Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I wonder how soon to the release of the iMac Pro we will begin to see proper drivers come out.

It's very close. I am running 10.13.2 beta 6 and a Sonnet Breakaway 550 with a Vega 56 card on a 15" late 2016 MBP.

Everything works (except for DP sound). The only issue seems to be the name of the driver being "
AMD RX xxx 8 GB" and the fact the fans run loud all the time. Not unbearable, but loud.

I suspect 10.13.3 will fix issues once and for all with fans but otherwise it's stable and fast (for me, using FCPX)
 
It's very close. I am running 10.13.2 beta 6 and a Sonnet Breakaway 550 with a Vega 56 card on a 15" late 2016 MBP.

Everything works (except for DP sound). The only issue seems to be the name of the driver being "
AMD RX xxx 8 GB" and the fact the fans run loud all the time. Not unbearable, but loud.

I suspect 10.13.3 will fix issues once and for all with fans but otherwise it's stable and fast (for me, using FCPX)

If you want audio from DP, you need to install HDMIAudio.kext. But the success rate still just 50:50. I found that by installing Clover can make the audio via DP always work (still need the HDMIAudio.kext), but not sure if this trick also applicable to eGPU.
 
If you want audio from DP, you need to install HDMIAudio.kext. But the success rate still just 50:50. I found that by installing Clover can make the audio via DP always work (still need the HDMIAudio.kext), but not sure if this trick also applicable to eGPU.
[doublepost=1512390566][/doublepost]The Sapphire Vega 64 seems to work ok for me. I'm not interested in driving a monitor for games, but using for image processing. I'm using a 2014 rMBP ( or 2013 MBP) & eGX 550 with the Vega or a Mantiz Venus with a gtx 1080 & 680. I'm also running the 1080 in a 2010 cMP. I'm attaching a few benchmarks(luxMark & Geekbench). I haven't had a chance to systematically test all combinations so the Bruce test with the Rx is only on the 2014 rMBP. The Bruce test shows impressive gains with the RX64:
Bruce test
2010 cMPro
ATI 5890 65 secs. Sierra 10.12.6
GTX1080 85 sec Sierra 10.12.6

2104 rMBP
RX Vega 64 High Serria 10.13.1
19 sec
 

Attachments

  • screenshot_237.jpg
    screenshot_237.jpg
    146.3 KB · Views: 325
  • screenshot_242.jpg
    screenshot_242.jpg
    106.3 KB · Views: 318
  • screenshot_238.jpg
    screenshot_238.jpg
    52.5 KB · Views: 266
  • screenshot_234.jpg
    screenshot_234.jpg
    87.5 KB · Views: 285
  • screenshot_241.jpg
    screenshot_241.jpg
    249.1 KB · Views: 253
[doublepost=1512390566][/doublepost]The Sapphire Vega 64 seems to work ok for me. I'm not interested in driving a monitor for games, but using for image processing. I'm using a 2014 rMBP ( or 2013 MBP) & eGX 550 with the Vega or a Mantiz Venus with a gtx 1080 & 680. I'm also running the 1080 in a 2010 cMP. I'm attaching a few benchmarks(luxMark & Geekbench). I haven't had a chance to systematically test all combinations so the Bruce test with the Rx is only on the 2014 rMBP. The Bruce test shows impressive gains with the RX64:
Bruce test
2010 cMPro
ATI 5890 65 secs. Sierra 10.12.6
GTX1080 85 sec Sierra 10.12.6

2104 rMBP
RX Vega 64 High Serria 10.13.1
19 sec

The Vega 64 result looks good to me.

Anyway, BruceX on my 2009 Mac Pro spec as per my signature (apart from GPU), if
1080Ti - 39s
R9 380 - 28s
Dual HD7950 - 15s

And for 19s, I am pretty sure a single RX580 on the cMP can do that. That means, when the Vega driver getting more mature (or FCPX opera optimised for Vega), it's possible to see this card can finish BruceX in ~10s.
 
Paired RX Vega 56 eGPU with nMP D500 brings BruceX from 24s to under 13s. I was able to update macOS from 10.13.1 to 10.13.2 with everything plugged in as arranged:

nMP «» TB3 to TB adapter «» RX Vega 56 eGPU «» DisplayPort cable «» LG 4K display

nMP-Mantiz-Venus-RX-Vega-56-eGPU-implementation.jpg nMP-Mantiz-Venus-RX-Vega-56-eGPU-brucex.jpg
 
Last edited:
The Vega 64 result looks good to me.

Anyway, BruceX on my 2009 Mac Pro spec as per my signature (apart from GPU), if
1080Ti - 39s
R9 380 - 28s
Dual HD7950 - 15s

And for 19s, I am pretty sure a single RX580 on the cMP can do that. That means, when the Vega driver getting more mature (or FCPX opera optimised for Vega), it's possible to see this card can finish BruceX in ~10s.

While the increases are super impressive (2-3x), I expect it could be more given the hardware. Thanks for this info.

I am seeing about 19s with Bruce on my setup (late 2016 MBP + Vega 56; it's about 40s with the inbuilt 460 Pro). This is within a second or three of where my old Mac Pro D700 was when both GPUs were firing. This is great, really, as that machine was very fast in FCPX even today.

That said, it can be a lot better still! The teraflop rating of the D700 was 7 and the Vega 56 is about 10, plus much better architecture, so there's definitely a lot of runway to improve things.

I'm excited to see what additional driver development (and the FCPX Metal 2 update) bring. This should be soon too ... I think release of FCPX .4 will coincide with the iMac Pro. 10.13.2 development is winding down, so I think the Vega drivers are almost baked (this first iteration anyway), but FCPX update may bring some significant increases.

It'll keep getting better!
 
  • Like
Reactions: devon807
I think I'm going to sell my Vega 56. Prices are high right now, I could make a nice chunk of change back (I bought close to MSRP.) Was hoping 10.13.2 would resolve sleep + fan, but looks like we're on the hook until 10.13.3 or later.

It's a great card, but I also think the 2010 Mac Pro is hitting it's limit in using all of Vega, and some of the benchmarks seem to show that.

So, going to wait for Vega Nano or just the next Mac Pro. But if you've got a pure compute workflow, would recommend it.

(The reference model also looks pretty sick. Makes me wish I had a custom PC with a case to show it off.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: dabotsonline
I think I'm going to sell my Vega 56. Prices are high right now, I could make a nice chunk of change back (I bought close to MSRP.) Was hoping 10.13.2 would resolve sleep + fan, but looks like we're on the hook until 10.13.3 or later.

It's a great card, but I also think the 2010 Mac Pro is hitting it's limit in using all of Vega, and some of the benchmarks seem to show that.

So, going to wait for Vega Nano or just the next Mac Pro. But if you've got a pure compute workflow, would recommend it.

(The reference model also looks pretty sick. Makes me wish I had a custom PC with a case to show it off.)

lol! We just built a dual-VEGA 56 cMP setup
 
lol! We just built a dual-VEGA 56 cMP setup

Well, for the price I'm selling my card at, I could buy a dual Vega 56 setup once prices come down. :p

But at the end of the day I realized I should just sell it for a nice profit and put that money towards a new... something next year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dabotsonline
I’d keep the Vega for sure. They’re almost impossible to find now. From now on its probably going to be custom PCB cards only and all of them so far are wider than 2 slots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dabotsonline
To fulfill the dual 8 pin power of Vega Frontier Edition, apart from the dual mini 6 pin to 8 pin, can we do 2x sata to 6 pin then connect to dual 6 pin to 8 pin? Of course that will sacrifices two sata slot.

Another question is, with dual 6 core cpu, is it too much loading for Mac Pro’s PSU?
 
To fulfill the dual 8 pin power of Vega Frontier Edition, apart from the dual mini 6 pin to 8 pin, can we do 2x sata to 6 pin then connect to dual 6 pin to 8 pin? Of course that will sacrifices two sata slot.

Another question is, with dual 6 core cpu, is it too much loading for Mac Pro’s PSU?

The PSU is fine.

However, you need 3x SATA port (rated up to 55W each) to support a single 8pin (up to 150W demand), not 2. Even though you post said 2x SATA -> single 6pin and then 2x 6pin -> single 8pin, which means 4 SATA ports in total.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crjackson2134
The PSU is fine.

However, you need 3x SATA port (rated up to 55W each) to support a single 8pin (up to 150W demand), not 2. Even though you post said 2x SATA -> single 6pin and then 2x 6pin -> single 8pin, which means 4 SATA ports in total.


Thanks for the reply.

I found this product: https://www.startech.com/Cables/Com...s-Video-Card-Power-Cable-Adapter~SATPCIEX8ADP

It's a 2x SATA --> single 8-pin PCIE adaptor. Will it draw enough power 8 pin only using 2x SATA?
 
Thanks for the reply.

I found this product: https://www.startech.com/Cables/Com...s-Video-Card-Power-Cable-Adapter~SATPCIEX8ADP

It's a 2x SATA --> single 8-pin PCIE adaptor. Will it draw enough power 8 pin only using 2x SATA?

Depends, unless you know that 8pin never draw more than 110W, otherwise, better avoid it. We know the real world limit of the mini 6pin is around 120W (official only 75W), and it's protected by the shutdown protection. However, we don't know the real world limit of the SATA port on the cMP yet. We also don't know is that protected by anything. Using 2x SATA to single 8pin without knowing the actual power draw may kill the SATA ports.

Of course, the card won't draw 110W from that single port just for booting. You can using this cable, boot up the card, and then slowly push it and monitor the power draw (from the SATA ports, also the mini 6pins). And then design if it's safe to power the card in this way.

In general, the card will draw more power from one of the 8pins, you want that 8pin powered by the dual mini 6pin. And the "secondary" 8pin by the SATA ports. As long as you can let the mini 6pins do the heavy duty. I think it should be OK.

I don't know which card you own, but let's say it has the same power draw characteristic as the one that tested by Tom's Hardware.

aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9WLzYvNzAyMjU4L29yaWdpbmFsLzAwLVBvd2VyLURyYXctT3ZlcnZpZXcucG5n

aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS83L1AvNzAxNDEzL29yaWdpbmFsLzA3LVBFRy1VdGlsaXphdGlvbi5wbmc=


This card draw 292W max (43W is from the slot, 249 from the 2x 8pin).

So, you basically have to make sure the 2x 8pin can provide 250W.

In your case, each mini 6pin can provide 75W (officially), and each SATA port can provide 55W). So, total 260W available. Which is good. In real world, we know the mini 6pin can deliver up to around 120W each. So you actually have 350W to feed the card.

However, we have no idea how the card draw this 250W. Which will ultimately affect if that 2x SATA ports cable is good for you.

Case 1: The card draw 125W from each 8pin.

So, dual mini 6pin -> single 8pin = 125W, which means only 62.5W for each mini 6pin, that's a piece of cake. No problem at all.

HOWEVER, the remaining 125W will be draw from the other 8pin, which is powered by 2x SATA ports. Which also means each SATA port has to deliver 62.5W, that's 14% over the 55W limit.

In this case, the cable may work. But you totally rely on if there is a build in buffer for the SATA port that's greater than 15%. And there is no way to make sure it can work.

Case 2: The card draw 140W from one of the 8pin, and 110W from the other one.

Then if you know which one is the 140W 8pin, you can connect it to the dual mini 6pin, then each mini 6pin has to deliver 70W, which is safe. And the other 8pin is connected to the SATA ports, each SATA port has to deliver right at the max 55W, but this is also considered safe.

In this case, that 2x SATA cable is GOOD.

HOWEVER, if you don't know which one is the 140W 8pin, and connect that 8pin to the SATA ports. Now, each SATA port will have to deliver 70W, which is 27% on top of the max rated 55W. On the other hand, each mini 6pin only has to deliver 55W, which is 27% under utilised. In this case, you may kill the SATA ports. Of experience hard shutdown (if shutdown protection is available).

Therefore, in case 2. You MUST need to know which one is the more hunger 8pin, and feed it by the mini 6pins.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crjackson2134
Thanks for the reply.

I found this product: https://www.startech.com/Cables/Com...s-Video-Card-Power-Cable-Adapter~SATPCIEX8ADP

It's a 2x SATA --> single 8-pin PCIE adaptor. Will it draw enough power 8 pin only using 2x SATA?

Stay away from that 2x SATA for the Vega. It provides barely enough power for the power hungry FE. I used it to test the FE rendering BruceX in FCPX. A couple of seconds into it my cMP 5,1 had a complete shutdown. It's also not long enough to reach and doesn't securely attach to the SATA ports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: itdk92
Thought I would add to this, chucked a Vega FE into my MacPro, works really well. Had to do the Pixlas mod though to give it enough power.

Would be great if they put out a Mac BIOS for it at some point so it shows the boot screen/options.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3393.jpg
    IMG_3393.jpg
    187.2 KB · Views: 295
  • Screen Shot 2018-04-18 at 6.45.35 pm.png
    Screen Shot 2018-04-18 at 6.45.35 pm.png
    85.6 KB · Views: 302
  • Like
Reactions: XNorth
Thought I would add to this, chucked a Vega FE into my MacPro, works really well. Had to do the Pixlas mod though to give it enough power.

Would be great if they put out a Mac BIOS for it at some point so it shows the boot screen/options.

Hi thanks for the update, if you have time could you do the Luxball render test as that is the one that is most commonly used on this forum to compare performance.
 
Hi thanks for the update, if you have time could you do the Luxball render test as that is the one that is most commonly used on this forum to compare performance.
No problem, here it is.

Cheers
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-04-20 at 7.15.11 am.png
    Screen Shot 2018-04-20 at 7.15.11 am.png
    85.1 KB · Views: 178
Good luxball score. But the interesting thing is that it's 6% higher than the Pulse 56 and to achieve that it consumes 67% more power.
Yeah, there isn't a lot of difference between the 56 and 64 (FE), I am also running the water cooled BIOS to allow more power to the card (was under water in a previous system, will probably do that again if I can work out how to do that in the Mac Pro case).
 
Yeah, there isn't a lot of difference between the 56 and 64 (FE), I am also running the water cooled BIOS to allow more power to the card (was under water in a previous system, will probably do that again if I can work out how to do that in the Mac Pro case).

Oh really? That's interesting. Other people said they couldn't get the water cooled FE to work in MacOS.
 
Picked up a Radeon Vega FE last night. Running it in my system haven't done any mods to my system yet but it seems to be running smoothly. I only do basic things like desktop graphics, web browsing and watching videos. Here's my thread with more details https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...tions-and-everyday-use.2148828/#post-26714377

Looking for a way to quiet the GPU fan a bit. I've read that you can undervolt the card. Would this help? I've also noticed that the LEDs under the PCIe power ports flicker instead of remaining solid. Is there a way to stop these from flickering? They make a low clicking sound when they flicker and perform graphics tasks.

EDIT: There is a switch on the bottom of the card to turn off the LEDs to the PCIe power ports. That turned off the clicking noise. 1 thing fixed :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: eksu
Hi, I am going to get a Amd Vega Frontier Edition for my Mac Pro 4.1-5.1, so my question do I need to do any mods, or just just plug the cables, I am confused little bit, hope you guys can help me out, plz
 
Hi, I am going to get a Amd Vega Frontier Edition for my Mac Pro 4.1-5.1, so my question do I need to do any mods, or just just plug the cables, I am confused little bit, hope you guys can help me out, plz

You could get shutdowns under heavy loads. E.g. using FurMurk causes a shutdown. Best to feed both 8-pin power ports with separate power sources. I use the Pixlas mod, which entails quite a bit of modding. There’s a thread here with detailed instructions.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.