-
CC-CS6-X render comparisons
-
One of the other things I’m seeing is that when you send log profile video (Alexa, BMD Film, etc.) to any third party filter that uses a preset browser (MB Looks, Sapphire Edge), levels are wrong with X and right with Premiere.
In general real-time, unrendered playback performance favors different cards depending on the developer’s own optimization. Sapphire filters run better with the NVIDIA card, while FxFactory filters appear to be better with the ATI.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Oliver,
have you sent feedback about that to Apple?
Kind regards,
M.
-
Premiere Pro CC does support dual GPUs right now, it would be cool to see those benchmarks too. I couldn’t find any on the web.
Santiago Martí
http://www.robotrojo.com.ar
Red One M-X, Red Epic X, Red Pro Primes, Adobe CS6, Assimilate Scratch -
Until proven otherwise- why not? That’s the official word. Both from Schiller and from the MacPro website. And I wager he has more conversations with the dev team that you do, so on the sliding scale of informed opinion I’ll lean his way for the moment.
Didn’t we just finish a year’s worth of these semantic arguments about Tim’s email about the MacPro? People parsing his words to try and pick apart what he REALLY meant- that it wouldn’t be a MacPro at all, but something for the MacPro crowd… After all that, and what did we get? A new MacPro. Maybe not what everyone might have wanted (it couldn’t have been no mater what it was) but it was a new MacPro.
Optimized for the machine means it will be in some form optimized for the machine.
-
[Oliver Peters] “This might be affected by staying in ProRes, which is clearly best for X, but for which CC has also been tweaked.”
That’s a significant understatement, to be sure. Final Cut definitely prefers and works well with ProRes. The strength of the Adobe software is that it works fairly well with most anything. My own tests with the software have Premiere (CS5.5 and CC) handling my tasks in literally 1/2 the length of the clip. For FCPX? Twice the length of the clip. The main difference between my tests and yours: I’m not starting with, nor transcoding to/from ProRes. I’m starting with AVCHD and ending with h.264 MP4.
-
[Santiago Martí] ” Premiere Pro CC does support dual GPUs right now, it would be cool to see those benchmarks too. I couldn’t find any on the web.”
Actually, it supports n GPUs, not just duals. And it seems to work with and without SLI (nVidia, obv) but appears to scale linearly when using SLI. That testing was done w/Windows and 2 Titans, if I remember correctly; there’s a thread on the Adobe’s forums somewhere. Since OS X doesn’t support SLI right now, it’d have to be done sans it in a Mac Pro. But then again, it’d take a heavily modified Mac Pro with extra power supplies to power more than one card…
-
[Marcus Moore] “Optimized for the machine means it will be in some form optimized for the machine.”
Exactly how? What will FCPX be optimized for on the Mac Pro that it currently doesn’t support on a high-end iMac? Outside of dual GPU, which I assume would be included as part of the OpenCL framework anyway.
-
[Gary Huff] ” Exactly how?”
If I had to guess: they overhauled how the software uses OpenCL so that it can take advantage of multiple GPUs.
-
As I said, dedicated GPU background rendering is one possibility- and it’s a possibility that’s even hinted at in the MacPro blurb. Besides that, I don’t know.
But you know how the best way to find out would be? Let’s wait and see what comes out with the MacPro in a couple months. Then we can argue about if what they’ve DONE classifies as optimization, vs talking in the future/abstract.
-
[Marcus Moore] “As I said, dedicated GPU background rendering is one possibility- and it’s a possibility that’s even hinted at in the MacPro blurb.”
What would prevent FCPX from doing that with the 680MX 2GB GPU in the iMac, albeit slower obviously?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up