Jump to content
J. Wallace

iMac Pro information

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, zoomer said:

 

Indeed.

 

Is this good or bad news ?


I'm expecting good! I was unable to replicate the iMac Pro-specific crashing as of their first 10.13.5 beta and the rest of the betas seemed to continue the trend. We found that the issue was driver related, so on the Mac side that means a OS update to fix.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

^Thanks !

 

So I don't need to fear any new issues with VW and my outdated nMac Pro w/o the "i" too.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks @zoomer for the excellent thoguths and explanations. Seems to all make sense. 

What I dont' understand is the 'turbo-speed' vs the quote speed (4.5 Ghz vs 3 in the 10 core, or 4.2 vs 3.2 in the 8 core). What does the turbo mean, and which one is more relevant? 

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks @JimW . I do use Renderworks, but probably mostly to present shadow studies, or in elevations etc as a white card model with hidden line rendering over the front of it, or something along those lines. These viewports usually take 1-2 minutes to render - so do you reckon that time could be increase by 10 vs 8 core, or is it too marginal to be relevant? 

Thanks for all your help everyone , I'll let you know how I go with what I get in the end 🙂 

Share this post


Link to post

The normal core speed is when all cores are working.

 

As not all work is multithreaded often some cores are not in use.

In this case a single (or a few) cores can run at even higher clock speeds.

Without exceeding specced temperature or power consumption.

That is the maximum Turbo Boost speed.

This is normally for a single core only while others are sleeping

(nowadays sometimes even 2 cores)

If more cores are active that speed is reduced step by step.

 

like you can see here in the tables :

https://marco.org/2013/11/26/new-mac-pro-cpus

Edited by zoomer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, markymarc said:

Thanks @Hans-Olav . The 3.2 Ghz you bought, that's the 8 core I assume? 

Yes it was the least expensive, except I choosed the larger graphics card

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just upgraded to 10.13.5 and I can no longer make VW2018 crash on my iMac Pro when using walkthrough or flyover in open GL. Until the upgrade, it was crashing often. very happy, now back to work.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I will add my two cents about my iMac Pro (8 core, Radeon Pro Vega 64) experience. I mostly do 3d design work and walk throughs in open GL. The video card makes open GL work much smoother and now that its not crashing anymore (hopefully) I'm very happy with the machine. Simple 2d work is only bit faster then my old 2012 27" iMac, but when my 2D work has many bitmaps there is a great improvement in speed. Since I keep multiple programs open, some running in the background while I work on VW, I believe the extra cores are helpful. If I'm creating an animation, I can jump to Mall or Word and I'm not aware at all the a rendering process is going on in the background. This was not the case in my old machine. If one wanted to optimize the VW experience on an iMac Pro, the 10 core machine has the highest single core speed. If you are doing a lot of long Renderworks rendreings or cinema 4d work, Mac my not be your best bet.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, markymarc said:

These viewports usually take 1-2 minutes to render - so do you reckon that time could be increase by 10 vs 8 core, or is it too marginal to be relevant? 


Too marginal in that case I would say.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/2/2018 at 7:38 AM, zoomer said:

The normal core speed is when all cores are working.

 

As not all work is multithreaded often some cores are not in use.

 In this case a single (or a few) cores can run at even higher clock speeds.

Without exceeding specced temperature or power consumption.

That is the maximum Turbo Boost speed.

This is normally for a single core only while others are sleeping

(nowadays sometimes even 2 cores)

If more cores are active that speed is reduced step by step.

 

like you can see here in the tables :

https://marco.org/2013/11/26/new-mac-pro-cpus

THansk @zoomer - that makes a lot of sense of these figures finally ! Thank you so much !

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Andrew Pollock said:

I will add my two cents about my iMac Pro (8 core, Radeon Pro Vega 64) experience. I mostly do 3d design work and walk throughs in open GL. The video card makes open GL work much smoother and now that its not crashing anymore (hopefully) I'm very happy with the machine. Simple 2d work is only bit faster then my old 2012 27" iMac, but when my 2D work has many bitmaps there is a great improvement in speed. Since I keep multiple programs open, some running in the background while I work on VW, I believe the extra cores are helpful. If I'm creating an animation, I can jump to Mall or Word and I'm not aware at all the a rendering process is going on in the background. This was not the case in my old machine. If one wanted to optimize the VW experience on an iMac Pro, the 10 core machine has the highest single core speed. If you are doing a lot of long Renderworks rendreings or cinema 4d work, Mac my not be your best bet.

Thanks @Andrew Pollock ! Great summary . Now I feel like I should go back and check what the exact specs were that I've been working with to date, so I can better compare 🙂 Cheers 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Confirmed that the 10.13.5 live macOS update fixes the crashing issue specific to iMac Pros.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 2/6/2018 at 1:23 PM, Jim Wilson said:

Here it is (sorted by CPU Cinebench score) handily beating my gaming rig "Ceres" even with an overclock and only being beaten by a 24core monster machine that costs over $14,000:

Screen Shot 2018-02-06 at 1.19.29 PM.png


My current Macbook Pro for comparison:

Screen Shot 2018-02-06 at 1.26.53 PM.png

The GPU scores lower than the dedicated GTX 970 gaming graphics card of course, since gaming cards are simply better at OpenGL overall for their price, but a score of 122 on the GPU in Cinebench is no slouch at all, as you could plainly see in the video comparison.

In this quick test render for another video I'm currently recording about Lit Fog:

 

Screen_Shot_2018-02-06_at_1_24.43_PM.png

 

My Macbook Pro took 9 minutes 58 seconds. The iMac Pro took 2 minutes 38 seconds.

Has any one run this Stained glass test on a new 2018 MacBook Pro? How long does it take for a preview to check lighting? I never sit and watch my Mac while rendering. Walk away time. However the killer for me is setting lights and waiting for previews. That is a time killer.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...