that) is a good chunk behind the 7970 (27%) and is also beat by the 780M of the iMac.

(and what the hell is a D500...)

Assuming those D770/7970 comparisons are accurate at all... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I must also say that as much as I hate to say it, these results are making me me start to lean to a Hackintosh/PC again.
 
td2243 said:
It could be two years before Adobe rewrites their code. By then, there will be updated versions of the MP.
Click to expand...

I can understand the hesitance after reading articles like that. However, they don't tell the whole story. I highlighted part of your post because Adobe has already coded Premiere Pro to be multi-GPU aware. And it uses OpenCL, as well. Now, this doesn't help the folks using AE for stuff, I understand. But it's a step in the right direction, and it was done last summer when Pr CC was first released.

I'll bet Pr CC flies on the new Mac Pro when accelerated effects are used, and when exporting videos via OpenCL.
 
I'm beginning to like the nMP more and more, but the reviews have me thinking that a rMBP would be equally proficient for non-optimized tasks.

I am a musician who primarily uses Cubase and Sibelius, neither of which is particularly multicore-happy. Forget Open CL...
 
jasonvp said:
I can understand the hesitance after reading articles like that. However, they don't tell the whole story. I highlighted part of your post because Adobe has already coded Premiere Pro to be multi-GPU aware. And it uses OpenCL, as well. Now, this doesn't help the folks using AE for stuff, I understand. But it's a step in the right direction, and it was done last summer when Pr CC was first released.

I'll bet Pr CC flies on the new Mac Pro when accelerated effects are used, and when exporting videos via OpenCL.
Click to expand...

Amen.

No one seems to realize the big improvement in CC is on export, when dual GPUs are indeed used.

Also, AE CC we know only uses CPU on AMD for now. Open CL is coming but not yet. This "benchmark" and most others haven't tested export with Premiere Pro CC or rendering, which is where the nMP will have the most impact. I don't get how people can draw conclusions without all the facts. lol
 
Would using high-end radeons in a TB2 PCIe enclosure, on the nMP, be able to end this debate about the cards?

Loa
 
Thanks for the comments. One of the first reviews with guys using Premiere Pro and they said it was choking a ton when compared to FCPX. I hate the new Final Cut, so I'd like Premiere to run well at least.

The Verge's review was to the contrary of your comments. They said Premiere CC was choppy because it doesn't take advantage of both GPUs.
 
Last edited:
wildmac said:
So, we are stuck in yet another round of.. Are they cards just consumer cards? are they gimped pro cards? what the hell are they actually optimized for? and how do our real apps actually use them?...

sigh....
Click to expand...

Yep, arguments waited for a good technical spec breakdown till the anandtech review came out. With this we'll have to wait for chipworks to X-ray the GPU's to find just exactly what and where the tracks actually are on the silicon. That's the only definitive evidence that will settle this argument once and for all, though some may still twist and argue despite what they see in front of them :rolleyes:
 
td2243 said:
The Verge's review was to the contrary of your comments. They said Premiere CC was choppy because it doesn't take advantage of both GPUs.
Click to expand...

With all due respect to the Verge: they didn't know what they were doing. Pr only uses GPUs for 2 things: Certain accelerated video effects, and during export. What they were attempting to do was just play video and do generic editing. Those tasks aren't GPU-accelerated in Premiere, so it was relying completely on the CPU.

Had they cut some video, added some accelerated effects for whatever reason, and then exported it, they'd have seen what the GPUs were capable of doing.
 
What do you mean they didn't know what they were doing? They were editing the same video using Premiere instead of FCP. It's not that complicated. It didn't run as well on Premiere. What am I missing?

I plan on using Premiere instead of FCP, so it's pretty clear to that the MP and Adobe don't get along all that well .... yet.

----------
jasonvp said:
What they were attempting to do was just play video and do generic editing. Those tasks aren't GPU-accelerated in Premiere, so it was relying completely on the CPU.
Click to expand...


I see what you are saying, but you are just making my point... And your point at the same time. :)

All I'm saying is that maybe me buying a MP is a waste of money . . . For now . . . Since two GPUs are overkill for most of the programs I use.
 
td2243 said:
What do you mean they didn't know what they were doing? They were editing the same video using Premiere instead of FCP. It's not that complicated. It didn't run as well on Premiere. What am I missing?
Click to expand...

You're missing the point I was making entirely, that's what. The Verge's review was done in a way to make the new Mac Pro look bad with Premiere Pro. The thing is: they would have run into the same issues on an older Mac or a Windows PC, regardless of whether they were using CUDA or OpenCL. They specific tasks they were doing were all CPU bound, and will continue to be with Premiere.

The platform here isn't the issue. It's how they were applying the technology available in the software. As Premiere editors, they should have known that.

I'll keep repeating it until you and others understand: Premiere WILL USE the AMD GPUs on the new Mac Pro for accelerated effects and for exporting media. Just like it'll use any other OpenCL or CUDA capable GPU (or GPUs). It won't use them for anything else. The Verge's review avoided mentioning any of that, and I'm not really sure why.
 
I get your point. I understood it before as well, because we are essentially saying the same thing. However, you are saying the Verge did it to make the Mac Pro look bad. I don't see it that way because they were, as you put it, playing videos and generic editing. When I edit, that's what takes up most of my time. Exporting, for me, is simply a final step, one where I don't care as much how fast it is because I can let it finish while I'm not at the computer.
 
slughead said:
Just because they identify as FirePro in OS X and windows doesn't make them firepros. I'm sure if I were a good enough programmer I could get my NVidia to identify as a "firepro"
Click to expand...

Just got our Quad Core 2013 nMP. Loaded Windows 8 in Bootcamp and Solidworks 2014 to see if the graphics D300 behaved like a true FirePro card. Surprising it did -- it supports RealView display mode which only Quadro and FireGL/Pro cards do. Rotating a large assembly was silky smooth. I am very happy with the performance and support for SW -- thanks Apple.
 
wrajr said:
Just got our Quad Core 2013 nMP. Loaded Windows 8 in Bootcamp and Solidworks 2014 to see if the graphics D300 behaved like a true FirePro card. Surprising it did -- it supports RealView display mode which only Quadro and FireGL/Pro cards do. Rotating a large assembly was silky smooth. I am very happy with the performance and support for SW -- thanks Apple.
Click to expand...

I expected this (phew). :apple:Business suicide isn't their game.

I find it amusing that some believe that Apple would charge $1000+ for D700 cards that were rebadged consumer grade under clocked Radeon's. They wouldn't do something so blatently dumb as a few months down the line the cat would be out the bag and trust would vanish.

What they have done though is cause a lot of speculation and not provided a detailed specification of the card capabilities, especially for the pro field (AA, Colour Depth, 3D, Hardware encode etc)

Edit: Actually, the Apple saying "it just works" could be the reason behind so little technical details.
 
Anim said:
I expected this (phew). :apple:Business suicide isn't their game.

I find it amusing that some believe that Apple would charge $1000+ for D700 cards that were rebadged consumer grade under clocked Radeon's. They wouldn't do something so blatently dumb as a few months down the line the cat would be out the bag and trust would vanish.

What they have done though is cause a lot of speculation and not provided a detailed specification of the card capabilities, especially for the pro field (AA, Colour Depth, 3D, Hardware encode etc)

Edit: Actually, the Apple saying "it just works" could be the reason behind so little technical details.
Click to expand...

Performance speaks louder than spec(ulation) :)
 
td2243 said:
4 hours to render a C4D is sort of unacceptable for that kind of money.
Click to expand...

Well you are talking about C4D in After effects which is using the CUDA Render engine.

Adobe have already stated that everything will be openCL soon too. Infact it's only the renderer that is Cuda.
 
AppleInsider review is up, they do some comparisons of stock 4 core vs. stock 6 core...
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/01/09/review-apples-redesigned-late-2013-mac-pro

As a photographer, this was the most interesting part to me...
Importing 36MB uncompressed RAW photo files into Adobe Photoshop was quick on both Pro models, likely thanks to PCIe and CPU threading. Pushing the files through Lightroom with correcting filters and other image processing enabled, the 4-core and 6-core performed nearly identically.
​

I wish they had some actual numbers though.
 
PmattF said:
AppleInsider review is up, they do some comparisons of stock 4 core vs. stock 6 core...
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/01/09/review-apples-redesigned-late-2013-mac-pro

As a photographer, this was the most interesting part to me...
Importing 36MB uncompressed RAW photo files into Adobe Photoshop was quick on both Pro models, likely thanks to PCIe and CPU threading. Pushing the files through Lightroom with correcting filters and other image processing enabled, the 4-core and 6-core performed nearly identically.
​

I wish they had some actual numbers though.
Click to expand...
Wow, what a wasted opportunity for a good head to head comparison. I'm disappointed, but not surprised, by the Lightroom result.

----------

Also some new FCP X results at Bare Feats:

http://www.barefeats.com/tube05.html
 
PmattF said:
AppleInsider review is up, they do some comparisons of stock 4 core vs. stock 6 core...
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/01/09/review-apples-redesigned-late-2013-mac-pro

I wish they had some actual numbers though.
Click to expand...

They helped me with my decision on my replacement RAM. :D

appleinsider said:
On our two test beds, the quad-core came with three 4GB sticks of 1866MHz DDR3 ECC made by Hynix, leaving one slot open for expansion. The 6-core version came with four 4GB Hynix modules.
Click to expand...

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=D3-18R16GH#

Same manufacturer for less than half the cost.
 
PmattF said:
AppleInsider review is up, they do some comparisons of stock 4 core vs. stock 6 core...
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/01/09/review-apples-redesigned-late-2013-mac-pro

As a photographer, this was the most interesting part to me...
Importing 36MB uncompressed RAW photo files into Adobe Photoshop was quick on both Pro models, likely thanks to PCIe and CPU threading. Pushing the files through Lightroom with correcting filters and other image processing enabled, the 4-core and 6-core performed nearly identically.
​

I wish they had some actual numbers though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's huge for me, and while numbers would have been nice, perhaps that the "eye test" says that they performed nearly identically is what we actually need to know for "real life". Assuming those were with the D300 and D500, then there may be little reason to worry about the D500 if you living in Adobeville.
 
wrajr said:
Just got our Quad Core 2013 nMP. Loaded Windows 8 in Bootcamp and Solidworks 2014 to see if the graphics D300 behaved like a true FirePro card. Surprising it did -- it supports RealView display mode which only Quadro and FireGL/Pro cards do. Rotating a large assembly was silky smooth. I am very happy with the performance and support for SW -- thanks Apple.
Click to expand...

Finally! someone who uses a professional 3D CAD software with the nMP, I'm not alone anymore!!!! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back