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

Hotshoe

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 28, 2017
81
48
Seattle, WA
Interesting video:

The video shows Mac Pro 7.1 w/ Vega II getting trounced by an iPad while scrubbing the HQ Canon footage.

Anybody out there with W5700X and just released EOS-R5? I'm curious to know if W5700X makes a difference. In theory, I believe it should since based on the newer NAVI arch, which includes H.265 10-bit hardware codec (or so I've read on the Internet anyway, and therefore must be true! :)).
 
My R5 arrived today, only shot some 8K RAW and 4K 100fps so far, but it’s definitely challenging the system!

[automerge]1596190915[/automerge]
Having just watched that video, it seems like the graphics cards specifically aren’t accelerating 4:2:2 10-bit HEVC, hence the less than ideal performance.

Wonder if it’s something that can be added on a software level, fingers crossed it can.
 

Attachments

  • B814195B-AD7A-467E-8811-F6E8A35F27D8.jpeg
    B814195B-AD7A-467E-8811-F6E8A35F27D8.jpeg
    103.6 KB · Views: 223
  • B81B7ED5-4138-4290-9815-DC2878520118.jpeg
    B81B7ED5-4138-4290-9815-DC2878520118.jpeg
    103.5 KB · Views: 216
  • 1D0BEB77-8744-4BF4-9E99-AC61792F15A7.jpeg
    1D0BEB77-8744-4BF4-9E99-AC61792F15A7.jpeg
    93.8 KB · Views: 189
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LeonPro and OkiRun
Attached a few screengrabs of CPU and GPU usage with DaVinci and FCPX testing both 8K RAW and 4K HEVC.
 

Attachments

  • R5 4K 50p HEVC 422 10bit DaVinci.jpg
    R5 4K 50p HEVC 422 10bit DaVinci.jpg
    215.9 KB · Views: 275
  • R5 8K 25p RAW FCPX.jpg
    R5 8K 25p RAW FCPX.jpg
    377.2 KB · Views: 300
  • R5 4K 25p HEVC 422 10bit FCPX.jpg
    R5 4K 25p HEVC 422 10bit FCPX.jpg
    234.6 KB · Views: 281
  • R5 8K 25p RAW DaVinci.jpg
    R5 8K 25p RAW DaVinci.jpg
    355.3 KB · Views: 262
  • Like
Reactions: LeonPro and OkiRun
but it’s definitely challenging the system

Interesting. I was expecting the W5700X would perform well. I picked-up my 5R as well and have Vega II, so it was disappointing to see how poorly Vega II performed. Are you getting better results than what the video showed? (Where editing workflow was essentially unusable)

I believe the fix must begin with Adobe software
If the hardware support is not present, then not going to be 'fixable' in software. Of course, if Adobe is not taking advantage of such support then that's a different story --- but that's pure speculation on my part to suggest as much.
 
Leave it to Canon to find the one Codec that is not supported. They crippled my Canon 5D MkIV in a similar fashion. I guess the new Mac Pro was released primarily to boost iPad Pro sales? I did my part!

It is going to be widely supported by the end of the year. (on more than a few new systems. )

"..Apart from HEVC and VP9, Gen12 Xe will also support native AV1 decode, which includes 10-bit 4:2:0 16K stills and 8-bit 4:2:0 4K and 2K video. 8K60 HEVC with 4:2:0, 4:2:2, and 4:4:4 chroma subsampling modes are also supported. ..."


This "iPad Pro" playback smoothly isn't going to last long. If Intel Frankenstien glues a 10nm Gen 12 GPU to a 14nm cores, (Rocket lake) then probably will have desktop solutions out in number in early 2021. Tiger Lake laptops will probably be able to do basic playback quite well.

The hype train on "big Navi" has been on the higher CU count and perhaps "ray tracing" hardware. If there is an evolution bump in H.265 decode then the 4:2:2 profile would be the next "version 2" subprofile to cover besides the "main". ( depends upon how much increased transistor budget the fixed function video logic got. )


Wouldn't be surprising if Canon was shown roadmaps two years ago they have slid out 5-11 months at Intel and AMD.
 
Leave it to Canon to find the one Codec that is not supported.

It's going to be a pain for the short-term, but I can't fault Canon for going with the newer 265/HVEC 4:2:2. For now, will just need to add an extra step to transcode before working with it in FCPX if using the R5 internally recorded 10-bit, or use the Atomos to save out to ProRes.

Max has a new video out that shows the 2020 iMac Pro doing a good job handling the R5 encoded video (linked below), and that system has the Radeon 5700.

Unlike what Max is suggesting, I think picking a system based on a camera is like the tail wagging the dog. If he's OK selling his MacPro for an iMac, then he never needed the MacPro in the first place.


 
Max has a new video out that shows the 2020 iMac Pro doing a good job handling the R5 encoded video (linked below), and that system has the Radeon 5700.

I could be wrong, but my understanding from that video is that the Intel iGPU is what's helping the R5 footage along, and the system he has now is the off-the-shelf high-end model with the 5500XT, he's waiting on delivery of a BTO with the 5700XT.
 
that the Intel iGPU is what's helping the R5 footage along

Good clarification. I caught that too and left a comment to him in channel if thought improved perf was a result 5700 chipset or Intel 10th gen HEVC support. It's ambiguous since both provide HEVC hardware encoding support.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikas
Good clarification. I caught that too and left a comment to him in channel if thought improved perf was a result 5700 chipset or Intel 10th gen HEVC support. It's ambiguous since both provide HEVC hardware encoding support.

It's all very confusing, but I *think* the Intel Quick Sync supports 10-bit 4:2:2 HEVC, which is key, since it's been confirmed that (at least for now, possibly forever) the 5700XT/W5700X doesn't.

I can't understand why AMD covered 4:2:0 and 4:4:4, while 4:2:2 is left out in the cold.

I'll be watching in earnest to see his next video covering the 10c/5700XT model, depending on the result I'll be seriously considering seeing what I can get for my Mac Pro and making the switch if the numbers (both dollars and performance) are right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hotshoe
I could be wrong, but my understanding from that video is that the Intel iGPU is what's helping the R5 footage along,

he is probably going to be disappointed. Intel's 10th generation CPU package line up is muddled. Some of it is 10nm ( and has Gen 11 GPUs Ice Lake ) and the rest like the CPUs in the iMac 27" are still 14nm (and gen "9.5" Kaby Lake , Comet lake GPUs). For 10th gen Intel you need to look specificaly look at the product number to see exactly what getting in terms of iGPU (and attached Quicksync functionality). it varies widely.

Ice Lake is suppose to have 4:2:2 but the only Mac with Ice Lake is the four port MBP 13" model.

https://github.com/intel/media-driver/blob/master/README.md#hw-media-features

When his new iMac shows up it probably isn't going to do it as it is the same UHD 630 iGPU ( so that implementation of QuickSync ) as the last 2019 iMac speed bump. It isn't going to help. Pretty good chance Apple skips Tiger lake because Apple Silicon is "just around the corner".


and the system he has now is the off-the-shelf high-end model with the 5500XT, he's waiting on delivery of a BTO with the 5700XT.

The 10 core processor and 5700XT may help a bit in "brute force" conversion of the Canon files but it probably won't be "amazingly" faster.


P.S.

... I can't understand why AMD covered 4:2:0 and 4:4:4, while 4:2:2 is left out in the cold.

First, this fixed function converters soak of lots of space (and transistors). If budget is tight then it gets left out.
Second, if you look at the HEVC profiles


In version 1, there was no 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 . So it depends upon when AMD locked up the video codec design for the inital Navi work. Version 2 wasn't published until late 2015. Navi was suppose to tape out in late 2018 ( it didn't had major problems and slid much farther into 2019). Two year lead time on 2018 is 2016 which is pretty close. Especially if really haven't finished and optimized Version 1 yet. If really want to get lots of interoperabiltiy testing done with other implementations it would also probably be risky to include "too soon".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DFP1989 and Hotshoe
It's all very confusing, but I *think* the Intel Quick Sync supports 10-bit 4:2:2 HEVC, which is key, since it's been confirmed that (at least for now, possibly forever) the 5700XT/W5700X doesn't.

I can't understand why AMD covered 4:2:0 and 4:4:4, while 4:2:2 is left out in the cold.

I see. Ok, that makes sense. I haven't fond 5700 spec details, except the AMD site claims H265/HEVC 4K support for encode / decode. So the devil is in the details, as usual!

Thanks for the info! It helps to clear things up.
 
I have shot and edited two short test projects with my Canon R5. My Mac Pro 7.1 is a 12-core, 192 GB of RAM, with the Radeon Pro Vega II card, and my monitor is the Apple Pro XDR display. The purpose of both of these projects was to shoot with various frame rates, resolutions up to and including 8K raw, Canon C log, and codecs to determine how difficult the footage would to edit in Final Cut Pro X on my Mac Pro. I have not had any difficulty in playing back the footage with the viewer set to favor performance over quality and basic edits were no problem. Rendering out to Pro Res 422 or ProRes Lite was very fast. I as actually very pleasantly surprised at how well my Mac Pro handled the various frame rates, resolutions, and codecs on a single FCP X 8K timeline. I am sure that if I had a lot of effects, transitions, etc. the footage would not have played back well. These two projects were uploaded as Pro Res to YouTube to preserve the quality as much as possible. The projects are on YouTube at resolutions up to and including 8K:
and
. Both look very nice on my Pro XDR display which is, of course "only" 6K.
 
Thanks, @Bengaldad, for taking the time to share your findings and footage.

I've been consumed by a side-project so haven't been able to try for myself, yet, but now I'm curious why the experience you describe differs so starkly from what Max's first video showed, where the experience is virtually unusable with the 10-bit HEVC encoded video.
 
Thanks, @Bengaldad, for taking the time to share your findings and footage.

I've been consumed by a side-project so haven't been able to try for myself, yet, but now I'm curious why the experience you describe differs so starkly from what Max's first video showed, where the experience is virtually unusable with the 10-bit HEVC encoded video.

I am unsure what to say other than that I am reporting what I experienced. I can offer one additional piece of information. Normally I allow the project settings to be set automatically by the characteristics of the first clip I drag into the FCP X timeline. When I tried that with some 8K All-I (h.265) footage, it would not play back well at all. I started all over by creating a new library and a new project, and I then set up the project to be 8K. (The wide color gamut (bt. 2020) has to be set up when you. create the library.) Then, to my surprise, when I placed each of the various resolution, frame rate, and codec clips into the timeline, playback was easily sufficiently good to edit the video. Note that I am not claiming that playback did not drop any frames, just that playback was sufficiently good that I had no problems editing the video. Again, I had watched the videos referred to earlier in this thread and I was very surprised at how well all this went. I did not find any need to create proxies of any of the footage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hotshoe
... Normally I allow the project settings to be set automatically by the characteristics of the first clip I drag into the FCP X timeline. When I tried that with some 8K All-I (h.265) footage, it would not play back well at all. I started all over by creating a new library and a new project, and I then set up the project to be 8K. (The wide color gamut (bt. 2020) has to be set up when you. create the library.) Then, to my surprise, when I placed each of the various resolution, frame rate, and codec clips into the timeline, playback was easily sufficiently good to edit the video. ...

The Canon R5 isn't Apple's officially supported camera list.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204203#canon

[ quickly browsing through the Canon list there isn't a single H.265 listed. ( edit: oops. OK one , 1D X Mark IIi (with footnotes) ]

If FCPX is trying to do the "right thing" without knowing specific things about the camera then above would not be too surprising. If expecting FCPX to automagically do the "right thing" when it has never seen the "right thing", that may be a bit of stretch. All if would take is for FCPX to not recognize some metadata in the Canon RAW file and try to "guess" at what the right thing to do (perhaps based on other Canon cameras that appear to be a 'close match' ) and create a bit of a mismatch.

Even if Canon provided some plug-ins to supposedly "fill the knowledge gap", it wouldn't be surprising if it didn't at these relatively early stages.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Adult80HD
What if there's hope in Apple configuring the After Burner card to support these codecs to provide longevity for the Mac Pro...

If that's possible, it would finally give reason to invest in that card.
 
What if there's hope in Apple configuring the After Burner card to support these codecs

I wouldn't expect anything like that to happen. Apple wants folks to use ProRes. They don't as much care about using other CODECs while editing. ProRes. Let me repeat:

ProRes.

It's clear because they're trying to push that CODEC to as many places as they can.

Given that, I wouldn't expect the Afterburner card to support playback of any other CODECs besides ProRes. For all else, the plan is to lean into the GPU(s). But that means the GPU vendor (AMD for now) has to keep up. And we know they simply can't.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: h9826790
What if there's hope in Apple configuring the After Burner card to support these codecs to provide longevity for the Mac Pro...

If that's possible, it would finally give reason to invest in that card.

Apple lowering their RAM upgrade prices to market rates is possible. It is also not likely.

It isn't likely Apple is going to use Afterburner to do a wide variety of codecs. In part, because would have to test which "mode" the card was in before use it. The FPGA in the AfterBurner conceptually means could turn it into a different product if "reprogramming" the gate array elements. But then it wouldn't be a ProRes product anymore.
There are also only a finite number of gates in the FPGA so it is not necessarily going to have huge amounts of "spare" , unused gates that don't currently have something to do in the ProRes configuration.

The other reasons is that the sole path to Afterburner is through Apple foundation libraries.

AfterBurner also only currently does "half" of ProRes. Decode only. It doesn't even encode Apple's own codec.
I'm not sure what kind of get element budget they have to allocate to encode but I'd expect a mode where could split the Afterburner to en/decode ( drop the maximum decode streams in a "trade" for an encode one (e.g. 3 8K decode 0 encode -> 1 8K decode 1 8K encode ) .

If the decode mode doesn't completely disappear then Apple doesn't have to test if the ability is still there. ( may have to test quantity of streams but that test pragmatically needs to be there anyway. Sending 10 8K concurrent streams at Afterburner isn't going to work either even in the default mode. )

Apple really wants the camera folks to license ProRes and put it inside the camera as an optional, "native" mode. ( where "native" means one of the options , not the natural format the camera uses by default. ). Or minimally allow a "RAW output" mode that Atomos (and others ) can use to record to "native" ProRes. ( and somewhat claim it is a "native" mode of the camera when done outside the camera (but completed upstream from the Mac/Windows machine usage of the file). )

Longer term the more general standards , fixed video codecs will get shoveled into the Apple Silicon SoC ( the T2 just happens to be a bit older fixed function video decode ( A10 ? like time period) so is trailing.). Also at some point there will be add-in GPU cards that the current Mac Pro could leverage via updated drivers that will also . I would more than surprise if Apple tries to track their silicon fixed function completely with Afterburner. ( as oppose to folks buying the newer macs to get it. having a $2+ K card chase a new Mac Pro with discontinued Mac Pro isn't something that is likely on Apple's top ten list of things to do. ). very good chance that every new Mac in 2021 will have able to handle H.265 4:2:2 . By end of 2022 the whole line up will.

It is better for Apple to put labor into Afterburner doing a codec that other GPU vendors are not going to do..... which is ProRes. Also a pretty good chance that ProRes doesn't' make it into future Apple Silicon either. ( perhaps will get to a time where the A-series has huge transistor budget and nothing else higher priority to spend it on so can "blow" the increase on ProRes.... but that probably isn't going to happen. AV1 , next iteration H.26x , etc. one of those will soak it up faster. )

There will probably still be a place for Afterburner after the Apple Silicon transition. In part, that is one contributing reasons why it is there in the Mac Pro options now. ( someone will come up with 10K or 12K or 16K displays and and an updated "firmware" Afterburner will adapt ProRes to those in decode only mode. )
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.