PPro Performance Variance on Mac Pro 2013: CC Version 7.0 vs. Version 8.0

Hi,
I've been editing on a late 2013 Mac Pro model with Yosemite (see system specs in the JPEG below). I have really mixed results editing with the most up to date version of Premiere Pro CC. Playback in a timeline lags significantly with 4K and standard HD 1080p media and the software crashes more often than I would like. I have tried a few things like checking the permissions status of varying media and project folders. I do not use GPU-based rendering as that has been problematic, creating pink lines etc. in the resulting previews and exports. Even after previews are rendered for a timeline, playback still lags regardless of media resolution.
In general, as a Premiere project becomes more complex, crashes become more frequent and playback lags even more. Dynamic Linking with AE causes so many crashes that is basically not functional. The only plug-ins I'm using are Magic Bullet and FilmConvert.
I'm not a huge fan of the shift in workflow/edit logic in FCP X, and want to avoid making that transition if I can. In an attempt to test the varied performance of Premiere, I have reverted to a previous version, CC 7.0. MY initial testing shows that this version renders previews more quickly (still without GPU assistance) and playback seems to lag less. Of course I imported an XML from a project originating in V. 8.0 and there are a few translation issues mostly related to warp stabilizing and color correction, which can be fixed if the overall performance boost is greater.
I have read a handful of forums of users experiencing similar or even more drastic difficulty running Premiere on a new MacPro platform. I have explored some of the troubleshoots suggested, but no major changes in performance. It seems to be hit or miss in terms of Premiere/MacPros playing well together. Strange that no one factor can seem to be pinpointed.
Has anyone else been fiddling with this option of using a previous version of Premiere on a Mac Pro? Any success? Other suggestions to improve performance in the latest version?
Thanks!

I just had an interesting thought.
I use the method of dragging a clip to the "new item" button to create a matching sequence of my majority media type for a project. Have there been any bugs or issues reported with this technique on the latest version of Premiere Pro CC? This is a possibility I haven't yet explored in terms of the issues I am experiencing with playback. When this thought dawned on me today, I took a look at my sequence settings in a troublesome clip, and am not sure it quite matches up. In this example, details in screenshot below, my majority footage was shot on a Canon XA20. The resulting sequence is using at ARRI Cinema editing mode. That seems to be a mis-match, but maybe not? Thoughts? Suggestions? Helpful resources about "editing modes" and optimization for playback? Any help appreciated. Thanks!

Similar Messages

New Mac Pro 2013 late version USB 3.0 hub issue during boot

Hi all, I just purchased a new Mac Pro 8 core with 32GB of ram and 1 TB drive. When I connect a USB powered 3.0 hub and turn on my Mac Pro, it gets hung on while booting. (Gray screen before the Apple logo appears on boot). If I pull the USB 3.0 hub out, the Mac Pro proceeds to boot normally. Once I am fully booted on my Mac Pro and I plug the USB 3.0 hub back in, everything seems to work fine. I have an enclosure that works off of lightening connector and the enclosure has a USB 3.0 hub onboard. I plug the USB 3.0 hub in that device and every thing seems to boot up fine on the Mac Pro. Any idea why when I plug in the USB 3.0 directly why the Mac Pro ha issues booting up?
Thanks in Advance.

The Driver for the Hub does not get loaded until late in the Boot-up process.
It is common not to be able to use devices on a Hub during boot-up, as they will not be ready (and therefore not available) until the Login screen appears.
For devices you need during boot-up, attach directly to a built-in USB port on the chassis, not on a display or any other Hub.
If your issue is only that the device interferes with Booting in general, ask the guys at OWC. They select their stocked items for trouble-free, and train their support people to resolve remaining problems quickly. If there is a problem, they will help you get is fixed quickly -- often providing an advanced exchange if that seems appropriate.

Mac Pro 2013 and Premiere Pro - The performance issue that Adobe don't want us talking about!

In May 2014 I bought a 2013 Mac Pro to help my business with the ever increasing demands video editing was placing on our systems. I was so excited to see how the 12GB of power the AMD D700s would affect my workflow and ability to edit footage seamlessly without delays to the creative process.
However, to my dismay pretty much since starting to work with the system I found that there was an issue with the GPUs, Mac OS and Adobe’s applications. It was first reported by many other users in early 2014 and as yet know one from Adobe has really commented officially on the issue.
Sadly it appears to still be present today and speaking with an Adobe rep confirmed this. Trouble is no one is doing anything about it. My hope is that, if you have watched this video and are experiencing the same issues then please let’s get the comments going, share and like the video and let’s get Adobe, Apple and AMD to pick up this with immediate haste! Thank you.
Below is a video of the problem I have been experiencing. It's a little long but I wanted to give a good account of the problem we are seeing so that someone can help! PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE help!
Mac Pro 2013 and Premiere Pro GPU Issue - YouTube
Thank you for your time and I'd love someone to help!

Thanks for responding! It's such a pain and I have been chatting to one of Adobe's senior consultants about this and still none the wiser. I have sent my machine off to the retailer as it was still under warranty. Nothing wrong with GPU apparently which is a relief although I kinda wish it had been that as it would have been an easier fix. Adobe told me that working with H.264 is totally possible but if you have a complex sequence with multicam and nested video with effects applied then it will seriously hinder performance. Sadly transcoding to ProRes doesn't seem to help either and they suggested not adding any effects to the nested clips, flattening out the multi cams etc and this has improved things a bit. Sent a sequence to SpeedGrade the other day though and the machine had a fit. FCPX though seems to be working great and has a few advantages over Premiere so I may be making a switch for this type of work until Adobe can sort out this issue. I still feel that the application isn't fully making the most of the GPUs. In fact, I found out that multicam is actually all still on the CPU and that they are trying to implement GPU handling of multicam soon.

Why mac pro 2013 not supporting illustrator GPU rendering

Here, all nvidia cards supporting this:
http://helpx.adobe.com/illustrator/kb/gpu-performance-preview-improvements.html
now I'm thinking, that buying the new mac pro 2013 maybe wasn't the best idea... Apple put in AMD GPu's, that is fine by me, but come on, give us some more support for them! Normal windows PC (for 800€) with nvidia GPU is faster at rendering in Illustrator, than my workstation mac (3500+€)! Really? O.o
And story doesn't end here. I was reading one article about GPU usage in this new mac pro and then I tested it myself. Only one GPU is used and the other is barely touched! And this goes for Maya, photoshop, illustrator and other adobe programs. I was shocked, that I discovered I have one GPU to warm up my room and only one actually doing all the work.
Ok I understand, that also software developers needs to support stuff and write their software to actually use GPU's, but adobe creative suite is one of examples, where software is actually capable of using GPU via openCL and in some cases even CUDA from nvidia.
And there is one more thing: new mac pro, has 2 identical AMD GPU's inside, which can work in crossfire configuration under windows in bootcamp, but not in OS X. Sometimes I even play some games on my mac and sometimes I'm testing them (I'm artist, but I also like to develop and test some games in my free time) and it's kinda a shame, that I can run games with better performance under windows in bootcamp.
When I bought this computer I thought this is going to rock and sweep up with all my previous machines. Well in practice it is much of unused potential and great room warmer. It's kinda sad, that on my girlfriend's PC I can play games with better frames and details on GF 660GTX than on my mac pro... I know I know, mac's aren't for gaming, but hey, sometimes it is good to get my mind on rest and blow up some enemies!
I'm not saying mac pro isn't great product, which is (very great). But support to use all computer capabilities is very limited and Apple should kick developers in their back side and push them to start developing things to use GPU's more.
I'm also not expecting Apple to jump on their feet and fix problems overnight. No, just start thinking of adding more support and things that would make our computers much more used and not only good decoration on desk. First would be a good steep adding crossfire support to OS X. That might even help at rendering some 3D scenes?
Next step would probably be better cooperation with software developers, like Adobe , Autodesk,... If adobe made good support for GPU rendering in Illustrator, aim that we get that support soon as well. I'm sometimes having a lot of paths and objects and rendering goes pretty slow then.
I'm also thinking about that AMD choice Apple made wasn't so good when you see that Nvidia puts much more effort into supporting more and more stuff, while AMD is sitting idle not even updating their drivers anymore.
Oh and one more thing: Can we please, please, please, please, preeeeeetty please get 10-bit output support on OS X? It's kinda sad, having good mac workstation with 10-bit capable monitor (dell UP2414Q) and no support for it, while other PC workstations all support it... Photoshop is working much better on OS X and here I have much better integration and everything and I really love working in Photoshop running on OS X, but some basic things are missing and I'm really asking myself sometimes: was that good decision? Photoshop was first written for macs and in 2014 there is much better support for adobe software on windows than on OS X. Where went wrong?
Don't take me wrong and think I'm just ranting here without any good reason, but think: buying very expensive computer that is supposed to make creative work easy and painless is actually just on paper. In reality computer potential is pretty much unused and that makes me thinking if I would be much better buying iMac instead of mac pro...
TL;DR: I wish for some more support from Apple for their new expensive mac pro's 2013. They are great piece of equipment, but equivalent PC's running windows are surpassing them in this department, specially when GPU's are involved. Now I would like to point this out to Apple, so I don't know where to write so they will read so I first wrote that here. I hope someone from Apple reads this and give us some feedback on those missing things or maybe I get direction where to write to Apple so I get maybe some response from them(?):
-not enough GPU support for creative software (adobe suite, autodesk,...) - nvidia + windows offering much more for less money?
-no crossfire support on OS X. Any particular reason for that?
-no 10-bit support for 10-bit displays. Why not? Hardware is capable, why software isn't?
-lack of openCL software out there. Apple isn't doing much to get more support or developers just too lazy to put more effort into this? GPGPU isn't the future as some companies are trying to convince us?

Grant Bennet-Alder wrote:
All displays are supported by one GPU -- the display GPU. The second GPU is reserved for un-interrupted GPU computing and has no Display output Hardware.
Anandtech has a discussion of this in his review of the late 2013 Mac Pro.
Under OS X the situation is a bit more complicated. There is no system-wide CrossFire X equivalent that will automatically split up rendering tasks across both GPUs.
By default, one GPU is setup for display duties while the other is used exclusively for GPU compute workloads. GPUs are notoriously bad at context switching, which can severely limit compute performance if the GPU also has to deal with the rendering workloads associated with display in a modern OS. NVIDIA sought to address a similar problem with their Maximus technology, combining Quadro and Tesla cards into a single system for display and compute.
from section 9:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7603/mac-pro-review-late-2013/9
Another problem here: on windows bootcamp crossfire IS working, but not in OS X. As I wrote, sometimes it would be better to get more rendering power than computing power (actually at current state of GPU computing software, computing GPU isn't working very much if at all). It would be nice to have an option to switch on and off crossfire so we could use more rendering power when needed.
Also not all people are doing video rendering on their computers. What about 3D modelling and 2D work in photosohp? And maybe people like me are occasionally wish to play some games on their mac?
You linked me GPU usage from one program (probably adobe after effects or premiere pro or apple final cut X?), that is probably one of the only pieces of software that actually uses both GPU's under OS X. I made same experiment with software I use and I even tested some software I don't use but it is advertised it is "optimized" for mac pro like pixelmator.
And guess what? Second GPU is 99% time idle. Even when some stuff is using openCL in Photoshop, stuff is still computed on rendering GPU and not on computing one, which makes computing GPU just a good room warmer as I wrote before. Wouldn't be better to at least use second GPU for something than heating air?

Best Mac Pro (2013) configuration for photo editing/processing?

Hi all,
I couldn't find a reliable answer to this in my searching here or on google, hence I'm posting it here.
I'm going to buy and upgrade to the new mac pro when it's announced this month (Dec 2013). My primary use will be photo processing in photoshop.
Configuring it with 64gb RAM is the no-brainer part. And probably a 512gb or 1TB flash drive too.
The bit I'm unsure about is whether to opt for the 6 core processor option over the quad core? For photo editing (adding layers, filters, brushing in, multiple files open at times, running batch edits etc), does anyone have an opinion on whether the performance increase (if there is in fact any increase for photo work?) of the 6 core 3.5ghz would justify paying the extra AU$1300 difference over the quad core 3.7ghz option?
And from my earlier research paying the huge prices for 8 or 12 cores would simply be a waste for photo processing.
Thanks for the advice...

Mozzzaaa
I have the exact same requirements, here are my findings based on some observations from Activity Monitor and research based on how the hardware works.
Photoshop does not utilize multiple cores well for many standard editing ativities - therefore one core will be busy while the rest remain idle, however I have noticed over time that upgrades to Photoshop seem to take more advantage of multiple cores as Adobe updates the code. For example, appling filters utilize all of the cores while the filters are computing changes (smart sharpen for example). Try running CPU monitoring in Activity Monitor (double click the CPU graph to display all cores).
Lightroom utilizes all of the cores for Import, export and other activities that process multiple files. Being more modern code, it beter utilizes muti cores.
Keep in mind that each core handles two code threads, therefore a four core system is capable of processing 8 "streams" of code, the 6 core can manage 12 threads, etc.
Here is a screen shot of Mac Book Pro running PS CC Smart Sharpen:
All the new Mac Pro run at 3.9Hz Turbo Boost - they are all the same in that respect. This means that when the processers are not hot, at least one core will run at 3.9Hz - therefore on a relativly idle machine (just editing in PS for example) you would likley be running at 3.9Hz on all the Mac Pro 2013.
There are also the GPUs to consider. Apple as usual has not made enough information available to easly determine the cost benefits of the more powerful GPUs and I don't know if PS would utiliize the AMD GPUs well now, or perhaps better utilize them for the future. Perhaps someone could comment on that. Here is an interesting article: http://architosh.com/2013/10/the-mac-pro-so-whats-a-d300-d500-and-d700-anyway-we -have-answers/
Clearly the D500 that is standard with the 6 core seems a major bump over the 4 core D300 (therefore the costs of the 6 core reflect that). I don't know how much the D700 would cost - it would be helpful if this were published so I could consider my order.
There are two GPU in the new Mac Pros - but the purpose of the second one is not toally clear (thanks again to Apples's communication). It likley will be utilized for all sorts of things that don't really exist now and FCP X is scheduled for a new release better utilize the GPU for video (as nwaphoto mentioned video processing will be a major use of this equipment).
I was interested in your comment regarding 64 Meg ram. Yes that would be a hudge boost to PS performance, but would it be better to purchase from Apple or wait for OWC who offer RAM at major discounts over Apple. Once again, no info yet that I am aware of.
I believe the flash drive is upgradable but rumor has it that it uses a proprietary connecter. Makes me want to go with the largest size but once again OWC might be the way to go for an upgrade in a year or two.
In the past, the 6 core 2012 Mac Pro's were somewhat of a sweat spot in terms of horsepower vs cost. I will be considering that in my decession to upgrade. So I am considering a 6 core, will check out the Ram and Flash diIsk based on price - which is the infor I don't have. If you have anything please post
Thanks

Mac Pro (2013) with Mavericks and Mac Office Excel

Using MAC Excel VBA, and obviously with my personally written Excel VBA application, I have discovered that
in a multi-Workbook Excel app, I am unable to "Open" additional Workbooks (xlsm-type) successfully
from any Workbook OTHER THAN with the very first Workbook opened in the app. In other words, if my app needs
2 or more Workbooks opened at any one time, only the 1st Workbook opened can "open" any other workbooks
successfully.
If the 2nd or any other Workbook in my app tries to execute an "open workbook" procedure of its own, no Err is thrown
and no indication is given that its "open Workbook" statement did not work, but the program/routine just continues as if
nothing was wrong. Additionally, all statements pertaining to the "not-opened" Workbook don't do a thing also
(i.e., .Clear, .ClearContents, .Range, .Copy, etc. don't work and don't throw errors).
On the other hand, when I restructure my Excel application such that the very first opened Workbook also "opens"
all the other Workbooks needed in my entire application, then my Excel application works great, even when I call
other subroutines that don't include "open workbook" statements but do include opject references and database
statements for whichever already-opened Workbook it needs. In this case also, all the final "close workbook"
statements must be properly placed in the first workbook's code and eventually executed at the end, and the entire
app works appropriately and successfully.
My question is, is it an Excel rule that ONLY the first workbook opened is allowed to open additional Workbooks, or
is this a MAC Excel limitation only, or is there a MAC Excel or VBA setting that solves this situation? I have done VBA
debug tracing in my app code to "prove" my point over and over here, and have found nothing that solves my delimma.
Maybe there's an additional workbook "open" parameter that might help, but I haven't discovered it yet. Note that
I am openinfg all my Workbooks with ReadOnly:= false
Note: I am using a Mac Pro (2013) 6-core, Mavericks, and Excel 11 VBA. Everything else on my entire system works great.
Thank you for any suggestions. I have used Windows Excel for many years very successfully and don't recall ever
encountering this situation with Workbooks before.

18. Can I connect a Mini DisplayPort monitor or monitor using a Mini DisplayPort adapter to a Thunderbolt port on my Thunderbolt-equipped Mac?
Yes. A Mini DisplayPort display or a display connecting with a Mini DisplayPort to VGA, DVI, or HDMI adapter will work just like it was connecting to a Mini DisplayPort connector when plugging in directly to the Thunderbolt connector on your Apple computer. Click here for more information on Mini DisplayPort connections and adapters.
19. How do I connect my Mini DisplayPort monitor or monitor using a Mini DisplayPort adapter to my Thunderbolt-equipped Mac when I have other Thunderbolt devices connected?
When connecting a Mini DisplayPort display or a display using a Mini DisplayPort adapter to a Thunderbolt peripheral (except as described in question 14), make sure the display is connected at the end of the Thunderbolt chain. You can use only one Mini DisplayPort device in the Thunderbolt chain.
Note: Systems with more than one Thunderbolt port, like an iMac, can have more than one Mini DisplayPort monitor or monitor connected with a Mini DisplayPort adapter connected as each Thunderbolt port can support one Mini DisplayPort display.

Where can I buy the Mac Pro 2013 motherboard? Just the motherboard

So where can I buy JUST the Mac pro 2013 motherboard? If you can, please link it.
Thanks!

This is a User-to-User help site.
Helpers get their rewards by helping.
I know some good solutions to a lot of problems with Mac Pros. And other readers know a whole lot more solutions.
I do not know of any problem that can be solved by replacing these boards in a nearly-new Mac Pro. The processor board is sold as a bare board, with no processors or heatsinks. It takes an hour of trained technician time just to install the processors and heat sinks, and you MUST get the correct parts or it will not work. If your technique is not correct, the processor(s) will self destruct when you power them up.
The mainboard does not include the SATA connectors, which are actually on a wiring harness that is attached from behind.
What problem are you trying to solve here?

Do Mac Pro 2013 support six TV using HDMI/DVI?

Hi everyone,
I found in Mac Pro support six displays using thunderbolt, but can I using HDMI or DVI?
I have six TVs, all of them have hdmi,dvi, and vga ports, I want to using one Mac Pro (2013) to display my screen in six TV as one screen, such as this:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmlsePKH6AY
Because Mac Pro using AMD display card, can I using Eyefinity technology?
Thanks a lot.

Yes. However, only two adopters can be passive. The rest have to be active.
All mini displayport to VGA adapters are active.
Mini displayport to DVI adopter can either be active or passive. The active ones say actie and cost more than passive ones.
If the display is greater than 1080X1200 you need dual-link mini displayport to DVI adapter. All the dual-link adopters are active and require USB connection for power.
I have no idea what " Eyefinity technology?" is

Mac Pro 2013 fan speeds up to maximum after restart.

My brand new Mac Pro 2013, hanged on shutdown..
so I had to restart by using the button on the cylinder, when it restarted it sounded like a vacuum cleaner, the fan started to spin fast and didn't stop anymore and my mac was suddenly very slow :S.
After restarting the mac pro works fine again! this happened 2 times now...
Already called with apple they said that i should try and work with it and see if the problem comes back again.
Maybe any of you knows what could be wrong.??????
I'm mainly using the machine for Logic Pro X and sometimes for some video editing.
OS : Yosemite - 10.10.2
Mac Pro 6core 2013

Reset the SMC and PRAM
Intel-based Macs: Resetting the System Management Controller (SMC)
About NVRAM and PRAM

Mac Pro 2013 Using Too Much RAM

I have a 6-core Mac Pro (2013) with 64GB of RAM. I have this feeling that the computer, and some assortment of processes, is sucking up a lot more of the RAM than they need to. As a point of reference, I use the vast majority of the RAM for audio production.
My concern is that, when I turn my computer on, it is already using 10 GBs of RAM right off the bat. One particular process, kernel_task, likes to use anywhere from 2-10 GBs. I can't imagine there is any reason for the Mac and all of its other processes to ever exceed even 4 GBs of RAM, let alone the upwards 20-30 that it will eventually consume. I say this because I migrated all of the data and processes form my 2010 Macbook Pro, which only has 8GB. Upon start-up, it is never using more than 2-4 GBs of RAM. I would assume, then, that my Mac Pro can get by using little more 4GBs (preserving the other 60GB for my much more resource-intensive music work). Both the MBP and Mac Pro have Mavericks 10.9.
Is there a way to cap the amount of RAM the computer, and any other process, uses, so I can preserve the majority of it for the tasks I know need it most?

Have you seen www.macperformanceguide.com ? focus is more on graphics and photography and where 128GB is shown to help.
The old method, to conserve and not use memory, went away years ago so as not to let a valuable resource sit idle and not being used.
Even if you don't have pageouts the system dynamically will use more if and when there is more memory present.
The numbers you report are not unusual. 1-2GB in today's world is like 50MB might have been 20 years ago - people were moaning over the fact that OS 7 was a memory hog as it now needed 40-50MB just to launch the Finder.

Mac Pro 2013 crash when attempting to drag object

IIllustrator CC (17.1) and Illustrator CC 2014 both crash if I try to drag any object on new Mac Pro (2013 model, running Mavericks). Anybody else run into this? Works fine on my MacBook Pro 13.

Hi Mark,
Have you submitted the crash log to Adobe via the crash reporter along with your email ID ? If not then can you please share the crash logs with me at [email protected]
To get the crash log please open the "Console" application and under the label "DIAGNOSTIC AND USAGE INFORMATION" expand the layer/label "User Diagnostic Reports" and open the latest AdobeIllustrator.............crash file.
If possible can you please join the connect room: Adobe Connect Login
With Best Regards,
Raghuveer Singh

Bootcamp is different on two identical Mac Pro 2013 towers, Windows 7 vs 8

OK, so we bought two identical Mac Pro 2013 towers, took them out of the box and updated the system, and checked to see if could use Bootcamp. Hopefully to install Windows 7, but, failing that, Windows 8. We got two different results:
One of the machines says only Windows 8 can be installed, but the other has a dialog about Windows 7.
The only difference here is that I messed around with the partitions on the second one. I may have jumped the gun and called one partition "BOOTCAMP" before being advised not to do so and attempting to get rid of that partition. My partition attempts have led to that system dialog...
What's the reason these two are different? IS it possible to install Windows 7?

According to Boot Camp: System requirements for Microsoft Windows operating systems - Apple Support
Mac model
Windows 8
64-bit
Windows 7
64-bit
Windows 7
32-bit
Windows Vista
64-bit
Windows Vista
32-bit
Windows XP
32-bit
iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
BCA
BCA
iMac (21.5-inch, Mid 2014)
BCA
BCA
iMac (27-inch, Late 2013)
5
5
iMac (21.5-inch, Late 2013)
5
5
W7 64-bit is supported, but W7 32-bit is not. Are you certain your W7 media is correct and complete? If the media has both 32-bit and 64-bit on it, it will be rejected.

CUDA NVIDIA video card to Mac Pro 2013

Is there any way to get the Mac Pro 2013 to run a CUDA enabled NVIDIA video card?

This graphic from ifixit.com shows the two special cards, still with heatsink paste in place, just after removal. The silver diamond surrounds the big graphics chip, just inside the RAMs on the card. Those RAMs contact heatsink pads on the central cooler. The whole business is secured with four screws beyond the RAMs, roughly centered on the sides of the diamond. So the Big GPU chip and the RAMs are pressed with heatsink paste and heatsink pads, respectively, against the central cooler. This is in lieu of allowance for a separate fan (which in many "standard" cards is what takes up the space of the second slot.
Power appears to be supplied by lugs in the outer corners of each card, so the cards are deliberately not interchangeable. One has connections that feed to the graphics outputs, the other has connections for the PCIe SSD socket.
The text says those connectors resemble the CPU daughter card connectors used in the late G4 and G5s.
https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Mac+Pro+Late+2013+Teardown/20778

Mac pro 2012 12 core 2,4 Ghz ou Mac pro 2013 8 cores 3,5 Ghz ?

Bonjour, j'ai besoin d'un avis exterieur !
Je suis graphiste, fais du motion design (sur After Effects donc) ainsi de la musique sur Ableton et je souhaite changer de machine.
On me propose un Mac pro de 2012 12 core 2,4 Ghz d'occase a un prix tres honnete, mais je me demande si le Mac pro 2013 8 cores 3,5 Ghz ne serait pas plus puissant et adapté a mes besoins.
Sachant que j'ai ouie dire que les mac récents ne sont pas super bien gérés par After effects...
Des avis?
Merci

Si tu n'a pas encore fait ton choix…
Le modèle 2013 est un excellente machine mais il induit quelques impératifs:
- côté stocage, oublies le firewire qui ne fonctionne qu'avec un adaptateur. Les débits s'en ressentent. Quant à l'usb3, si tu envisages de laisser tous tes disques toujours allumés, ça ira. Sinon, un disque cablé mais éteint fera que chaque démarrage sera plus long que le précédent. La faute à la structure "tout externe" de l'ordi. Il te faudra donc investir dans du thunderbolt.
- Côté disque interne, à notre époque, et pour un pro, moins de 1To ça devient vite étroit!
Je te parle en connaisance de cause, j'ai depuis mars 2014 un hexa 3,5ghz. SSD 1To. Ram 32Go.
Couplé à un LaCie 5big thunderbolt, c'est un foudre de guerre! C'est l'un des Mac les plus stables que j'ai connus. Et ce qui ne gâche rien, l'ensemble est ultra-silencieux!
Quant au modèle 2012, c'est aussi une excellente machine. Comparée au 2013 4 cœurs 3,7ghz, elle sera plus rapide. Et fera jeu égal ou un peu moins que le 6 cœurs 3,5ghz. L'investissement nécessaire pourra être moins lourd mais la machine sera plus bruyante!

Mac Pro 2013/14 UK Delivery

Has anyone in the UK recieved their new Mac Pro 2013/14 models yet?
Or does anyone have any RELIABLE information of when UK machines have/are being shipped?
I ordered my machine late on the day of release. Minor build to order with upgraded GFX cards and RAM.
Apple are being their usual arrogant, un-co-operative, non-communicative selves and refuse to give me any information on the delivery time of my machine.
Honestly you couldn't write this stuff - I literally get the Cupertino equivalent of "Computer says No." when I try and get ANY information at all.
I've never met a company so wilfully oblivious to the fact you are spending a huge amount of money with them, and so determined to deliver a terrible customer service experience despite that fact. If I weren't locked into the Apple eco system for work reasons I would tell them to take my order and shove it into one of those black bins they're selling
Anyway - I'm away travelling from the last week of Jan to the first week of Feb and obviously need to make arrangements if my machine is likely to arrive around then?
Any information at all on when/how Apple plan to ship UK machines would be much appreciated?
J

This is a User-to-User forum. We have no special Apple Insider information here.
Apple itself is providing the most reliable information available.
If you have no 'special insider information' then how do you know 'Apple itself is providing the most reliable information available.'
If Apple wanted to give me a rough delievry window that would be great - even a 7 day window would allow us customers to make suitable arrangements beforehand.
but no one else is doing any better.
I use many creative tech/software companies everyday - almost all offer better customer service than Apple (some not by much I'll grant you - but still better). None have the blatant arrogance and attitude of total disregard for the customer who is spending money with them that Apple do.
The tone of your reply implies that I'm being unreasonable in wishing to know ROUGHLY when a product I have spent several thousand pounds/dollars on, will be delivered to me.
And then having complete communications blackout from the company I ordered it from, despite the fact that the delivery date I was given has changed on the website (Does this affect me - who knows!?) - forcing me to chase them continually. To no avail.
J

PPro Performance Variance on Mac Pro 2013: CC Version 7.0 vs. Version 8.0

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for