Contribute
Register

Nvidia GPU for FCPX

Status
Not open for further replies.
chickeneaterguy said:
Looks like you're right. Again, I can't open up FCPX just using integrated graphics (it specifies that I can only use FCPX with graphics cards with acceleration enabled), but when using it with my i7 6700K and 960, it takes TWO MINUTES!

I was using FCPX 10.3 then I tried 10.3.1 and got the same results. I went to the 10.2.3 trial found here - https://secure-appldnld.apple.com/F...177.20160129.QERFT/FinalCutProTrial10.2.3.dmg and my scores were about 20 seconds faster. That being said, I think it is a driver issue like you mentioned because people using this card have gotten scores as fast as 30 seconds.

If you find out a fix, please let me know.

This is only a hobby for me, and the 1070 I ordered will benefit me more in other things I do, but performance is still important to me and if it can be better without spending money, I'd obviously want that.
Click to expand...

My hunch is that when they switched from OpenCL calls to metal in FCPX, it broke. I use to get into the low teens with the card. Its taking about 4 times longer which stinks. Please let me know what you find tomorrow. If I find something, I'll let you know.
 
smounic said:
Fl0r!an: Do you know of a way to force it to use one card vs the other?
Click to expand...

My theory based on experience (which i posted earlier in thread) is you have to run the main window with viewers and timeline on the screen connected to the card you want to use. you can have browser on the weaker card. Its a theory, but it worked like that many many times (my job is fcpx) for over a year.

On the other hand, it was amd with integrated intel, which is a configuration present in macs. There are no macs with nvidia and amd, so your experience may vary.

As for Sierra performance, there has been performance drop going from El Capitan to Sierra in fcpx. Maybe future updates will fix that but for the time being 280x went in BruceX from 23s in Yosemite to 15s in El Capitan to 23s in Sierra. That is with the same fcpx version.

I run 980ti and it works fine but i didnt switch to Sierra yet. Only updated fcpx and the performance is same in fcpx 10.2.3 and 10.3
 
Last edited:
The new MBPs use a Radeon Pro, which I assume has a different call than a RX460/70/80, although they are both Polaris.

I know for a fact that the 280x (pretty old card) works well with FCPX. I did some research way back on a couple of forums, and everyone was praising the 280x VaporX Triforce from Sapphire.

I think if you have the space you can put in maybe a used 280x in a secondary PCIe slot and put another GPU you want to use daily in the primary slot.

I don't think you need to be connected to the 280x for FCPX to take advantage of it, so you can leave the cable on your nVidia GPU.

Also as mentioned, I think Apple moved from OpenCL to Metal in the latest FCPx (10.3 I believe). It might be in their whitepapers, if they ever released one.

FCPX is really really picky and you have to use a GPU that Apple has implementations for set in place -- for example, if they did move to Metal, nVidia people may be screwed to a certain extent.
 
izo1 said:
The new MBPs use a Radeon Pro, which I assume has a different call than a RX460/70/80, although they are both Polaris.

I know for a fact that the 280x (pretty old card) works well with FCPX. I did some research way back on a couple of forums, and everyone was praising the 280x VaporX Triforce from Sapphire.

I think if you have the space you can put in maybe a used 280x in a secondary PCIe slot and put another GPU you want to use daily in the primary slot.

I don't think you need to be connected to the 280x for FCPX to take advantage of it, so you can leave the cable on your nVidia GPU.

Also as mentioned, I think Apple moved from OpenCL to Metal in the latest FCPx (10.3 I believe). It might be in their whitepapers, if they ever released one.

FCPX is really really picky and you have to use a GPU that Apple has implementations for set in place -- for example, if they did move to Metal, nVidia people may be screwed to a certain extent.
Click to expand...

Im sorry but i must dissagree on many things here

The advice to get 280x is good. It is after all the same chip D700 that is in mac pro and its cheap now. Also for the time being all the more powerful AMD cards have many problems in osx but 280x is very easy to get working as long as you have the same port layout as reference card. I had 3 cards over the years, each from a different maker, as long as the ports are same, there was no problem even for dual screen. Indeed it is a better choice at this time than 460 for compatibility and good price. Nvidia is easy to make it working but its more expensive for the same amount of performance (my 980ti is actually slower than 280x).

RX460/70/80/PRO - same generation but do not get fooled, as with the 2xx generation, some are better some worse in terms of osx compatibility. I have been on hackintosh many years and the one most important thing is compatibility for system, power (sadly) comes as second. You need machine to work not spend more time on it repairing stuff etc. "Pro" is for the mobile computers, same generation, lower wattage, different board layout than desktop reference. That all there is to it. Peoples experience will tell what is the best computer part/gpu to use without the hassles, even in one generation of architecture.

The move from OpenCL to Metal comes on OSX system basis not FCPX. The performance is different with systems not with versions of fcpx.

Dont know what you mean picky, as far as the card works with no problems in the system, fcpx worked with it. Tried four different cards amd/nvidia/intel and all that is different is performance.

Lastly, why do you "think" its ok to have amd card just in computer and fcpx will use it. My experience says otherwise. If you have the main window on Intel GPU, fcpx didnt use the 280x i had running without any problems alongside the Intel with one of the two screens actually attached to it. Than i move the window and BruceX is telling me there is a hell lot of difference. I dont have the same setup now so i cant verify, but it always worked like that.
 
I have problem with 10.3 3D text rendering on 980Ti
once background render is done, 3D text is gone :D
can any of you replicate this issue?

tested on 10.3 and 10.3.1
switching back to 10.2
 
Maximus VIII Extreme
Maximus VIII Hero |  i7 6700K |  Graphics Card

I am just stating from personal experience. But if things work for you, great.

I have tried a GTX980 and a 280x on another Hackintosh and the 280x killed the 980 in terms of performance in FCPX on 10.2.

Maybe things are different now.

I also know if you have 2x280x's you get the most performance -- kind of how the circular Mac Pro works and FCPX is optimized for dual GPUs like the 280x.

FYI Metal (for GPU computation) is a replacement for OpenCL. All of Sierra's interface uses Metal now. I wouldn't be surprised of the latest FCPX uses Metal or it will in the future (I haven't looked into it).
 
Fl0r!an said:
I don't think Apple has moved FCPX to Metal yet, especially not exclusively. Even the Window Server still runs perfectly fine with OpenGL rendering.
Click to expand...

The strange thing is, OpenCL benchmarks are great. And even metal benchmarks look great. But FCPX is not using it now. Do you know of a way to trick FCPX into using a different card? My first thought was that maybe they did something special based on the system id (17,1 14,2 etc). But then I tested a Mac Pro 5,1 definition and it did not improve.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Copyright © 2010 - 2024 tonymacx86 LLC
Back
Top