✎ Latest Free FCPX Effects
Bretwilliams's Avatar
Bretwilliams's Avatar
Karsten Schlüter's Avatar
Karsten Schlüter
FCPX.guru's Avatar
Rinaldo Doon's Avatar
Rinaldo Doon
Jason Van Patten replied to the topic 'Promise RAID... INSIDE the new Mac Pro...' in the forum. 5 months ago

FCPX.guru wrote:

Slow? 4K multicams in a RAID is not slow. And it's quiet. I do voice-overs while only 4 feet from it and it's dead quiet.]/quote]

It's not dead quiet; you just may not be able to hear them. I can hear any spinner in the same room with me no matter how far it is from me. There's just simply no way to make them quiet. And they are slow, in comparison to the 10GB/sec reads, 9GB/sec writes (read that carefully :-)) that I'm getting from NVMe hardware RAID. You'll never get that from your spinners.

We just have a different perspective of what's considered quiet, and what's considered fast. If spinners work for you, cool. I think Promise would go a long way by offering empty units of their products so people aren't forced to pay for drives they may not want.


Jason Van Patten replied to the topic 'Promise RAID... INSIDE the new Mac Pro...' in the forum. 5 months ago

FCPX.guru wrote:

How is the 8TB HHD useless? I have a Promise external RAID (Thunderbolt) full of spinning disc drives, I edit H.264 4K multicams with no issues.


Did I mention: slow?

If they work for you, cool. I think we're at an age where spinners aren't really a thing for workstations/desktops any longer. SSDs and NVMes are pretty big and silly fast in a lot of cases. Spinners belong in file servers.

I stick by my initial post in that I wish they'd sell a drive-less unit. But they won't because they like to have an excuse to vastly mark up their products way up.

Jason Van Patten replied to the topic 'Promise RAID... INSIDE the new Mac Pro...' in the forum. 5 months ago

Meh. I bought the J2I, but only because I wanted the rack and the cable for power/data. I'm not keen on being forced to also pay for a useless 8TB spinner that I'll never use. Instead, I put 2 2TB SSDs in, and striped them into a 4TB volume.

Definitely would have preferred an empty unit.

arc wrote:

I am well are that the Xeon CPUs do not have Intel's Quick Sync. That is why I stated I don't know about the T2 chip.

OK, understood. I don't believe the T2 chip is at play here at all. As far as I can tell, the encode/decode performance is due to the GPU hardware. And unfortunately the Vega II GPU has an older encoder and decoder that isn't nearly as capable as what's available on Team Green. They work, but slowly unlike NVidia's which go through h.264 and h.265 like butter.

The encoder that'll come with the new W5700X MPX module (whenever...) should be a lot faster.
Having said that the video below might be of some interest.

I saw that when he launched it; his presentation style grates on me though. Anyway, I don't have the stuttering during the playback that he has.

arc wrote:

I don't know about the T2 chip but I know Intel's Quick Sync

Unfortunately, Intel's QuickSync isn't applicable at all here. The Mac Pro has a Xeon chip in it, and those don't have iGPUs incorporated in them. Therefore: no QuickSync.

joema wrote:

IF the issue is encoding performance, separate this from rendering. Duplicate the timeline as a snapshot, open that, strip all effects with Edit>Remove Effects, then export to 4K H.264 using Share>Master File>Settings>Format:Computer, Video Codec: H.264 Faster Encode, Resolution: 4k. Then repeat the same test, exporting from FCPX to 8-bit HEVC.

My tests had no rendering to be done; no effects or anything whatsoever. It was literally taking a 4K/59.94 h.264 file and writing a new, identical copy of that same h.264 file. Then also transcoding it to h.265. With hardware encoding, that should have been faster than it was.

I did follow your suggestion after doubling the length of the footage (literally using 2 copies of the same clip) to ten minutes. Sure enough: it took about 10 minutes to write the h.264 file and quite a bit longer to do the h.265 file (somewhere around 13-15 minutes). FPCX doesn't allow me to create "Master File" with h.265, so I had to create a Compressor output instead.

Based on what I'm seeing, it doesn't matter which encoder and setting I choose (Faster/Slower, h.264/h.265). It appears as though there's no access to the AMD hardware encoder with FCPX; at least not with the Vega II GPUs.

Heya gang -

I'm a bit ignorant of driving FCPX (ok, ok ... a LOT ignorant) and I'm hoping I'm just doing something wrong or misunderstanding something. Is FCPX supposed to be able to make use of the hardware h.264/h.265 encoders on the AMD Vega II GPU? I thought it was supposed to, but I might be completely mistaken. I know it will use Intel's QuickSync on the laptops and other Macs that don't have Xeons. But what about the AMD hardware? Can it use that as well? Or is it just using the hardware for other rendering tasks?

My inputs and outputs are both 4K h.264 (or h.265 for output). I know that h.264 isn't the best of CODECs to edit in, but it's what my software produces. So I have to make the best of it. I did some simple re-encoding with my new Pro today, using a 5 minute 4K/59.94 h.264. Outputting to both h.264 or h.265 was basically real time; IOW around 5 minutes. That's pretty good, but I was sorta hoping for it to be a bit quicker; hardware encoding should have halved that time, give or take.

Am I barking up the wrong tree here?

For the record, hardware:

  • Mac Pro 7,1 w/16-core Xeon
  • 96GB RAM
  • 1TB system drive (not using that for editing)
  • AMD Vega II GPU
  • 8TB of an NVMe RAID01 volume spread across 2 HighPoint PCI-E cards (this is the drive I use)

The source footage was a 5 minute 75Mbit/sec h.264 file, 4K/59.94
Output 1: 30Mbit/sec h.264 file, 4K/59.94
Output 2: 25Mbit/sec h.265 file, 4K/59.94



Jason Van Patten has a new avatar. 6 years ago
Jason Van Patten