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 :)

Nvidia Quadro K5000 for mac

Whether you run Resolve on Mac or Windows, more GPUs is better (within reason), they increase your node processing ability. That said, it's a difficult decision with the Mac Pro (and some PC workstations) because there are too few slots to go around. PCIe expansion units are always a possibility, but having gone down that road just recently with my Mac Resolve system, I'm not too eager to do it again. The price/performance ratio didn't exactly feel like yin and yang...
 
May just have to do a test at some point to see if having a dedicated GUI card makes a significant difference.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Whether you run Resolve on Mac or Windows, more GPUs is better (within reason), they increase your node processing ability. That said, it's a difficult decision with the Mac Pro (and some PC workstations) because there are too few slots to go around. PCIe expansion units are always a possibility, but having gone down that road just recently with my Mac Resolve system, I'm not too eager to do it again. The price/performance ratio didn't exactly feel like yin and yang...
Click to expand...

And that, in a nutshell, is why I dislike all current Mac Pro options for post production heavy lifting. Too few PCI lanes, not enough expandability. About the only thing that keeps Mac Pro relevant is continuing demand for Prores.

Setting aside the Xeon CPU argument, because I believe it's the lesser issue, the biggest difference between currently available Macpro vs. PC is motherboard design. There are numerous options available on the PC side that will allow 4 concurrent 16x PCI slots without expansion chassis, and power is just a non-issue. Just think - 3 GPUs, Fibre, and a redrocket without a $2000 add-on that acts as nothing but a kludge for outdated workstation design.

I really do hope this gets addressed by Apple soon.
 
John Tissavary said:
And that, in a nutshell, is why I dislike all current Mac Pro options for post production heavy lifting. Too few PCI lanes, not enough expandability. About the only thing that keeps Mac Pro relevant is continuing demand for Prores.

Setting aside the Xeon CPU argument, because I believe it's the lesser issue, the biggest difference between currently available Macpro vs. PC is motherboard design. There are numerous options available on the PC side that will allow 4 concurrent 16x PCI slots without expansion chassis, and power is just a non-issue. Just think - 3 GPUs, Fibre, and a redrocket without a $2000 add-on that acts as nothing but a kludge for outdated workstation design.

I really do hope this gets addressed by Apple soon.
Click to expand...

Pro res works on a PC just fine. just google for the numerous free solutions out there.
 
I'm actually looking for a new Graphic Card since mine doesn't do the half of what I want. I'm working in 3D on Maya 2013 and want faster renders. I'm also working on the usual adobe app (Photoshop/Premiere/After Effects). I have a Mac Pro 4.1 with 32 GB of RAM and some added Hard drive, otherwise everything in my Mac Pro is the stuff that came with the original realase. I'm mostly working on Windows 7 on my Mac though.

So the question I asked me was which Graphic Card should I buy? From my use, I was going to buy the K5000 (thinking about the future that I want an other screen/buy next Mac Pro/make editing in Raw) but after reading this topic it seems that this Graphic Card wouldn't work at it full potential on my comp so I guess it didn't worth put that amount of money in it for now. So I turned myself on the Nvidia 4000/4800, but I seriously don't understand what's the difference between these 2. Which one is better for me/which one is older/is the older one works better etc, just these kind of questions came up so here I ask them. Also, if you can propose me other Graphic Card that you think would be great, let me know I'd like to hear some propositions/thought about it.

Thanks!
 
What graphics card do you have now?

You can get better interactive performance in Maya by using a more powerful OpenGL card -- namely a Quadro or FireGL card. However it doesn't do much to speed up renders, for that you need faster CPUs. Depending on which render engine you are using, there are some that take advantage of OpenGL, OpenCL and/or CUDA to help speed things along via the GPU, however that boost is relatively small compared to adding more or better CPUs / render nodes.

You say you primarily work in Windows 7. Will you be running OSX at all?

Best single card for Maya right now is the Quadro 6000. The new K6000 that replaces it has not been released yet and while the K5000 has some nice new features for texel pipes and shader abilities, it can't throw around as much data in terms of points and polygons. The Quadro K5000 + Tesla K20X combo is the ultimate multi-GPU setup if the system and software are keen on the "nVidia Maximus" configurations -- it's not Mac friendly though, no proper OSX support for such a configuration yet and it would require supplementary power.

If you want to run one of these cards under OSX, you really need a properly hacked card like from MacVidCards (ebay seller, probably the best source). This way, the power management and other features will work properly. OSX nVidia drivers do support many of the newer GTX series cards (Quadro support is very minimal outside of the Quadro 4000!!!), however most all of them have issues with power management and operation outside of low-bus-speed mode without the hack. Even with the hack, proper support for the GTX 6xx cards is only half-baked and they like PCIe v3 slots too.


Don't get an nVidia 4800. It is a few generations behind now, but still out there as it seems ample supplies exist. It's a decent OpenGL card, doesn't have the latest abilities for texture pipes or any of that, but can push a lot of polygons. Has mostly nothing in the way of CUDA support.


Other than Maya, the apps you've listed (Photoshop, Premiere, AE) will benefit, but are indifferent as to whether you're using a Quadro card or not. The OpenGL acceleration in Photoshop is minimal and mostly pointless. In After Effects, it's only for the RayTrace engine and nearly any proper OpenGL card will work, ATI, nVidia, etc.. Chances are, your card is doing just fine right now if you have an ATI 5770, for example. In Premiere, this is where a new GPU can help. You can find a list of which cards Premiere supports at the bottom of this page here. However, it's out of date. For example, the GTX 670, 680 are now supported, and I believe the 690 is too, it works by modifying the list, so is the Quadro K5000 and Tesla K20 (on Windows for those two).


All that said, a GTX570, or possibly a 580 if you can find one that fits within the power envelope, is usually the best bet for this system and Premiere. Otherwise, I would go with a Quadro 4000 for Maya use. A Quadro 6000 only if you intend to run under Windows 99% of the time. The Quadro K5000 won't work under OSX at all, but will run under Windows. This is hardly the ideal system for that card as the system is nearing 4 years old... The K5000 is only slightly faster than the Quadro 4000 in terms of polygon performance and CUDA ability. GTX570 with hacked EFI is probably your best bet in this Mac tower.

There is no one single card to rule them all, unfortunately. For a new PC build with enough PCIe v3 slots and if budget were not a consideration, I would go with dual overclocked GTX680 4GB cards for use in Premiere and Resolve. If I needed more robust OpenGL support and spent more time in Maya, but also Premiere and Resolve as well, I would go with the K5000 + K20X combo.
 
For Maya rendering (Renderman in my case), CPU helps but I/O is also important.
I have to use our network and that could easily bring speeds down if not set up right.
If its critical I go local but then your back to I/O such as SAS and RAIDs.

Where the heck are these K5000s anyway (for Mac)?
 
+1 on disk / data throughput. That's a huge potential bottleneck. Actually the most common bottleneck I see when helping people with their system setups and workflow issues.

Eric Santiago said:
Where the heck are these K5000s anyway (for Mac)?
Click to expand...

Not going to happen until there's a new Mac to put them in...
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Not going to happen until there's a new Mac to put them in...
Click to expand...

Say it aint so! I was hoping to update a few Mac Pro's at work with that card.

The Quadro 4000 is great but would like something that matches my BOXX 8400s Quadro 5600.

There are times when Id like to work on the Apple side for Maya.
 
What are you updating from and what are you mostly doing that the Quadro 5600 helps you with? The 5600 is the mid-range quadro card from two Quadro generations ago. GTX570 and up will smoke it for CUDA performance and in Premiere. Quadro 4000 isn't too far off of the 5600 for OpenGL performance, about 10% lower polygon performance, but superior texture pipeline... 5600 has more onboard memory if you're moving around huge OpenGL data sets... K5000 is not much of an upgrade over the Q4000 for most things.
 
Jeff just for Maya and After Effects.
Our Resolve set-up is fine (CUBIX and dual Quadros) and getting along with both FCPX, ROCKET and Avid in the same Mac Pro.
We have a few Mac Pros (2012 technically) that I would like to move up to K5000 for After Effects and Maya.
 
Thanks Jeff, I really appreciate your help. I just ordered a Quatro 4000. Can't wait to see the result.

Another question that came about it though, I guess that yes, but with Mac I'm never sure. Did a 30" Apple display would works with this graphic card?
 
yes I use a Quadro 4000 with Dual 30inch Apple Cinemas.

I think youll need a Display Port to DVI for duals.
 
Exact ;) Especially since I'm from Canada like you. People seems unwilling to ship these screens, sadly. Event that I don't want to buy it if it's not in a like new/brand new condition. This isn't the kind of things I want used.
 
I run dual 30" Dell monitors off a Mac Pro with Quadro 4000. These have DVI-DL inputs and you need a proper DisplayPort to DVI-DL converter. The video card has a DisplayPort and a DVI-DL on it. Apple converter works great as long as you have the current firmware version. You have to buy it that way, can't update. Shouldn't be a problem, I bought mine from the Apple Store about 2 years ago and the firmware was fine. First couple firmware revisions actually had trouble with sync and sparkles on 2560x1600 displays -- you know, the reason why people were probably buying the adapter in the first place. Oops.

Atlona makes a good converter too -- I have a couple of those, but they're a bit more expensive.
 
Jeffs right, went through a couple of those before finding one that works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top