Looking at a older Mac Pro for davinci resolve r3d work.

[jonathan murphy]

So my motherboard failed (I have a 2 xeon 8 core setup with 2 titans running pc) and so I tried buying a motherboard that was compatible with hackintosh because I need proress. I understand there are programs that can convert files to proress on windows but with the amount of clips I will be exporting out on a regular basis that will be a nightmare.

I ordered the supermicro x9dai-0 motherboard and have spent 4 days trying to get the hackintosh to work with no luck. I am done with it. I have decided to return everything, sell my 2 xeon 8 core chips and maybe even my original titans and get an old Mac Pro.


What is an ideal setup for doing davinci resolve work with 6k r3d's on a budget? Would the older mac pros do well if I upgraded the graphics to like a titan x or something else? What cpus are best?

Sorry that these questions are broad but just wanted to get a feel for these older (not trash can mac) mac pros because I don't know much about them in regards to davinci. Any help is appreciated


Thanks

Jonathan

 

[Michael McLaughlin]

lot of threads on this and I just saw this...

http://barefeats.com/hard210.html

I think the nvidia 980ti would be good but I can't remember off hand if it fits in the power envelope of
the older macs, plus you lose a bit on the older pci architecture.

There will be good and bad trade offs.

love the last part of the article:

"Armed with the Amfeltec Squid PCI Express Carrier board with four Samsung M.2 SM951 AHCI flash blades
and the ASUS GeForce GTX 980 Ti overclocked GPU, our 2010 Mac Pro tower has been transformed into
a 'beastly hot rod.' All that's missing are the flames and exhaust pipes."

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Better off to run Resolve on a Windows workstation and master to 16bit DPX or other currently common format. Then use an older or cheaper Mac to do the final transcode to ProRes. There are Windows ProRes solutions, but they're not officially supported or all that user friendly. We don't know how long they will maintain compatibility with current software and codec tools. These solutions are not 100% up to date with the latest ProRes spec anyway and it seems that there is an updated spec coming "soon" that Apple has hinted at.

 

[jake blackstone]

Using Windows to run Resolve is an excellent suggestion. I use Resolve on Windows myself whenever I can. Unfortunately, if you need to do a roundtrip back to PPro, FCPX or Avid, Windows solution becomes very difficult. Maintaining metadata with DPX, such as TC, original names or new names, based on multiple clips with the same names, which requires a new XML or AAF is almost impossible. I had VERY high hopes, when BM announced Remote Rendering. Unfortunately, BM again was precluded by Apple to render Prores on a remote machine, if your local machine is not capable of rendering Prores. And that is why I still cling to my good old Mac 4.1 updated to 5.1. I know at some point I will have to move to something else, but right now I just cling to a hope for something else beside trashcan. I will continue to use resolve on Windows, whenever I can. Current trashcan computer is a disaster.
I'd like to encourage anyone, who is fed up with Mac computer hardware and inability of resolve on windows to write Prores to look elsewhere. Personally, I prefer to use Nucoda. It runs beautifully on pretty much any Windows computer (it even runs on a MacPro 5.1 under the Bootcamp), writes perfect Apple certified Prores and it's not terribly expensive. I suggest, anyone at NAB to check them out.

 

[jake blackstone]

I think the nvidia 980ti would be good but I can't remember off hand if it fits in the power envelope of
the older macs

It does not fit the power envelope. But standard 980 will. That is the one I use. Unfortunately, it's only 3GB, so you may run into some issues, if trying to render 4k files.

 

[M.Halsell]

Jake, why do some vendors have ProRes rolled into their products and others do not?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Jake, why do some vendors have ProRes rolled into their products and others do not?

I'm not Jake, but it just comes down to licensing from Apple. This is what is rather infuriating with Windows applications and other Windows ProRes solutions. It's simple and dirt-cheap to license and implement. Apple makes this available to developers. Apple does not make the Professional ProRes codecs available as a stand-alone or drop-in codec pack on Windows. Nor will they license it for such use. It seems every external camera recorder device out there has ProRes, but a paltry few pro software solutions have bothered to implement. Contact [insert your software developer here] to ask them why they don't support ProRes. ...Some will not due to various industry politics. Don't expect ProRes support from Avid or Adobe.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

I run a 4GB version of the 980 on a 5,1 12-core with an RR-X in slot 2 without auxiliary PSU. The 6GB 980Ti will outperform the 4GB 980 on some tasks, but much of the theoretical advantage is lost in the slower bus architecture of the old towers.

If you're willing to add a PSU, then you'll realize a bit more of the 6GB 980Ti advantage - but do you really want to put more money and effort into extracting the last little bit of performance out of a legacy platform? I firmly believe that a Maxwell based nVidia 4GB 980 GPU is the sweet spot for the old Mac towers - bang for the buck. YMMV.

Cheers - #19

 

[M.Halsell]

Thanks Jeff

 

[jake blackstone]

I'm not Jake, but it just comes down to licensing from Apple. This is what is rather infuriating with Windows applications and other Windows ProRes solutions. It's simple and dirt-cheap to license and implement. Apple makes this available to developers. Apple does not make the Professional ProRes codecs available as a stand-alone or drop-in codec pack on Windows. Nor will they license it for such use. It seems every external camera recorder device out there has ProRes, but a paltry few pro software solutions have bothered to implement. Contact [insert your software developer here] to ask them why they don't support ProRes. ...Some will not due to various industry politics. Don't expect ProRes support from Avid or Adobe.

Actually I have different perspective and in this case I'm talking straight from the horses mouth, so to speak. Yes, any developer can apply for a prores license on Windows, but it's up to Apple who they decide to give it to. Licensing Prores is not that expensive, so from strictly business point of view these licensing fees for company like Apple are peanuts. So, let's look at it from the other point of view- hardware sales. Imagine tomorrow Apple allows Prores writing on Windows Resolve. I don';t know about you, but I'm ditching MacPro hardware tomorrow! Apple know this and that is why they have so many users of Mac hardware. If it was not for Prores, I hardly think there will be any significant user base for post professional. That is why Resolve on Linux CAN write Prores, because the number is insignificant. Just follow the money
Final point, at one very brief moment in Resolve Beta version 9 or 10 on Windows you could write Prores. But that lasted all of one version upgrade. Apple came down on BM hard and now we know the rest of the story...

 

[jake blackstone]

I run a 4GB version of the 980 on a 5,1 12-core with an RR-X in slot 2 without auxiliary PSU. The 6GB 980Ti will outperform the 4GB 980 on some tasks, but much of the theoretical advantage is lost in the slower bus architecture of the old towers.

If you're willing to add a PSU, then you'll realize a bit more of the 6GB 980Ti advantage - but do you really want to put more money and effort into extracting the last little bit of performance out of a legacy platform? I firmly believe that a Maxwell based nVidia 4GB 980 GPU is the sweet spot for the old Mac towers - bang for the buck. YMMV.

Cheers - #19

Sorry, i confused my Mac with Windows computer. On Windows I run 780ti and that card has 3GB of RAM. On my Mac it is 980 and it does have 4GB of RAM.

 

[M.Halsell]

.......Windows....Prores

Thanks for your take on the subject. Would it be violation of the the Apple agreement is say, Nucoda or Scratch had ProRes encoder in the form of a plug-in. Specifically talking about the Windows platform.

 

[jake blackstone]

Thanks for your take on the subject. Would it be violation of the the Apple agreement is say, Nucoda or Scratch had ProRes encoder in the form of a plug-in. Specifically talking about the Windows platform.

Unless i'm misunderstanding you, of coarse not Nucoda and Scratch and Pablo... er Rio all read and write Prores on Windows. Incidentally, neither are any of Adobe apps can write Prores on Windows. Do you now see the trend? The number of those grading apps seats are in what, a few hundred total? Resolve and Adobe suite on Windows, if Prores would have been allowed, would easily be tens if not hundreds of thousands. Millions perhaps around the world? That would constitute a significant loss of Mac hardware sales...

 

[M.Halsell]

Unless i'm misunderstanding you, of coarse not Nucoda and Scratch and Pablo... er Rio all read and write Prores on Windows. Incidentally, neither are any of Adobe apps can write Prores on Windows. Do you now see the trend? The number of those grading apps seats are in what, a few hundred total? Resolve and Adobe suite on Windows, if Prores would have been allowed, would easily be tens if not hundreds of thousands. Millions perhaps around the world? That would constitute a significant loss of Mac hardware sales...

Your logic is understand. But bear with me, could the system be gamed to allow each of those vendors to create a modified product that (includes) an encoder? At render time, the app would launch and the render would take place under the auspices of said vender? Or as you said, does Apple cap the license relationship based on the number of projected seats to be sold?

 

[jake blackstone]

Your logic is understand. But bear with me, could the system be gamed to allow each of those vendors to create a modified product that (includes) an encoder? At render time, the app would launch and the render would take place under the auspices of said vender? Or as you said, does Apple cap the license relationship based on the number of projected seats to be sold?

No one in their right mind will decide to screw around with Apple IP. Remember Samsung? They are very vigorous defending what's theirs, especially something, that would affect their bottom line, like inclusion of Prores on competing platform. Said that, look at Cinemartin. It is a plugin, that works with Adobe apps and allows for direct writing of Prores on Windows. Same can be said for Mirazon. Unfortunately, they mysteriously went out of business, but if you can find it, it still works very well. Regardless, neither plugin could work with Resolve. And the Prores files will not pass the QC master, as they are not official Apple Prores. if you look at the files created closely, it will say something like Mirazon Prores

 

[M.Halsell]

Thanks Jake. So it reaffirms that we shall not expect Apple ProRes support on the Windows platform at any reasonable point in the futures. So, buying decisions for our group will still need to include workstations. We our anticipating our volume of ProRes to increase significantly. We have been fielding quite a few questions recently from our clients regarding moving inhouse productions away DSLRs over to some of the newer camera offerings. ProRes being the conversation starter. We have used the other said ProRes solutions, but were unhappy with inconsistent results vs genuine Apple encoding. DnxHD would be my codec of choice, but unfortunately its not part of our client gravy train.

 

[jake blackstone]

Thanks Jake. So it reaffirms that we shall not expect Apple ProRes support on the Windows platform at any reasonable point in the futures. So, buying decisions for our group will still need to include workstations. We our anticipating our volume of ProRes to increase significantly. We have been fielding quite a few questions recently from our clients regarding moving inhouse productions away DSLRs over to some of the newer camera offerings. ProRes being the conversation starter. We have used the other said ProRes solutions, but were unhappy with inconsistent results vs genuine Apple encoding. DnxHD would be my codec of choice, but unfortunately its not part of our client gravy train.

Unfortunately yes, Apple would be crazy to allow Prores writing on Windows by Adobe and BM...

 

[Eric Santiago]

With all this talk of resurrecting an cMP for Resolve work, what kind of advantages are you getting with the 980s if you are sticking to 4K?

I am going wear my BT Scartlet down to the nubbin before I move to a higher plane

Currently with a nMP I def am hitting the "GPU Memory is full" with a full length feature using a 4K timeline.

So far the only fix is to change it back to an HD timeline but then what the heck do I do if I need to export to 4K?

 

[Björn Benckert]

With all this talk of resurrecting an cMP for Resolve work, what kind of advantages are you getting with the 980s if you are sticking to 4K?

I am going wear my BT Scartlet down to the nubbin before I move to a higher plane

Currently with a nMP I def am hitting the "GPU Memory is full" with a full length feature using a 4K timeline.

So far the only fix is to change it back to an HD timeline but then what the heck do I do if I need to export to 4K?

I would normally divide up the film in 5 acts and do one project in NLE per act.

Then I create a "bounce folder". where I export each act as a quicktime. Those quicklimes are then reentering the 5 projects and are tagged on to the single act time line....

So when editing act one you got act one as edit from source takes, the other acts are links to the bounce folder. And when editing act two you got act 1 and 3,4,5 as links to the bone folder etc.

And then you can do daily exports or such to this bounce folder with overwrite. then all your 5 act projects are updated with heads tails of the other acts.

This way you:

Do not run in to the same amount of lag.
You simply divide the ram abuse by 5 and you also kind of put your legs in 5 different baskets.
And you also got the timeline decided in a way so you can easily change and render out part of the timeline.
And if done nicely you also divide up your source so you only got the source clips for the given act in the given project, keeps source folders smaller and cleaner and easer to search etc.


We do this for vfx work where sometimes a minute long segment got so much shit going so it completely clogs the machines, then thinking to have the whole feature in one timeline is simply not possible even on new really beefed out machines. so if you ask me, then just go around the problem instead of trying to force through.

 

[Eric Santiago]

We do this for vfx work where sometimes a minute long segment got so much shit going so it completely clogs the machines, then thinking to have the whole feature in one timeline is simply not possible even on new really beefed out machines. so if you ask me, then just go around the problem instead of trying to force through.

Great tip and very similar to my old school 3D rendering days

I hear ya about VFX work. I am not sure if Im doing this right but Im rendering a 4K (portion required) graded version before blending with AE/Maya.
Yea I know its insane to CG in 4K but Im on an island with most of my work so I have the luxury

I couldnt help trying to keep the whole 1.5 plus hour on a timeline it just felt right.
But I guess in the end I will need to try your workflow.

Again thanks!