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.
So is anyone actually running a GTX 1070/80?
- Thread starter Messy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have a gtx 1070, but only works on windows. still waiting for osx webdriver.
maybe not the best time to buy 1070/1080, no driver for osx and the price is high.
maybe not the best time to buy 1070/1080, no driver for osx and the price is high.
Opencl is compute only... Opengl and metal are for video rendering...
I never heard anyone attempt to use GL or Metal (or Direct X) to render video except for timeline preview purposes.
Last edited:
But it isn't its main task. Hell you can use a hammer on a lot of thing too but it isn't always the right tool for the job.
[doublepost=1468241224][/doublepost]
OpenCL was released in 2009... People were rendering video before that.
Beside why would you use a software renderer when you can get a hardware solution that is way more efficient. Most come with their own API that aren't opencl based.
People were rendering out video content using OpenGL? First time I heard of this. Which app did that?
.
People were using many API to do the job. Your comment made it sound as if OpenCL was required to do so, it isn't.
Also you have to say what you mean by video rendering. Any image displayed on your screen as been rendered by your GPU and such image are a video image.
If you mean video as in movie, then yes, DirectX for exemple does video rendering via the Media Foundation Library. No OpenCL involved. Here is some code: https://code.msdn.microsoft.com/windowsdesktop/DirectX-11-Video-Renderer-0e749100
I don't need these links. I just asked a simple question : which app was using GL to render video.
After 20 years of building PCs and configuring systems I still can't remember any video editing suite that used OpenGL or Direct X to "render" out video content to file or tape. And I definitely did not say we NEED OpenCL to render a video. Please don't put such stupid words in people's mouths.
I must remind you that one year ago on this forum we tested CUDA, OpenCL and CPU rendering in a discussion. Of course, there was nothing about OpenGL or Direct X video rendering because those are uselessly inefficient for encoding. Even CUDA and OpenCL can't compete against a CPU for encoding into certain popular codecs.
Last edited:
First those were your words, you put them there. And now you're trying to move the goal post by wanting specific software name...
Second that link proved that you were wrong, that DirectX does video rendering, maybe you should do a bit of research before posting.
Third, "rendering" of video (which is a sequential suite of static image) is exactly what every graphical API on this planet does.
Final Cut Pro was still using OpenGL for several years after OpenCL was first released. In fact, it looks like OpenCL support was added in FCP X only, so all previous versions used OpenGL. There are plenty of video extensions to OpenGL on macOS, e.g. YUV image formats and so on.
You're on ignore. Question dodging, ridiculous links that aren't based on real world apps, and wasting our time with opinions that aren't based on experience. If you don't know the difference between rendering a video display and rendering a video to a file then this is not a rational debate.
What?
https://www.objc.io/issues/23-video/videotoolbox/ (Apologies for the third party link, Apple doesn't seem to have official web docs.)
Along with kCVPixelBufferMetalCompatibilityKey.
Ah this looks interesting (though not thoroughly tested and or professionally applied in real world use yet). Much better than someone claiming that OpenGL has been used to render video for years.
One of the major problems forums have is people posting synthetics benchmarks, hypothetical scenarios and obscure lab experiments and then thinking that translates to real world applications. You ask for a real world app and real world usage and they start screaming.
Last edited:
Please explain how Final Cut Pro worked before it switched over to sue OpenCL in FCP X a couple of years ago. Are you claiming it rendered everything in software and had no GPU acceleration?
Half the reason I was hesitant to make this thread, it just get's cluttered by 1 or 2 people in particular debating the finer points of things no one cares about.
Got the answer though. There was an Nvidia update I noticed earlier though, any news?
Got the answer though. There was an Nvidia update I noticed earlier though, any news?
May I ask you guys a question? Why, the hell, you still are trying to revive Mac Pro's with new GPUs, when everything what will happen to those GPUs will be bottlenecks? Both software and hardware side(CPU).
It would be much much cheaper to sell MP, and buy custom PC with GTX 1070 or 1080.
-My software is bottlenecking me, what should I do?
-Buy a new GPU.
Madness. Nothing else.
It would be much much cheaper to sell MP, and buy custom PC with GTX 1070 or 1080.
-My software is bottlenecking me, what should I do?
-Buy a new GPU.
Madness. Nothing else.
Some of those custom PCs can even run Mac....not that I have ever engaged in such activities. 
Of course I build them, not buy them.
Of course I build them, not buy them.
It is a kind of madness how far some people and to go. I said some of these upgrades as nonsense in such an old machine especially when the drivers people are using are dodgy and buggy.
Because they just don't want a Mac without upgrades. Some upgrades are fine. A decent spacious SATA3 SSD. Any good GPU you can afford that won't without paying ridiculous 'Mac' premiums in top. A USB 3 card.
Then come some nutters who want to put a 8GB/s 4TB NVME raid for their amateur video editing or mobile flappy paceman remake app and won't listen to any reason. They just wants to flash some cash on a forum or work for an online retailer.
If you're talking specifically about something that's 100% CPU bound like most video encoding software, or something like 1080P gaming, then yes the CPU is a bottleneck. But other use cases benefit quite a bit.
Personally, I will move on when I stop seeing significant performance increases when I upgrade my GPU in the applications that I care about. In addition to application benchmarking, I've checked hardware utilization and I'm still bottlenecked by the GPU at 99%+ utilization, with CPU usually around 20% overall and no single core more than 70%.
If I ever plop in a new GPU and I don't have my expectations met in the actual applications I use, I for damn sure will build a new PC around it.
It also really depends on where you're coming from. If you're current GPU is a GT120 or something, then of course a GPU bump can have a dramatic positive affect.
So while I agree with you in many cases, it's not necessarily "madness" in others. One thing that really bugs me is when someone asks what he should upgrade but doesn't say what he's using his computer for and what software he does it with. That's critically important information to have before a solid recommendation can be made. Maybe he needs a CPU bump, or a new GPU, or an SSD, or as you say a whole new PC.
I can tell you that If I would be buying Nvidia GPU I would not even bothered considering Apple platform. Much more I would get on Windows or even Linux than on OSX. Software is too outdated at this moment.
IMO buying Nvidia GPus to stick it into Mac Pro is waste of money at this moment. When Apple will bring new software and external GPUs to Mac, that is different situation.