Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

New Mac Pros... which video card?

MikeCurtis said:
As for interfaces - 1920x1200 is max res for single link DVI AFAIK.
Click to expand...

It can do a bit higher than that, but I think that's pretty much the highest any of the vid card makers allow in their drivers. I know that to get anything I've seen with 2048 pixels wide or more, it has been on a dual-link interface.

Dual link DVI can do 2560x1600. Twin dual link can drive 3840x2400 that I've seen. But 4096x2304 may well require another bus - anybody know for sure? Oh, and that 3840x2400 was at some woefully, horrifically slow refresh rate - like 16Hz or something on a Mac Pro at IBC last year.
Click to expand...

I'm driving dual 30" here on an FX4500 card. That's 5120x1600 @ 60Hz, and that's 1.1MP short of 3840x2400, which still isn't a problem. At least not at 8bits/channel. The older IBM/ViewSonic 22" 3840x2400 displays could handle this resolution via quad DVI (2 x dual-link w/splitters). But they unfortunately have terribly slow refresh at full resolution. Those displays essentailly use the same 1920x1200 DSP system to process each input in series, so you're getting a refresh of about 15Hz for the entire display. I recall someone mentioning that these 22" displays are what was being used at IBC, so there's a good bet that's the problem.

From what I can make of the DVI specs, 2x dual-link DVI interfaces should drive the 4096x2304 from RED just fine at 8bits/channel RGB up to 60Hz. For 10bit or greater, lower refresh rates will be fine, but for 60Hz, it looks like something more will be required.

The upcoming display interface offerings like DisplayPort may help in this regard. Although, DisplayPort seems more consumer oriented... I can't recall the name of the other one that is being supported by Apple and a few others, but it should provide the equivalent bandwidth of at least two dual-link DVI interfaces on a single cable. Actually 4 on a single cable as I think it has a "dual-link" capability of its own. So this may be the answer. But I don't know the specs, just what I've heard.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
From what I can make of the DVI specs, 2x dual-link DVI interfaces should drive the 4096x2304 from RED just fine at 8bits/channel RGB up to 60Hz. For 10bit or greater, lower refresh rates will be fine, but for 60Hz, it looks like something more will be required.
Click to expand...

I have dual ATI Radeon X1900 XT that could run 4 x 30" displays (W:5120 x H:3200).

This resolution is enough to show 4K movie from RED.

Unfortunately I do not have four 30" displays at the moment to test this configuration

but I could show one improvisation with 3 displays (two 23" and one 30")

that shows how could "look" 4K movie from RED in a certain configuration.

4k-spec.jpg


4k-spec2.jpg
 
i saw this on ebay item 310013606542
is it the same one you mention here Sanjin
ATI Radeon x1900 XT 512MB Video Card Intel Mac Pro
it say's different resolution
 
Maybe to run 4k smoothly it could be the best (save bet) to have two NVIDIA Quadro FX 5600 that is about 2 x 1.5GB of GDDR3 memory.

But cost you a lot.

Big studios could have it soon.

Also Apple wrote:

"The even bigger picture.
To create an incredible display wall or large-scale visualization,
install up to four graphics cards, each with two dual-link DVI ports.
You can run up to eight 30-inch Apple Cinema HD Displays
at the same time with just one Mac Pro."

technology_graphics_displays20080108.png


LINK>>>
 
The 88 is a beast. However if your are moneyed up and crazy go for ye newy/oldy Quadro FX 5600. The 5600 is getting a lot of use in the hard core HP graphics machines, I got told to stick one in my color grading VFX machine, I trust the guy that told me, so I pass that information on to you, the user?

_________________________________
Color GRADING!... COLOR GRADING!... YOUR NOT SEEING THE BIG PICTURE!
 
gunleik said:
Hey sanjin,
you changed your avatar!

Cheers!

G
Click to expand...

Gunleik yes,

I saw that is a newest trend here at the forum.

Or I just followed a crowd.

The Third Man has to be like Orson Walles in The Third Man movie and in his life.

A brave, intelligent, courageous, smart, handsome...and a little bit bizarre. :)
 
A Dual Link Dvi Can Also Display 3840x1024, At 60 Hz.

Even Though A Mac Pro Could Use 8 Displays, You Couldn't Really Play Back Video On All 8 Because Quicktime Doesn't Play Full Screen Across More Than 1 Screen Without Special Devices. (please Correct Me If I'm Wrong)
 
Using true spanning in Windows, Quicktime can span multiple physical displays, while WMP can not. Not sure if that applies to Mac, since the DualView system is usually used with multiple screens, (allowing independent resolutions and refresh rates)
 
QT can span my dual 30's in OSX no problem.
 
So Jeff, are you saying that you could take a 5120x1600 video and play it full screen without any thing but the video showing? If so, please explain how you do it. We've had to buy a Matrox device in order to show a 3 1080p presentation we created on 3 52 inch hdtvs
 
kinobairn said:
So Jeff, are you saying that you could take a 5120x1600 video and play it full screen without any thing but the video showing? If so, please explain how you do it. We've had to buy a Matrox device in order to show a 3 1080p presentation we created on 3 52 inch hdtvs
Click to expand...

Ah, but with nothing else showing is the trick. That's currently a QT restriction and not a hardware one. I can stretch a window across both displays and play the video, but doing "full screen" in QT always limits itself to a single display. I can load a clip on each monitor and set each one to "full screen" and it takes up that screen. I haven't tried making a 5120x1600 QT file. Maybe I'll try it just to see... Can QT even support such a resolution? Probably would have to go with an MKV container or Divx.

Other video players can be made to take up multiple screens. If I had a specific playback use for something like that, I would start with VLC. I think it can do it. If not, shouldn't be too difficult to modify it to do so -- the source is fully available under GNU license.
 
so, apparently the old mac pros, from before early 2008 model cant have the gpu upgraded to a 880 anyway as its incompatible or something.

wtf apple?
 
Thats Apple!~

A monopolizing underclocked Hardware company.

The facts are you dont need an Apple computer to Run MAC OS X anymore...

EFI is working under Leopard and ALL video cards on the market are working, fully without heavy patching... All you need is a Intel motherboard and Quad Xeon or Quad core 2 duo,

Get your 8800 or your 1950 Xt whichever you prefer... And faster Memory.. 800 mHz

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/HCL_10.5.1#PCI_Express
 
x86box said:
Thats Apple!~

A monopolizing underclocked Hardware company.

The facts are you dont need an Apple computer to Run MAC OS X anymore...

EFI is working under Leopard and ALL video cards on the market are working, fully without heavy patching... All you need is a Intel motherboard and Quad Xeon or Quad core 2 duo,

Get your 8800 or your 1950 Xt whichever you prefer... And faster Memory.. 800 mHz

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/HCL_10.5.1#PCI_Express
Click to expand...

so, when something goes wrong with your fcp set up, where exactly is your support going to come from?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top