Thinking about making the upgrade from my 16 core to the 28 core CPU for video editing. When I bought the Mac Pro I was filming Sony 4K footage now I’m shooting RED Monstro 8K footage. Seems like I could use some more “horsepower” what kind of gains am I likely to see in FCPX or Davinci going from 16 core to 28 core?
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.
MP 7,1 Upgrading to 28 core
- Thread starter Rr697
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, if he is using a ton of special effects *visual and audio* then that will tap the GPU. If he is has multiple 4k or 8k video clips in the timeline at the same time, the more cores the better. Of course, he will be sacrificing speed for power so he can expect some hit for rendering/exporting time wise.
Be interesting to see some screenshots of activity monitor during usage to see what’s currently being utilised and by how much.
Might see if there are some demo 8K R3D files I can download, curious to see what it does to my 16c/W5700X.
Might see if there are some demo 8K R3D files I can download, curious to see what it does to my 16c/W5700X.
No ProRes otherwise I would have bought the afterburner card. I do however have a Radeon Vega Pro Duo as my graphics card. The graphics run at 75-100% and cpu runs at 100%. The question is how much faster will my computer run with an additional 12 cores. I’m glad you can upgrade this machine but I only want to do it if it’s going to make sense.
DFP1989 if you are curious there is r3d files on RED.com for download my camera is the Monstro VV https://www.red.com/sample-r3d-files
let me know!
DFP1989 if you are curious there is r3d files on RED.com for download my camera is the Monstro VV https://www.red.com/sample-r3d-files
let me know!
I agree about the 16 cores & 'diminishing returns' beyond (multiply core numbers x speed vs $$s to get a better feel for that).
In any case, FWIW, I do film work with Da Vinci Resolve Studio 16 & FCPX from time to time. Interesting to see the observation that 'graphics run at 75-100% and cpu runs at 100% '. I never, ever have had that experience & have monitored hardware usage regularly (Sensie, iStat Menus etc).
The most demanding tasks for me are always timeline caching & FX /NR, and rendering a timeline to H.264. Input media mostly multiple 4k files on a 1080p timeline; usually H.264 from consumer cameras, sometimes all-Intra from a GH5.
GPU runs at around 75-100% as mentioned, but the CPUs never get beyond around 5% or so (very unlike my dual Xeon Dell workstation where both RTX 2080Ti & the 2x12 cores go like the clappers). 192GB ram on the mac may have a little influence on that ... only 64GB on the Dell. All cache /proxies /optimised media is written to a dedicated RAID 0 Sonnet M.2 SDD PCie. Original media from a TB3 RAID.
In sum - *whatever* the tasks, the CPUs never really work all that hard, whereas the GPU can indeed top out. Three displays.
So I have no intention of upgrading the CPU (Xeon-W is a dead end anyways), but the GPU - absolutely. I ran a couple of Titans in the Dell at one point & clearly Resolve loves multiple GPUs. So the plan for now is to keep the Vega II doing what its doing and add a second 'compute only' GPU in the spare 16x MPX slot. Likely a big Navi should it come out later in the year, and of course if and when Apple supports it.
That's pretty much how I also thought about the mac config when I first spec'd it: 16 cores as best bang for buck; a single Vega vs. the duo (being fairly certain the overpriced latter would under-perform & become dated quickly) & deliberately configuring my slot usage to allow for a second, high performance GPU ... what a drag that cannot be NVidia, but maybe big Navi, who knows?
In any case, FWIW, I do film work with Da Vinci Resolve Studio 16 & FCPX from time to time. Interesting to see the observation that 'graphics run at 75-100% and cpu runs at 100% '. I never, ever have had that experience & have monitored hardware usage regularly (Sensie, iStat Menus etc).
The most demanding tasks for me are always timeline caching & FX /NR, and rendering a timeline to H.264. Input media mostly multiple 4k files on a 1080p timeline; usually H.264 from consumer cameras, sometimes all-Intra from a GH5.
GPU runs at around 75-100% as mentioned, but the CPUs never get beyond around 5% or so (very unlike my dual Xeon Dell workstation where both RTX 2080Ti & the 2x12 cores go like the clappers). 192GB ram on the mac may have a little influence on that ... only 64GB on the Dell. All cache /proxies /optimised media is written to a dedicated RAID 0 Sonnet M.2 SDD PCie. Original media from a TB3 RAID.
In sum - *whatever* the tasks, the CPUs never really work all that hard, whereas the GPU can indeed top out. Three displays.
So I have no intention of upgrading the CPU (Xeon-W is a dead end anyways), but the GPU - absolutely. I ran a couple of Titans in the Dell at one point & clearly Resolve loves multiple GPUs. So the plan for now is to keep the Vega II doing what its doing and add a second 'compute only' GPU in the spare 16x MPX slot. Likely a big Navi should it come out later in the year, and of course if and when Apple supports it.
That's pretty much how I also thought about the mac config when I first spec'd it: 16 cores as best bang for buck; a single Vega vs. the duo (being fairly certain the overpriced latter would under-perform & become dated quickly) & deliberately configuring my slot usage to allow for a second, high performance GPU ... what a drag that cannot be NVidia, but maybe big Navi, who knows?
The OP needs to keep RAM in their thoughts ~
Just checked an open film on FCPX on the 7, 1; here is the RAM usage monitor !
[Edit] My graphics card (to my knowledge) never goes above 15% for my workflow. CPU has hit 40%.
Last edited:
What did you end up doing? I'm in the same spot now. Have two Vega IIs now and a 16core with 196gb ram.
The 28core has dropped to 1800 € on ebay, minus the potential resale value of the 16c, and it's almost a no brainer.
But the question for me is how big would be the hit by redrucing the base clock speed from 3,2 to 2,7 Ghz? Can someone explain how and when the turboboost would kick in? Would the system feel slower in day to day tasks and after effects?
I do use rendergarden in after effects so more cores are always appreciated. Premiere taps ver well into my 16 cores, at about 75% when rendering, sometimes even more. When playing back R3d in Premiere, the CPUS absolutely max out and can't play back smoothly at full or even 1/2 res. Sometimes I get Sony h264 footage that Premiere absolutely can't handle so I have to render proxies - again a nice task for many cores.
Resolve I also use more and more, that's why I bought the second Vega.