[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Let’s also not forget that Thunderbolt is two channels of 10Gb, each way.”

I didn’t forget. Don’t you forget that you can only have a max 10Gb in any direction for both DP and PCIe.
Marketing departments always want you to add both directions together, but that’s marketing.
Thunderbolt is a 10Gb a second connection. There is no way to send more then 10Gb of PCIe data and 10Gb of Display data at a time, in any given direction.

[Jeremy Garchow] “It does? Do you have a computer or graphics card that allows it or is that just the theoretical limit?”

The theoretical limit. At the moment you have to pay about 80 grand for one of those panels.

At the moment, Thunderbolt is more then capable of driving current displays, so that isn’t a problem.
However, it is not capable of replacing PCIe, and I hope to god that Apple understands this.

Cause if they don’t, we’re all screwed until 100Gb thunderbolt comes along, which won’t be for a few years.

[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

I think what Philip is talking about is the apparent limit of 10Gb on thunderbolt vs. Display Port’s 17.28Gb max.

Display Port supports up to QFHD (3840 × 2160) at 30bit and 60 Hz.

Obviously, this isn’t a problem at the moment.

One question I do have is whether Thunderbolt supports 30bit displays. All the good pro monitors from NEC, Eizo, etc. are 30bit now, but apple’s new thunderbolt display is still 24bit.

I don’t see why Thunderbolt wouldn’t be compatible with 30bit, but since it isn’t Display Port it doesn’t have to support any standards they don’t feel like supporting, and Apple has no personal use for 30bit color at the moment.

[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

I’m not sure I understand exactly what you don’t understand….. (that wasn’t exactly clear ether)

As I see it, the point of buying a Mac Pro is for two reasons:

The power that the CPU’s provide, and the expansion options offered by the PCIe bus.

One of those options is being able to chose a GPU. If apple switches to an onboard GPU, as I’m arguing they’re forced to by adding Thunderbolt, then your options will be limited to one or two GPUs which you can’t change later, and unless Apple and nVidia get their act together, that means ATI and therefor no CUDA.

This would have no impact on any of Apple’s software, but it would have a big impact on high-end use of Mac Pro’s which is very CUDA intensive.

My further thought is that, having dispensed with the need for a PCIe connected GPU, Apple will also dump the PCIe slots altogether, in favor of Thunderbolt. Problem is, Thunderbolt isn’t fast enough to replace PCIe as a connection for GPUs if the performance of GPU cards in x4 slots is any indication. (there is the Sony Thunderbolt connected GPU unit for one of their laptops, so it is possible. Whether that setup can handle high-end 3D work remains to be seen.)

My whole point?

I see Thunderbolt as forcing Apple to drop PCIe… And PCIe is the reason people buy Mac Pros.

I’m guessing the next Mac Pro will be a small box with Thunderbolt and no PCIe, and GPU processing will be severely handicapped to one onboard GPU that doesn’t support CUDA and offboard GPUs that are handicapped by the Thunderbolt interface being 1/8th of the speed that PCIe GPU’s use.

Also, anyone using Fibre Cards will find themselves handicapped compared to PCIe.

As soon as 100Gb Thunderbolt comes out this won’t be a problem anymore.

[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

Sorry, poor choice of words. I didn’t mean “onboard” as in, part of the processor. I meant onboard as in built into the computer, like every other mac other then the current Mac Pro

[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

Here’s my thought. The Mac Pro as we know it is definitely dead. And I’ll tell you why:

Thunderbolt. It contains both a PCIe signal and a Display Port signal.

So how’s that Display Port signal going to get in there? Easy. But it means the end of the user replaceable main GPU.
I would be willing to bet that Apple will never again release a computer without a built in GPU. Think about what would happen if they did:

The Thunderbolt ports would only have a data connection, no video. You couldn’t use Apples nice fancy thunderbolt display. You’d ether get working ports, or you could plug it into your GPU card and get video, but not both. Apple would never do that. They could i guess, make a custom Card that sent the video signal back through it’s PCIe interface to the onboard Thunderbolt controller, Or they could make a card that had the thunderbolt ports on it.
But nether setup works the moment the user changes out the card.

My point, simply, is this. Because the display signal is folded into the Thunderbolt connection, Apple has to use an onboard GPU.

Now I guess they could stick this into the current design, but do you think they would?

It seems to me that to add Thunderbolt to the Mac Pro Apple is forced to do a redesign.

That’s my theory. Now onto speculation:
If the GPU is no longer connected by a PCIe port, what’s stopping them from getting rid of PCIe expansion all together? It would be just like apple to think that Thunderbolt is fast enough to replace PCIe…

It seems to me we may have a couple of generations of Macs which just aren’t useable for high-end 3D/compositing/color work until 100Gb Thunderbolt comes along and Thunderbolt connected GPUs become feasible. (From looking at the DiVinci message bords, I see that DiVinci doen’t work with GPU’s connected by 4x PCIe connections.)

[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

[Mark Dobson]
I won’t be buying. “

This seems like the common thread in everything I’ve read about this camera. Lots of view points, from one end of the spectrum to the other, but I have yet to hear anyone say they’re planing on actually buying it.

Usually they say they’re going to buy the Scarlet.

Canon could have knocked one out of the park and absolutely owned their own little niche of the market that they created.

Instead, they decided to go after an already existing market where they have no name and didn’t do anything to shake it up. We have a camera which takes on the F3 and wins on some points and loses others. If they’ed offered 4:4:4 SDI right out of the box and a MSRP the same as the F3, it would have been a different story.

[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

So are you saying that new projects work fine?

It matters cause it might help us root out the problem.

[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

What about a new project? If you make a new project, save it, restart PP and then open it what happens then? (assuming you can get that far)

[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

Seems to me the easiest fix would be to reinstall CS4.

Obviously something got corrupted, and since it’s happening with any project, it’s in the program or its dependent plugins.

When exactly does it crash? what’s the last thing you see on the screen?

[John-michael Seng-wheeler]

Also, Tim, I realized that I misspoke,

I said “If you Keep your editing PC up to date and dont use the web you will “never” get malware. That’s because malware basically comes from one of two places: E-mail, and compromised websites. The third possibility, a worm from an infected PC on your network, is very very unlikely if you keep your computers updated.”

And I recall your response, which was that you needed the interent and not using it would be a big hardship.

What I meant to say was that if you didn’t use the web and kept your computer updated, you wouldn’t get Malware even without an Antimalware program.

I’ve been editing on windows for 6 years with totally unprotected computers. Ok, not totally unprotected, but not protected by any program that’s running all the time. I have backups and Malware cleanup programs installed and ready should I need them, but nothing actively scanning.

I haven’t had a single problem on my edit machines in those 5 years.

I know what you’re thinking: “How does he know there’s nothing wrong? it could have got in with out him noticing”. You’re right, of course, but it’s unlikely. I monitor and scan my computer regularly.