Anyone know when this graphics card is likely to be released?
Anyone know when this graphics card is likely to be released?
What is the advantage/disadvantage of the w5700X over the VegaII?
What is the advantage/disadvantage of the w5700X over the VegaII?
In the end I guess we‘ll have to wait and see, but this is really interesting.
Guys, as an editor I‘m very curious about how the W5700X will behave during encoding vs the Vega II..
do you think if I‘ll throw in a 5700 next to my Vega, it‘s gonna be utilized for rendering?
Yea I meant encoding, not rendering.. sorry for the confusion, but you’re right, the background rendering in FCP is not equal encoding.If you're producing h.264 or h.265, it'll beat the Vega II in time. The VCE in the 5700 is newer and faster. If your output is something else, then it'll likely not make much of a difference.
Remember: Render != Encoding. It's a mistake nearly everyone makes. Rendering may be done during the encoding, but it doesn't mean encoding.
For rendering, the 5700 will very likely be slower than the Vega II. I'm guessing here as I haven't seen any benchmarks. But based on what I can tell, that GPU will be slower at rendering. But when it comes to outputting h.264 or h.265, it'll be faster. Now, will the software know to use one versus the other? I don't know.
I can’t really narrow it down, everything from Prores, to Sony Alpha MXFs, the occasional drone shot from some gopro.. rarely r3d files. Very often some random long gop nonsense because some producer wanted to save money.That is the ultimate answer, because it really depends on the optimization on software side as well. As of right now seems like even FCPX can't take full advantage of hardware depending on codec. By the way, what sort of footage are you working with?
The Vega II has four Thunderbolt 3 ports and one HDMI 2.0 port on the card. Does the 5700 have more? Sorry to be dense.The advantage would be Display Stream Compression support (you can connect 1 extra Apple Pro Display XDR compared to single Vega II + faster speeds for display's built-in USB ports) and better h.264 and h.265 acceleration (encoding and decoding, including 10bit) thanks to the newer GPU architecture. Might be a bit better at graphics (better gaming and viewport performance). Probably lower temperatures and power consumption as well. Also cheaper, should've been the base option.
The disadvantage is slower type of VRAM (GDDR6 instead of HBM2), less compute power (slower particle simulations and real-time GPU rendering).
I'm personally waiting for it to be released to come to any conclusions (=
My current version of FCPX only allows export in H.264; not H.265. We use it only when a TV station is adamant about receiving content that way.Yea I meant encoding, not rendering.. sorry for the confusion, but you’re right, the background rendering in FCP is not equal encoding.
Benchmarks about how much of an impact this will have are gonna be interesting!
[automerge]1578787514[/automerge]
I can’t really narrow it down, everything from Prores, to Sony Alpha MXFs, the occasional drone shot from some gopro.. rarely r3d files. Very often some random long gop nonsense because some producer wanted to save money.
From Apple:The Vega II has four Thunderbolt 3 ports and one HDMI 2.0 port on the card. Does the 5700 have more?
If you are mainly working with ProRes it seems like the Vega II is the better option - along with the Afterburner Card.Guys, as an editor I‘m very curious about how the W5700X will behave during encoding vs the Vega II..
do you think if I‘ll throw in a 5700 next to my Vega, it‘s gonna be utilized for rendering? I‘m still debating if a second Vega with IF is gonna be better or maybe the 5700 because of bang for the buck and the newer architecture...
In the end I guess we‘ll have to wait and see, but this is really interesting.
It's about bandwidth, not ports. Directly from Apple:The Vega II has four Thunderbolt 3 ports and one HDMI 2.0 port on the card. Does the 5700 have more?
ProRes is CPU-intensive codec, GPU doesn't matter that much. It is also very optimized in macOS, so any current Mac will run it fine.everything from Prores, to Sony Alpha MXFs, the occasional drone shot from some gopro.. rarely r3d files
Long gop is not nonsense. Compressed codec with same bitrate has better quality when recording long gop, but is more CPU intensive to decode. Usually not GPU dependent.random long gop nonsense
Or a better CPU – Afterburner is used only for decoding, so your source has to be ProRes and your editing app has to use VideoToolbox framework to actually use Afterburner. Rest of encoding / decoding is done on the CPU. GPU is only used for applying effects, color grading and driving the display, so I'd personally invest in CPU before getting Afterburner. You can also buy Afterburner after the fact for the same price.If you are mainly working with ProRes it seems like the Vega II is the better option - along with the Afterburner Card
It's about bandwidth, not ports. Directly from Apple:
View attachment 888132
Display Stream Compression allows more Pro Display XDR connections and faster speeds for the USB-C ports on the display because it uses less bandwidth for the display data itself. Note that with Vega II and 580X you're getting USB 2.0 speeds from the display's USB-C ports at best.
ProRes is CPU-intensive codec, GPU doesn't matter that much. It is also very optimized in macOS, so any current Mac will run it fine.
Sony Alpha cameras record XAVC-S/AVCHD, not MXF. It's an 8-bit long gop codec that will work fine on any top of the line current Mac, no need to worry about GPU unless if it's 580X.
Modern GoPro and drones record h.265 which might make good use of newer architecture W5700X.
R3D files are getting Metal optimization with the next update. May be Vega II we be about 1.4 times better at this, but the question is if W5700X will do. We'll have to wait and see.
Long gop is not nonsense. Compressed codec with same bitrate has better quality when recording long gop, but is more CPU intensive to decode. Usually not GPU dependent.
[automerge]1578827585[/automerge]
Or a better CPU – Afterburner is used only for decoding, so your source has to be ProRes and your editing app has to use VideoToolbox framework to actually use Afterburner. Rest of encoding / decoding is done on the CPU. GPU is only used for applying effects, color grading and driving the display, so I'd personally invest in CPU before getting Afterburner. You can also buy Afterburner after the fact for the same price.
Those are proxies, what's the point then? If you do proxy workflow, any modern Mac CPU will handle ProRes. As you know – Afterburner doesn't even help encoding to those ProRes proxy files. Of course you can get Afterburner anyway, but will it make sense?FCPX converts source files to your choice of ProRes formats. Once that is done, Afterburner takes over.
That’s a feasible theory and sad if it’s true.Those are proxies, what's the point then? If you do proxy workflow, any modern Mac CPU will handle ProRes. As you know – Afterburner doesn't even help encoding to those ProRes proxy files. Of course you can get Afterburner anyway, but will it make sense?
I believe Apple wanted their ProRes RAW in more cameras by the time Mac Pro released, but RED patents didn't let manufacturers implement compressed RAW recording within the camera unit. DJI promised ProRes RAW in their Inspire 2 drone, didn't happen. Blackmagic removed CinemaDNG and created it's own BRAW so it can be recorded without infringing RED patents. Same thing with Arri – they can't touch it. If all those cameras (any of those cameras) recorded ProRes RAW – Afterburner would've made perfect sense.
It is smarter to invest in hardware that accelerates your acquisition codec, doesn't it? And that is CPU and GPU upgrades first, and may be Afterburner sometime later if it gets more functionality. Unless you are already capturing ProRes (=
He wrote me in an email:BareFeats reports MacPro 7,1 crashing with a 5700 when waking up from sleep. Can anyone confirm that?