RRX with enclosure or new iMac Pro?

[Shehab_Illyas]

I am looking for a bit of advice. I am stuck in a technology rut. I upgraded my MX to Epic-W recently and my 2015 topped out i7 MacBook Pro is reluctantly playing one lane of 8k footage in FCPX. I have been using proxy files for now for my edits. I was considering the new iMac Pro but already have monitors etc. I don't own a RRX card and was wondering if that would bridge the gap till either a new MacBook Pro is released or wait out the new desktop solution for the Mac Pro sometime next year. Would it make sense to jump in on the iMac Pro now(sell a monitor) or would an RRX help with the data load to be able to edit a bit smoother with the set up I have now.

Will the RRX help and be useful down the road? I am sure there are many thoughts on this and I am way under powered at the moment in the computer dept, but don't want to jump the gun if something is on the horizon with Mac ( I was hoping for a hardware announcement a few days ago for the Macbook Pro). I travel quite a bit so a laptop is ideal but also need a studio computer at some point. I have also been contemplating moving to PC instead of waiting for the next proper desktop solution for MAC, but I am pretty comfortable with FCPX. I was also trying to research a eGPU solution and if that may bridge the gap between computer upgrades. Anyone have something working for them that might fit my situation?

Any advise is appreciated.

Thanks

Shehab

 

[Michael Tiemann]

The RR-X can decrypt (CPU intensive) and debayer (GPU intensive) Dragon clips. The RR-X can only decrypt Helium, Monstro, and (I presume) Gemini clips. Powerful GPU cards (such as late-model nVidia 1080) can readily debayer all of the above. But many CPUs struggle to keep up on the decryption front. An RR-X goes a long way toward relieving that particular CPU pressure.

I have an eGPU holding my RR-X, which supplements the powerful Vega 64 in my iMac Pro, and I'm quite happy with that. I don't know about using a eGPU to host both an RR-X and a powerful GPU. The iMac Pro will be a *huge* step up from your laptop. It was a huge step up from my 2012 Mac Pro (which previously housed my RR-X and an older model 1080).

 

[Shehab_Illyas]

Thanks for sharing Michael,

I think the RRX would be a good option for me too..just on the fence about where to spend dollars. I have been hesitant to jump in iMac Pro because I used to own a tower way back and hopes that they bring that back again. The trash can got old very quickly so I sold that a year ago, maybe the RRX is the first purchase then iMac Pro or new MacBook if they announce in Sept and wait out for the re-design of the Mac Pro.

I appreciate you taking the time.

Cheers

Shehab

 

[Misha Engel]

Thanks for sharing Michael,

I think the RRX would be a good option for me too..just on the fence about where to spend dollars. I have been hesitant to jump in iMac Pro because I used to own a tower way back and hopes that they bring that back again. The trash can got old very quickly so I sold that a year ago, maybe the RRX is the first purchase then iMac Pro or new MacBook if they announce in Sept and wait out for the re-design of the Mac Pro.

I appreciate you taking the time.

Cheers

Shehab

A new RRX cost $ 6.750 and a cheap thunderbolt station to put it in you need at least an other $ 250..400, where I live that is serious money and for that kind of money you can build a very quick hackintosh or buy a midrange iMac Pro.

 

[Shehab_Illyas]

Hi Misha,

I would go the used route so $2000-$2500 for a card and enclosure. See the dilemma?

Have you used a hackintoch? I am nervous to get into that world with all the updates Apple consistently does. My min build on a iMac Pro would be at least $6k.

 

[Misha Engel]

Hi Misha,

I would go the used route so $2000-$2500 for a card and enclosure. See the dilemma?

Have you used a hackintoch? I am nervous to get into that world with all the updates Apple consistently does. My min build on a iMac Pro would be at least $6k.

Yes, build a couple of them and you have to be pretty educated to maintain them, 2 run windows only these days (users couldn't keep them running them selves) and 1 is running on a threadripper on a seperate SSD (normal it is running windows 10) for when ProRes output is needed fast. Lucky for us most clients don't demand ProRes, but in the US and Canada ProRes still seems to be golden standard.

A hackintosh is not like an Amira or Alexa that just works.

 

[Mike Halper]

Kind of depends on your particular Hackintosh build. I had a Hackintosh system I just dismantled for about 5 years. Never any issues and OS updates worked every time without problems because I kept all my custom config files in the bootloader instead of on the system partition.

Built a new Hackintosh last week the same way. Already updated from 10.13.4 to 10.13.5 without issue.

You do need to be a bit computer savvy. I recommend you also use a guide for a system that completely works. Like this one: https://www.tonymacx86.com/threads/...c-pro-successful-build-extended-guide.229353/ You’ll spend half the price of an iMacPro for the same performance and not need any external expansion boxes to deal with. The trade-off is you don’t have an actual Apple computer and the benefits that come with those.

 

[Misha Engel]

The trade-off is you don’t have an actual Apple computer and the benefits that come with those.

And what are those benefits?

 

[Michael Tiemann]

And what are those benefits?

The ability to do modular upgrades to any component in the system as technology marches forward, which it does faster than the average Apple refresh cycle (5 years and counting on the nMP).

 

[Misha Engel]

The ability to do modular upgrades to any component in the system as technology marches forward, which it does faster than the average Apple refresh cycle (5 years and counting on the nMP).

Ehhhh... modular upgrades on Apple products, really...

 

[Michael Tiemann]

Ehhhh... modular upgrades on Apple products, really...

I'm sorry, I misread the earlier post. I thought Mike was talking about the benefits that come with NOT using Apple products. I stand corrected.

 

[Mike Halper]

And what are those benefits?

Build quality, support, being an actual Mac computer there's generally no tweaking necessary to get things working, more refinement, better resale value when you decide to sell/upgrade. That's pretty much about it. If you're technically savvy, build a Hackintosh. You'll definitely get more bang for your buck up front.

 

[Matt Fredericks]

In a similar boat here. I have a RRX connected via TB2 to a maxed out 2013 Apple nmp, but Helium transcoding and playback is killing in me in RCX, Adobe Pr & Ae- (Dragon 6K was so much faster). We recently lost our in-house post team and I'm one-man-banding it, so now it's not just a tech bottleneck but a staffing one as well. I'm trying to find a way to speed up the workflow while sticking with R3D's, without having to crop the sensor or switch to Prores... Thinking the new iMac with a TB3 connection to the existing RRX is the best bet.

 

[DJ Meyer]

In a similar boat here. I have a RRX connected via TB2 to a maxed out 2013 Apple nmp, but Helium transcoding and playback is killing in me in RCX, Adobe Pr & Ae- (Dragon 6K was so much faster). We recently lost our in-house post team and I'm one-man-banding it, so now it's not just a tech bottleneck but a staffing one as well. I'm trying to find a way to speed up the workflow while sticking with R3D's, without having to crop the sensor or switch to Prores... Thinking the new iMac with a TB3 connection to the existing RRX is the best bet.

I've got a 10-core iMac Pro, Vega 64, and RR-X connected over TB3. It will play back 8k in realtime in RCX while using about 30% of CPU, but just barely keeps up with the playhead.

 

[Misha Engel]

I've got a 10-core iMac Pro, Vega 64, and RR-X connected over TB3. It will play back 8k in realtime in RCX while using about 30% of CPU, but just barely keeps up with the playhead.

Not bad for $14.000 worth of computer equipment.

Apple did great forcing ProRes as the defacto standard (in north america), hats of for that.

 

[Matt Fredericks]

I've got a 10-core iMac Pro, Vega 64, and RR-X connected over TB3. It will play back 8k in realtime in RCX while using about 30% of CPU, but just barely keeps up with the playhead.

The 10-core will do all that.. nice to know. Figure the 14 & 18 cores will be faster- or not because of the slower clock speed?

 

[DJ Meyer]

The 10-core will do all that.. nice to know. Figure the 14 & 18 cores will be faster- or not because of the slower clock speed?

The RR-X takes a lot of the load off the CPU, so with that attached then the 14/18 will not be any faster than the 10 or even the 8. Without the RR-X, then yes the 14/18 would likely be faster for playback.