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

Vega Frontier Edition on 4,1 5,1 Classic Mac Pro

I have been running a Vega FE in my 2010 cMP for a few weeks now and honestly it doesn't seem to be delivering what I expected from this card. The system profiler says the link width is 8.0 GTS but that is not possible. Using openCL Wave it seems to be running at PCIE 1.0 speeds. Does anyone know of another way to observe or test the PCIE link speed?
 
chrissomos said:
I have been running a Vega FE in my 2010 cMP for a few weeks now and honestly it doesn't seem to be delivering what I expected from this card. The system profiler says the link width is 8.0 GTS but that is not possible. Using openCL Wave it seems to be running at PCIE 1.0 speeds. Does anyone know of another way to observe or test the PCIE link speed?
Click to expand...

Been testing different Frontier Edition, and while they are not better than the regular VEGA (beside the 16GB VRAM), they behave as expected here.
 
itdk92 said:
Been testing different Frontier Edition, and while they are not better than the regular VEGA (beside the 16GB VRAM), they behave as expected here.
Click to expand...
What sort of FPS are you getting in Unigin Heaven and at what settings? Was expecting this card to be able to easily maintain 60FPS at high settings but it has trouble keeping it above 40. I suspect it is not getting pcie 2.0 link speed. I am still running 10.13.2 right now because of problems with the updater for 10.13.3. Any insight you can help with would be appreciated.
 
chrissomos said:
I have been running a Vega FE in my 2010 cMP for a few weeks now and honestly it doesn't seem to be delivering what I expected from this card. The system profiler says the link width is 8.0 GTS but that is not possible. Using openCL Wave it seems to be running at PCIE 1.0 speeds. Does anyone know of another way to observe or test the PCIE link speed?
Click to expand...

If you keep open and close Oceanwave for a few times (e.g. 5 times), and it always record PCIe 2.5GT/s Speed, then it’s PCIe 1.0 Speed.

AFAIK, PC AMD card require resistor mod to achieve PCIe 2.0 Speed in cMP (in both MacOS AND Windows), but we don't know which one is the correct resistor. MIKX has better knowledge in this area, you may work with him to activate PCIe 2.0 on Vega. HOWEVER, your card should still has warranty, I really won’t recommend you to do it at this stage unless absolutely required.
 
chrissomos said:
I have been running a Vega FE in my 2010 cMP for a few weeks now and honestly it doesn't seem to be delivering what I expected from this card. The system profiler says the link width is 8.0 GTS but that is not possible. Using openCL Wave it seems to be running at PCIE 1.0 speeds. Does anyone know of another way to observe or test the PCIE link speed?
Click to expand...

I quote what h9826790 says.

Also, how are you powering that VEGA FE :) ?
 
chrissomos said:
What sort of FPS are you getting in Unigin Heaven and at what settings? Was expecting this card to be able to easily maintain 60FPS at high settings but it has trouble keeping it above 40. I suspect it is not getting pcie 2.0 link speed. I am still running 10.13.2 right now because of problems with the updater for 10.13.3. Any insight you can help with would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

Most likely just poor driver performance in macOS, it's been like that for many years. For just 60FPS, PCIe 1.0 x16 should be more than enough. My 1080Ti also running at PCIe 1.0 x16 in Windows, and it can achieve way more than 60FPS average.
Screen Shot 2018-02-26 at 04.39.25.jpg

The same card in the same computer in macOS which can utilise PCIe 2.0 x16 can only achieve 76FPS.
Screen Shot 2018-02-26 at 04.39.28.jpg

Therefore, it's the API or driver performance issue, not bandwidth issue.
 
h9826790 said:
Most likely just poor driver performance in macOS, it's been like that for many years. For just 60FPS, PCIe 1.0 x16 should be more than enough. My 1080Ti also running at PCIe 1.0 x16 in Windows, and it can achieve way more than 60FPS average.
View attachment 752398
The same card in the same computer in macOS which can utilise PCIe 2.0 x16 can only achieve 76FPS.
View attachment 752399
Therefore, it's the API or driver performance issue, not bandwidth issue.
Click to expand...
May I ask, are you running a cMP or a hackintosh?
[doublepost=1519621552][/doublepost]
h9826790 said:
If you keep open and close Oceanwave for a few times (e.g. 5 times), and it always record PCIe 2.5GT/s Speed, then it’s PCIe 1.0 Speed.

AFAIK, PC AMD card require resistor mod to achieve PCIe 2.0 Speed in cMP (in both MacOS AND Windows), but we don't know which one is the correct resistor. MIKX has better knowledge in this area, you may work with him to activate PCIe 2.0 on Vega. HOWEVER, your card should still has warranty, I really won’t recommend you to do it at this stage unless absolutely required.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your response. Prior to the FE I was running an unmodified RX480 and getting PCIE 2.0 link speeds according to oceanwave.
 
chrissomos said:
May I ask, are you running a cMP or a hackintosh?
[doublepost=1519621552][/doublepost]
Thank you for your response. Prior to the FE I was running an unmodified RX480 and getting PCIE 2.0 link speeds according to oceanwave.
Click to expand...

cMP as per my signature.

I never run any Polaris card, it’s good to know that. May be Apple intentionally “unlock” the Polaris card because of their eGPU developer kit.
 
So I upgraded to 10.13.3 today and it has made no difference. Still getting the exact same results. Hopefully 10.13.4 will see better support for VEGA FE.
 
I am trying to understand the VEGA FE performance, which has been different from system to system.

Could any of you who has a cMP and a VEGA FE..

- downlod and/or open Resolve
- import this RED RAW clip in the media http://downloads.red.com.s3.amazonaws.com/sample-r3d-files/w8kvv-sth-48fps-10to1redcode_FF.RDC.zip

- go to Color Window,
- press on the camera icon at the bottom left and adjust the playback to Full Premium, and RED decode

.. and tell me how many fps you get?

ps. also write your system info if possible!
 
Assuming the frame counter is beside the title green dot, I am getting 23.976. Running 2010 2X 3.46Ghz, 64GB ram, vega FE, and SD array getting 1200R 1300R speed.
 
For reference, easily hitting 23.976 (even with multiple color grading layers) on native 5,1 with GTX 1080 FE and SSDs (seperate system and media).
 
Sorry, this particular test was with six core 3.33GHz Xeon W3680 (Westmere) and 48GB (16GBx3) RAM.

(Back to using a single CPU board for at least the next few weeks. Looking for a dual CPU board, but prices are insane right now. Cheaper to buy a whole tower and have some spare parts.)
[doublepost=1519914959][/doublepost]Yes - 8K RED RAW clip linked. Pretty much messed around with the clip the same way I have other RED footage in Resolve just to push the limits. Can run through Adobe Premiere Pro CC 2018 if there's any performance tests you want to check.
 
  • Like
Reactions: itdk92
bsbeamer said:
Sorry, this particular test was with six core 3.33GHz Xeon W3680 (Westmere) and 48GB (16GBx3) RAM.

(Back to using a single CPU board for at least the next few weeks. Looking for a dual CPU board, but prices are insane right now. Cheaper to buy a whole tower and have some spare parts.)
[doublepost=1519914959][/doublepost]Yes - 8K RED RAW clip linked. Pretty much messed around with the clip the same way I have other RED footage in Resolve just to push the limits. Can run through Adobe Premiere Pro CC 2018 if there's any performance tests you want to check.
Click to expand...

Thank you.
It was more for consistency. We have many machines and installation, but I recently noticed better performance on a freshly installed 10.13.3 than with my own rig.

I think today I will do some more tests and find out if there are any issues with my rig.
Thank you for now! :)
 
Benchmark numbers for Vega FE on 2012 MP 12-core 3.46GHz, High Sierra 10.13.4 Beta (17E160e):

Geekbench 4 OpenCL: 177258
Cinebench OpenGL: 69.14 FPS
FCPX 10.4 BruceX: 16.87 sec
Uinigine extreme preset: FPS 72, Score 1811, Min/Max FPS 88.8/144.1
 
bsbeamer said:
Sorry, this particular test was with six core 3.33GHz Xeon W3680 (Westmere) and 48GB (16GBx3) RAM.

(Back to using a single CPU board for at least the next few weeks. Looking for a dual CPU board, but prices are insane right now. Cheaper to buy a whole tower and have some spare parts.)
[doublepost=1519914959][/doublepost]Yes - 8K RED RAW clip linked. Pretty much messed around with the clip the same way I have other RED footage in Resolve just to push the limits. Can run through Adobe Premiere Pro CC 2018 if there's any performance tests you want to check.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I tested it on my 5,1. It seems the test is very CPU limiting.

I follow the steps above, and achieve about 10FPS with my 1080Ti.
Screen Shot 2018-03-01 at 22.39.23.jpg


However, that already used up my whole CPU
Screen Shot 2018-03-01 at 22.40.45.jpg

I am with the latest 10.13.3 (17D102), and web driver 387.10.10.10.25.158.
 
  • Like
Reactions: itdk92
h9826790 said:
Interesting, I tested it on my 5,1. It seems the test is very CPU limiting.

I follow the steps above, and achieve about 10FPS with my 1080Ti.
View attachment 752852

However, that already used up my whole CPU
View attachment 752851
I am with the latest 10.13.3 (17D102), and web driver 387.10.10.10.25.158.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's also what I would expect. But it seems like VEGA FE is kicking in in a different way than the other cards, even different than VEGA 56/64
 
Also with 10.13.3 (17D102), NVIDIA Web Driver Version 387.10.10.10.25.158, and CUDA Driver Version 387.128. System SSD is HFS+ off Apricorn Velocity Solo X2 (with firmware upgrade). Media drives HFS+ off Apricorn Velocity Duo X2. SIP enabled. Running 27" ACD and 4K HDMI TV/monitor (which was disabled at the time of test).
 
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