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 :)

Something Special... ( REDCINE-X )

Might have finally sold me on a Titan. Good move by RED.

Do we need a second card while playing back or is the PC responsive. When I do 3D rendering on a GPU the OS slows to a crawl since it's intensively rendering. Are you able to reserve a few GPU cores for windowing? How much RAM do we need on a card? Can it be done on a 2-3GB card or do we need the new 6-12GB cards?
 
I figure I'll have to wait until after IBC, but I do hope this will be in the SDK. I also hope that when BMD gets ahold of that SDK, that it's easy to distribute my GPUs - i.e. set one to dedicated RED debayering, and one to Resolve GPU processing. A Rocket - even the first one - would be over my head price-wise. I really just want to be able to work with 5K in half-res premium at 24 fps, anything else is gravy. Right now I do basic grading at 1/4 res for real-time playback, 1/2 res Premium for some finer details, and pump to full for NR and sharpening on single frames. Exporting a project with Full-Res debayer goes at ~2fps on my i7 3820. Not sure if I can justify a even a Titan right now, but if buying another dedicated GPU can get me to 24fps at 4-5K (even at half-res), I'd lose my mind. But anything would be better than where I'm at.

I'm super-excited at the prospects, and how much this will improve my workflow.
 
Current Mac Pro GPU?

Current Mac Pro GPU?

Now, for those of us still trying to make sense of the GPU thing, what will be the best (current) Mac Pro options to take advantage of this? :huh:
 
Last edited:
Terry VerHaar said:
Now, for those of us still trying to make sense of the GPU thing, what will be the best (current) Mac Pro options to take advantage of this? :huh:
Click to expand...

In my 2008 or 2009 Mac Pro, I have a Quadro 4000 (CUDA and Open GL 4.1) in mine that in theory should take advantage of GPU aware software.
That is where I edit right now and it isn't that bad.
 
Andy Roberts said:
In my 2008 or 2009 Mac Pro, I have a Quadro 4000 (CUDA and Open GL 4.1) in mine that in theory should take advantage of GPU aware software.
That is where I edit right now and it isn't that bad.
Click to expand...

Any thoughts about the GTX 680? I was just about to pull the trigger on one of those but now am more interested in what might specifically support RCX the best. The sands are always shifting. LOL
 
Terry VerHaar said:
Now, for those of us still trying to make sense of the GPU thing, what will be the best (current) Mac Pro options to take advantage of this? :huh:
Click to expand...


Last year I was looking to replace a few Quadro 4000s with the new K5000 (for mac side of things).

I read a few reviews and it wasnt a big enough jump to bother.

I too am wondering if were good with a few Quadro 4000s in a MP/CUBIX here.

Also wondering what results are with a ROCKET and GPUs.

Does it help at all is the question.
 
CPU, GPU, RR, RR-X decode metrics

CPU, GPU, RR, RR-X decode metrics

Curious about the differences, if any, between software (CPU), commodity GPU, RedRocket and RedRocket-X processed images. The current RedRocket apparently sacrifices a little precision for speed. Many have found the software (CPU) decode a bit smoother than the RR output and use it for rendering deliverables.

I have been hoping that the greater muscle in the second gen RR-X will not require the rounding, or whatever it is, of the first gen RR thereby allowing us best possible quality right off the card. Using GPU's like the Titan, can we get the maximum IQ, or will it be slightly coarser to maintain real time capability? If the new SDK allows multiple GPU configurations would that allow higher precision rendering? Will the SDK allow dynamic parameter adjustments to match GPU resources? Will there be the equivalent of good, better, best?

Would like to determine if the next generation of r3d handling will essentially offer 3 options:

1) Using a reasonably fast CPU and decent GPU one can work at 1/4 res until final render, then cook out a max quality deliverable that will take some time to create.

2) Using a reasonably fast CPU and one or more bomber GPUs, one can work at 1/2 res (or even full res?) and output max quality deliverables - perhaps a bit slower than real time but much faster than CPU based?

3) Using any newer computer (perhaps even a laptop with TB2 and an expansion chassis for uber-mobile) with the RedRocket-X everything is full res, final output at max quality and faster than real time.

It would obviously be great if a GPU based pipeline could offer what the RR-X does while also speeding up tons of non r3d operations. How realistic is that hope? Inquiring minds...

Cheers - #19
 
Terry VerHaar said:
Am I mistaken: the Titan isn't available for Mac, right?
Click to expand...

Correct. No Titan on Mac. The Titan can be made to work on the Mac, but driver support for it is incomplete. I just tried it again this past weekend... IMO, that's a lot of money to spend on a GPU that's only half-assed supported and may never be fully supported. Hacked firmware or not, if the drivers don't provide full support, it isn't going to work to its abilities. I think for right now the best two Mac GPUs are the GTX680 Mac Edition and the Radeon 7950 for Mac. As to which one will perform better in RC-X, that would be a question for RED. If and when they get the Mac version to a point they're ready to talk about it.
 
Out of the two cards. The GTX680 will help you more in CUDA capable applications.

Radeon 7950 does not.

Jeff Kilgroe said:
Correct. No Titan on Mac. The Titan can be made to work on the Mac, but driver support for it is incomplete. I just tried it again this past weekend... IMO, that's a lot of money to spend on a GPU that's only half-assed supported and may never be fully supported. Hacked firmware or not, if the drivers don't provide full support, it isn't going to work to its abilities. I think for right now the best two Mac GPUs are the GTX680 Mac Edition and the Radeon 7950 for Mac. As to which one will perform better in RC-X, that would be a question for RED. If and when they get the Mac version to a point they're ready to talk about it.
Click to expand...
 
Will Keir said:
Out of the two cards. The GTX680 will help you more in CUDA capable applications.

Radeon 7950 does not.
Click to expand...

I guess the question then is - does the new RCX rely more on CUDA or OpenCL? Do I at least have the question right? Is the 7950 better or equal on OpenCL performance? (Why can't this be simple, like camera technology? :smiley:)
 
Will Keir said:
Out of the two cards. The GTX680 will help you more in CUDA capable applications.

Radeon 7950 does not.
Click to expand...

Correct, but the industry is shifting away from CUDA and all the big GPU-accelerated software on the Mac now uses OpenCL, so I wouldn't stress over CUDA support much as we move forward.
 
Jarred Land said:
heh heh heh.

Was really planning on holding this one under our hat until IBC.. Everyone just pretend to act surprised when we announce it at the show :)
Click to expand...

Haha, I could have sworn a RedName had mentioned GPU acceleration was in the works a few months ago.

Believe me when I say that I am no less excited knowing this one is coming, than I would be if it were a surprise. Something that will accelerate every single Red workflow in a free software update? Done and done.
 
So for a more ubiquitous cross platform workflow, is there any available 16bit codec that can be transcoded to in Windows RedcineX that will work equally well in a Windows / Mac OS environment (not a fan of grading/finishing in 8bit codecs or uncompressed quicktime), or are we going to be stuck using image sequences like DPX and TIFF or EXR. ProRes 4444 is pretty much a Mac transcode only, Avid MXF is too proprietary, Cineform is a bit too buggy and often lacks support, and black magic codecs have yet to work in RedcineX.

It seems like a Windows platform is going to be better/faster for transcoding to a 16bit DPX/Tiff sequence, but most clients I work with are still on the Mac platform and want ProRes offline/online files for edit. I know there are a few programs to convert files to ProRes on the Windows platform, and they usually work well for 8/10bit codecs, but it's also adding time and another step into the workflow. It's seeming like we'll need a Windows RedcineX system to transcode and a Mac system to color grade and render the transcoded image sequence to ProRes. If Resolve could output to Prores on the Windows side of things, that would be ideal, but I seriously doubt that could or would ever happen. I suppose post production wouldn't be very interesting or colorful if everyone used the same codecs, standards, and tools.

I prefer the idea of using a couple GTX Titans for everything, rather than a rocket-x that is only usable for red transcodes.
 
Shiblon Wixom said:
So for a more ubiquitous cross platform workflow, is there any available 16bit codec that can be transcoded to in Windows RedcineX that will work equally well in a Windows / Mac OS environment (not a fan of grading/finishing in 8bit codecs or uncompressed quicktime), or are we going to be stuck using image sequences like DPX and TIFF or EXR. ProRes 4444 is pretty much a Mac transcode only, Avid MXF is too proprietary, Cineform is a bit too buggy and often lacks support, and black magic codecs have yet to work in RedcineX.

It seems like a Windows platform is going to be better/faster for transcoding to a 16bit DPX/Tiff sequence, but most clients I work with are still on the Mac platform and want ProRes offline/online files for edit. I know there are a few programs to convert files to ProRes on the Windows platform, and they usually work well for 8/10bit codecs, but it's also adding time and another step into the workflow. It's seeming like we'll need a Windows RedcineX system to transcode and a Mac system to color grade and render the transcoded image sequence to ProRes. If Resolve could output to Prores on the Windows side of things, that would be ideal, but I seriously doubt that could or would ever happen. I suppose post production wouldn't be very interesting or colorful if everyone used the same codecs, standards, and tools.

I prefer the idea of using a couple GTX Titans for everything, rather than a rocket-x that is only usable for red transcodes.
Click to expand...

Agree.

Maybe Apple will release prores encoding for windows some day. I have heard rumblings of something coming down the line from Avid in the form of a new form of DNXhd.. not sure if that is just a rumor or not but we will definitely support it if it comes to light, and it historically has been cross platform.

Adobe is in a good position to come out with something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top