Multiple High End graphics cards

Does anyone know if the Mac Pro is able to use multiple Quadro FX 4500's or possibly a Quadro FX 4500 X2. And if this is not possible, would a Quadro FX 4500 in addition to one of the consumer cards work? I require at least 4 graphics outputs (2 to drive a walleye stereo wall, and 2 to use with desktop monitors) and would prefer to use the Quadros to the 7300's at least for the stereo wall and if possible I would like to get the same level of performance on the desktop monitors.
Thanks
macbook pro   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

Based on careful reading of the recently released development notes
<http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Conceptual/HWTechVideo/Articles/Video_implementation.html#//appleref/doc/uid/TP40003994> and
<http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Conceptual/HWtechPCI/Articles/pci_implementation.html#//appleref/doc/uid/TP40003937>,
it may be possible to install two ATI Radeon X1900 XT cards, one in slot 1, and one in slot 2 (also covering slot 3). The PCI bus would be set to x8 x8 x1 x8.
The configuration would meet all the cooling and power restrictions. There are auxiliary power connectors for both slots 1 and 2.
This would give you four displays (all could be up to 30") with independent resolution and rotation.
It is not a standard configuration, so you would order the Mac Pro with one ATI Radeon X1900 XT and order the second as an add-on
<http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/6.RSLID?mco= 220D662A&nplm=MA631Z%2FA>. Note where it says:
"System Requirements:
Mac Pro with available double-wide PCI Express slot or two standard slots". They wouldn't say that if it was only allowed in slot 1 (the only double-wide slot).
There would still be one empty slot, x8, with 36 watts available.
You might also be able to use two Nvidia Quadro FX 4500 boards if you could find a second board. That would leave 80 watts for the last slot. I don't think you get display rotation with Nvidia boards.

Similar Messages

  • Xserve and high end graphic cards?!

    anybody tried to put a new graphic card (like ati 850xt or similar with 256 memory) into a xserve??
    could it work? i want to use xserve as desktop machine with gb ram on photoshop... so i need as well a high end graphic card ...
    any suggestions?

    No, you can't do this. The Xserve will only take PCI video cards; high-end graphics cards all use the very high speed AGP interface. The best graphics card you can put in it is probably going to be an ATI Radeon 7000 or thereabouts.
    The Xserve is not designed as a desktop machine. My suggestion is you buy a PowerMac G5 instead

  • Does a high end graphic card really make a difference ? or is the CPU more important ?

    NVIDIA has the Quadro CX  (very expensive)
    http://www.nvidia.com/object/builtforadobepros.html
    They mainly talk about h264 encoding.
    Does it help as far as timeline editing ?
    Im shooting in HDV but final project is SD MPEG2 for DVD
    Or does a faster CPU work better.  Multiple Cores.
    Is it better to get a faster Quad Core Intel Core i7 Processor ?
    Intel® Core i7-940 Processor (2.93GHz) (Quad-Core)
    or a slower Processor speed but dual ?
    WS DUAL XEON E5504 2.0GHz, 8MB cache, 800 MHz, 4.8 GT/s QPI (Quad-Core)
    WS DUAL XEON E5520 2.26GHz, 8MB cache, 1066 MHz, 5.86 GT/s QPI (Quad-Core)  [+$385 ]
    What role is the graphics card really having.
    I have read some places that as long as you have a good card you don't have to waste money on the top end ones.
    Any thought would be helpful.
    Thanks:  Glenn

    IMO a Quadro CX is a waste of money, unless your editing life consists of only encoding to H264 and even then it may be a waste of money.
    You may be better off with more capable CPU's and a better disk setup.
    Have a look at all three topics linked to here:
    How to get the best from a PC? Some guides...
    Do read them carefully, including the responses, since there is some info on the performance of dual Xeons versus i7 that may help you decide.

  • Auxillary power supply for high-end graphics cards

    Dear All,
    I have an ATI Firepro card that needs 450W and of course the MacPro motherboard is not suited for the purpose. However there are a few auxillary power supplies advertised to supply extra power. Has anyone got any experience with using them?
    Is it safe to expand the power range of your motherboard?
    I'd really love to make use of this card (the FirePro V8750) as apparently it is the fastest for 3D graphics applications.
    Regards
    el

    I remember someone in macrumors installing a power booster in the lower optical bay, in order to power dual 4870s. I was trying to look for the thread, but couldn't find it
    I don't see a problem with using that to supply aux power, as long as it fits.
    Another option: You probably shouldn't though just cause I don't know the long term effects (if any), but you can get aux power from the lower optical bay molex... I can't say I recommend it, just because half of the people say its fine to do, while the other half says not to.
    I do know that people were using this option to run 4870s in crossfire; not sure how long it lasted though..
    I'm assuming you want to use this card under bootcamp correct?

  • Problems With 4K at 60fps & a High-End Graphics Card

    I'm having major problems editing footage shot at 3840x2160 @ 59.94. The video will play back fine initially, but after a few seconds, the video starts chugging along until I get less than 1fps. I have the same problem using adaptive resolution during playback set to 1/8.
    So, I would think that I might need to upgrade my hardware, but what is the bottleneck?
    Premiere Pro 2014.2 & AME 2014.2
    Windows 8.1
    Intel Core i5-4670 CPU @ 3.4 GHz
    16GB of RAM
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti (that's 2880 CUDA cores!)
    The footage was shot on a Panasonic HC-X1000 with MP4 selected as the output format.
    I have a 1 minute test file from that camera on my SSD. It's 59.94fps and shot using AVC at about 155 Mbps.
    Since Windows 8 doesn't come with any way to monitor the GPU usage, my sysadmin installed Geeks3d GPU Shark. It seems to work, as it was accurately able to detect GPU usage in external benchmarking tools. Maxed out at 99%.
    I moved Premiere's cache folder to my SSD to see if that had any affect. Mercury Playback Engine is definitely ON.
    When I try to playback the aforementioned 1 minute clip in Premiere, it:
    very few dropped frames, maxes out at around 29% of GPU usage, CPU virtually 100%
    plenty of dropped frames, GPU percentage starts decreasing, CPU virtually 100%
    around 1fps, GPU virtually 0%, CPU virtually 100%
    I didn't list the RAM, but it's nowhere near 100%, and goes up about a gig or so during playback, and it's not near the Memory ceiling of 10.9 GB that After Effects, PPro, AME, PS, and others share.
    Why does the GPU stop working when the number of frames dropped significantly increases? And why is it only using less than 30% of my GPU during playback while editing?
    With Mercury Playback Engine off, I noticed only a minor decrease in performace. The GPU was still used, but much less: maybe 10% or so.
    Also, why on earth does my encode with Mercury Playback Engine GPU Acceleration (Cuda) switched on encode with 100% CPU and 0% GPU? I'm trying to encode H.264 at the Match Source - High bitrate preset. AME + Mercury Playback Engine = 0% GPU usage?! There are no effects applied. No panning, scaling, video effects, nor audio effects. Literally, drag clip into new timeline (that matches clip settings), and encode using AME. What the hell is going on here.
    Can someone explain how the Mercury Playback engine is supposed to work, and why it doesn't seem to be leveraging my powerful GPU?
    Any recommendations for alternate GPU profiling tools, perhaps?
    I can ask my sysadmin to upgrade the CPU, but I'm not sure how much to go up.
    Note: I also tried bringing the footage into a sequence at 29.97fps, but it didn't help very much. I was hoping that reducing the playback framerate would help.

    There are no effects applied. No panning, scaling, video effects,
    That's why no GPU during export.  Encoding is a CPU only process.  The things you're not using are some of the very things processed on the GPU.  Add some and you may see different results.
    I would expect playback to be better with your hardware.  If you care to upload a clip for me to download, I can test it here.

  • Creative Cloud background service constantly uses high-performance graphics card on MacBook Pro

    On my MacBook Pro mid-2010, I recently noticed that the high-performance graphics card for some reason was constantly on. In MacBooks as of 2009, there are two graphics cards that can be used, one integrated, one PCIe. The integrated one is less powerful, but is used to preserve battery. The other one is enabled when there is a high demand for graphics power.
    I saw that when the Creative Cloud service (with this I mean the general software package that tracks for updates and syncs fonts and files) was loaded into the system, the MacBook automatically starts using this high-performance graphics card, even without any other software running, just freshly from boot. This, of course, drains battery and I don't think that much power is needed to run a background service. The only way to stop the high-performance graphics card from kicking in, is by terminating the complete Creative Cloud service, which is of course not very useful when you use the sync feature a lot.
    Is there a solution for this problem, or can you release an update of the software that addressess this issue?
    If I need to provide you with logs or other relevant information, please let me know.
    Thanks in advance, it's kind of annoying as it is now.
    Ruben Delil

    Same here. Macbook Retina 15", purchased earlier this year.
    Nice (and free) utility to monitor GPU-usage is:
    gfxCardStatus from http://gfx.io/
    Helped me to notice that it's better to quit Photoshop if not using it because it still uses the nVidia GPU if Photoshop is not even the active application (eg. running in the background).
    But still, sometimes after closing Photoshop, gfxCardStatus says that nVidia GPU is in use for process 'Creative Cloud'.
    I'm mostly running on battery and nVidia GPU consumes much, much more battery than the integrated, Intel HD Graphics 4000 so this is a big issue for me.

  • Single or double wide/high for graphic cards?

    High everyone,
    What is better in regards to graphic cards for MacPro 2006 (model 1.1). Double or single wide/high? I am about to purchase an Nvidia 8800GT and don't know if I should choose the "flatter" or "thicker" one. The "thicker" one would obviously take up two spaces in the 1st PCI-E slot and the "thinner" one would not. They both have the double DVI ports I was looking for. Is there a difference in performance?
    Rio

    Hi hatter,
    I had the ATI 5770 but seemingly it did not support Quartz Extreme (whatever that is) and I failed to notice that it did not provide two DVI ports (I don't like the mini port) and it only "officially supports" Snow Leopard. I returned it to Apple.
    I understand where you are coming from regadring the Nvidia 8800 GT card choices via ebay. According to their description, some are listed as New items. Their description also mentions that they work for Tiger and up. Are you suggesting that the sellers are giving false info and that the cards may all be "flashed"? I was about to "click" the "Buy Now" button on one of the items but decided to seek last minute advice via this forum. Now I'm unsure as to what to do...
    You also mention that Apple never made "double wide" 8800 GT. That means that the "flatter" 8800 GT card should work fine in my MacPro?
    PS: What is the difference between a single and double wide graphics card?
    If I may bring some humour to the situation, I feel I'm kind of "stuck" between a "rock" and a "hard place", i.e., ATI 5770 that doesn't seem to suit some Appps in my MacPro and which Nvidia 8800 GT "could" work for me?!?
    I'll probably need to take a "risk" with some choice of cards within a day or two.
    Anyway, thanks for your input The hatter.
    Rio

  • Need opinions on a VERY low end power supply handling a low end graphics card

    Greetings.
    I have acquired my father's old(old) HP Slimline S3400F and have intentions of turning it into a media computer.
    Problem : Due to the tiny form factor, it has an abysmal 160watt PSU.
    Inquiry : I know that most manufacturers FAR overstate the actual required wattage on graphics cards, as such, I am looking at a fanless GT 610 to put in it. Do you think since all it will be doing is serving up video, the PSU will be able to handle it?
    (Full specs can be found easily on Google).
    If you like my post, or solution to your issue/question, go ahead and click on the little star by my name and/or accept the post as the Solution. It makes me happy.
    I'm NOT an employee of Best Buy, or Geek Squad, though I did work as an Agent for a year 5 years ago. None of my posts are to be taken as the official stance that Best Buy will take on your situation. My advice is just that, advice.
    Unfortunately, that's the bad luck of any electronic, there's going to be bad Apples... wait that's a horrible pun.

    Oh, I will be doing 1080P.
    My plan has slightly shifted to transplanting the HP's parts into a super cheap ATX case with a regular PSU. That's the going plan for now, at least.
    If you like my post, or solution to your issue/question, go ahead and click on the little star by my name and/or accept the post as the Solution. It makes me happy.
    I'm NOT an employee of Best Buy, or Geek Squad, though I did work as an Agent for a year 5 years ago. None of my posts are to be taken as the official stance that Best Buy will take on your situation. My advice is just that, advice.
    Unfortunately, that's the bad luck of any electronic, there's going to be bad Apples... wait that's a horrible pun.

  • Need new low-end graphics card for Power Mac G5 (PowerPC 970)

    My Power Mac G5 (PowerPC 970) has recently died I believe due to a bad
    ATI RADEON X800 XT MAC EDITION video card.
    Reason for thinking its the card, is that the machine was performing its intended tasks for several days even though the monitor was snow.
    Having trouble determining a low-end replacement. (I no longer need the enhanced features of the RADEON X800 for this machine.
    Much appreciated if someone could suggest a product appropriate for PowerPC 970.
    Thanks!

    I also ran into this issue with my dual G5. When I bought it, I didn't get wireless because it was a dedicated desktop on the network, but I'm upgrading and giving it to the kids to use in a room without wired network. Now that wireless would be really nice and it looks like the official solution is:
    "Apple Wireless Upgrade Kit for Power Mac G5 Dual or Power Mac G5 Quad MA252G/A"
    which is really expensive and difficult to install. But the weird thing is that I do have bluetooth. I wonder if there's just some little doodad I need to connect to get wireless going too, but I can't find any info on the card, and it looks like it's buried on the motherboard behind all the cooling stuff. I'll probably just spring for one of the USB solutions.

  • Graphics Card = More Pixels????

    Hi there,
    Does the graphics cars affect the pixels in the screen? By this i mean, if i get a higher graphics card, will the picture on the screen be clearer, and less pixellated?
    Cheers
    23rd Child

    A higher-end graphics card means your mac's processor will be free up to do what it does basically, processing the applications running instead of also "minding" what is to display on the screen, this is "lay man" explaining... especially if you have graphics-intensive program running like 3D software or games.
    Example if you have a "low-end" or basic graphics card, and if you have multiple apps running, and when you say for example run iTunes and have the Visualizer turn on, you will notice the graphics on the Visualizer will not run as smooth, as when ONLY iTunes is running; But if you have a "higher end" graphics card with more VRam, that may not be the case.
    Cheers

  • My next iMac-- which graphics card; which display size?

    Hi all,
    I'd like some advice in choosing my next iMac, specifically regarding the graphics card and the display size.
    Graphics Card:
    I'm not a gamer nor am I doing any 3D animation. Is there any other reason to upgrade the graphics card? I DO want the best possible video playback (QT movies), but I don't know if the graphics card has any bearing on video playback quality.
    Display size:
    Aside from the obvious differences in resolution, do any of the three displays sizes (17,20,24) have any history of being better or more reliable?
    Thanks in advance for any tips

    Your needs will better dictate which model is best.
    Video playback of QuickTine movies will not be affected by upgrading to the 24" with the nVidia chip.
    No 3D gaming or animation means no need for a higher end graphics card. In my case, the x1600 ATi in the original Core Duo 20" is more than sufficient for everything I've thrown at it so far including full resolution "Call of Duty".
    For your use, you may not need the extra VRAM but I personally would bump it up to 256MB though. Adding an external monitor will split the total VRAM between the two monitors and with Apple continually moving a lot of Mac OS X's graphical features to the GPU, the extra memory may be a blessing.
    Display Size:
    I believe that reliability between the three models is pretty much the same.
    The advantage to the 24" is, of course, the extra screen real estate and resolution. However The price difference between the 20" and 24" could allow you to go with the 20" model and add an external LCD for a dual screen setup (if space permits).
    Weigh your needs - now and the immediate future - and then look at both models in person if possible.

  • I have a HP Pavilion a6603w. I want to upgrade power supply to run powerful graphic card. Suggest

    I have a HP pavilion a6603w desktop model number FK555AA-ABA a6603w.  I have a low to mid level graphics card, which is the most that my power supply will handle. 
    I want to get a stronger power supply to run a high end graphics card with a self cooling fan.  Can anyone suggest an excellent, reliable power supply brand and model that will fit into my desktop case with minimum fuss?  I am not tech savy but I have replaced my video card and hard drives with no problem. 
    Thanks,
    Lugnut 

    lugnut1204 wrote: I have a HP pavilion a6603w desktop model number FK555AA-ABA a6603w.  I have a low to mid level graphics card, which is the most that my power supply will handle. I want to get a stronger power supply to run a high end graphics card with a self cooling fan.  Can anyone suggest an excellent, reliable power supply brand and model that will fit into my desktop case with minimum fuss?  I am not tech savy but I have replaced my video card and hard drives with no problem.  Thanks, Lugnut 
    Hello lugnut1204, I checked the specifications for your system and is appears the system shipped with a 250 power supply. The dimensions for this power supply are 5 15/16 inches wide, 5.5 inches long, and 3 3/8 inches tall. Since your system is a MicroATX version, you would be slightly limited to a power supply of the same size as the original power supply.
    Here  is a link to Newegg where a Corsair 600 watt power supply can be found with almost the exact same physical size as you original 250 watt version. The Corsair power supply dimensions are 5.9 inches wide, 5.5 inches long, and 3.4 inches tall.
    If you get a power supply too long, it may interfer with the back of the CD\DVD drives.
    You would need to locate a video card that you wanted and make sure the power supply requirements were less than the 600 watt Corsair model. Most of the mid to higher end cards require at leaset a 400 to 500 watt or greater power supply.
    Please click the White Kudos star on the left, to say thanks.
    Please mark Accept As Solution if it solves your problem.

  • Which apps most affected by graphics card?

    Trying to understand which non-game apps are likely to perform better with a high end graphics card vs my stock FX5200.
    The description of the x800 XT says it's good for content creation apps "such as" Motion, Modo, and Maya.
    Does that mean any 3D/animation app, or....how can I tell which other apps would benefit from it?
    For example, what about LiveType, Final Cut Pro, and Cinema 4D?

    If you are going to buy and use a program, like Aperture, the hardware requirements in Tech Specs are helpful, and look for "recommended" and you want to totally avoid minimum requirements.
    Software sells hardware. It always has. It might be needing 16GB of memory, or 8-cores, or the latest SATA II support.... or video card option.
    Sometimes you do need to find a system to check out in the store or somewhere (lease to buy?) to see if it will run - but it is in asking questions as you are and researching, and talking to others in your chosen field, what they use and recommend - and why.

  • Does an upgraded graphics card help stability within FCP?

    I have been having some issues, working on a documentary about two hours long shot on Sony EX-1. The timeline contains a mix of footage (24 1080p, 30 1080p, 24 720p, 30 720p) all rendered to 30fps ProRes 422. No effects at this point, mostly just the transcoding during render.
    It crashed when I export through compressor to DVD, and will not render the whole project without crashing. Sometimes, when I select just a portion of the project to render, within the main timeline, once it is done renedering that section, it looses the rest of the render for the entire project.
    All this points me to some hardware issues, probably ram, but i have been advised to purchase a high end graphics card to carry the burden of exporting. (currently using the stock ATI Radeon HD 2600) As far as I have known, a graphics card holds no bearing on this process. I know a new graphics card helps a lot in Motion, AE and such, but I am only concerned about editing in FCP at this point.
    Thanks for any thoughts you may have.

    Are you mixing formats and resolutions in the timeline? If so, you might consider converting all the the same format before editing.
    Try exporting a selfcontained quicktime and then bringing that quicktime into compressor.
    Oh yeah, make sure you don't have any cmyk graphics.
    Message was edited by: Michael Grenadier

  • HP Pavilion Elite h8-1380t is a GTX970 Graphics Card Compatible?

    I need a graphics card that will allow acceleration in adobe illustrator. I'm just not sure what is compatible with this PC but I am looking at a GTX970 . I am a freelance designer and illustrator hangs and large files take forever to export so I need to upgrade to a better video card and I am going to install 8 more gbs of ram. Hopefully this helps the illustrator lag. I'm not a computer harware guru lol. Here are my specs:  Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3820 CPU @ 3.60GHz Manufacturer Intel Speed 3.6 GHz Number of Cores 4 CPU ID BFEBFBFF000206D7 Family 06 Model 2D Stepping 7 Revision   Video Card AMD Radeon HD 7700 Series Manufacturer ATI Chipset AMD Radeon HD 7700 Series Dedicated Memory 2.0 GB Total Memory 4.0 GB Pixel Shader Version 5.0 Vertex Shader Version 5.0 Hardware T & L Yes Vendor ID 1002 Device ID 683D Plug and Play ID VEN_1002&DEV_683D&SUBSYS_6886103C&REV_00 Driver Version 15.200.1046.0 Memory 24 GB Operating System Microsoft Windows 8.1 Professional Edition (build 9600), 64-bit Service Pack 0 Size 64 Bit Edition   Version 6.3.9600 Locale 0409 BIOS Ver: PIT_714.rom vPIT7.14 Version AMI 7.14 Manufacturer AMI 

    OK.
    It is indeed upgradeable. Ensure that you check all prospective video card system requirements to see if they require that you upgrade the PSU. Check the specs for your PC to see how many Watts (RMS) the PSU delivers. I just checked. It has only 300 Watts. It would be better  to upgrade to one with a bit more grunt (@450 Watts or better) if your plan is to upgrade to a video card that has some real power.
    Most lower end PC's do not have PSUs  that come equipped with PCIe six and eight pin power connectors. They are required for the mainstream and higher end graphics cards.
    The video card you asked about:
    Requirements
    Minimum of a 350 Watt power supply.
    (Minimum recommended power supply with +12 Volt current rating of 18 Amps.)
    Total Power Draw : 49 Watts
    Some versions of the video card, depending on the installed vRAM require more power.
    ****Please click on Accept As Solution if a suggestion solves your problem. It helps others facing the same problem to find a solution easily****
    2015 Microsoft MVP - Windows Experience Consumer

Maybe you are looking for