PDA

View Full Version : Should I buy Mac Pro ?



dankayaker
06-11-2007, 07:29 AM
I have not been following what version LW works with the newest Mac Pros.
I have an urgent project and in LW and need to get a new Mac. Are the MacPro dual 2.66 machines working well with LW9 at this point ?

Thanks

Captain Obvious
06-11-2007, 07:45 AM
As long as you run Windows, yes. Lightwave does not work well in Mac OS X on Intel Macs, due to the fact that it's not yet a universal binary.

dankayaker
06-11-2007, 07:50 AM
As long as you run Windows, yes. Lightwave does not work well in Mac OS X on Intel Macs, due to the fact that it's not yet a universal binary.


Thanks . . not what I wanted to hear though. Bad timing for me.
If I upgraded to 9.2 would that help ?

Captain Obvious
06-11-2007, 08:11 AM
No. But as long as you're not dependant on third party plugins, you could give the Universal Binary beta a go.

Or you could just run Windows on it temporarily, until the UB is released. Lightwave is platform agnostic (in the sense that you get both a Windows a Mac version).

dankayaker
06-11-2007, 08:41 AM
Thanks . . . .anyone have any idea when LW will release the UB version ?

byte_fx
06-11-2007, 08:45 AM
I run LW on my Mac Pro's under XP SP2 and will probably run it under both Windows and OS X after the UB version comes out.

Some plugs aren't availale for OS X and probably never will be. Plus it's likely that there will be differences in stabiliry, rebder speeds, whatever, between the versions.

Then there's the ancillary Windows apps that simply have no counterpart under OS X.

Another reason to dual boot. Think of it as horses for courses.

byte_fx

Phil
06-11-2007, 10:34 AM
Thanks . . . .anyone have any idea when LW will release the UB version ?

Nope. You can join the OB to see how it is progressing, though. It's important to note that most LScripts will work with UB LW. Some may need special care, so this isn't a blanket guarantee.

Other addon developers will need to port their work over. Some will; some won't, based on their hardware, interest and whether or not they have a Mac to hand.

You won't want to run CFM LW on Intel Mac hardware anyway. It's too damn slow - around 1/3 of the performance under Windows on the same hardware. It's also not a supported configuration, either by NewTek or by any plugin vendors, due to the various issues with Rosetta.

Parallels may work, to run the Windows version from a Boot Camp partition in OS X, or from a virtual machine on your OS X partition. The caveat here is slightly/very flaky 3D support. It's improving slowly, but isn't where Parallels is claiming it is. VMWare Fusion may give better results.

Scazzino
06-11-2007, 11:18 AM
As for running LW9.2 CFM (non-UB) on the Intel Macs, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it. I was extremely surprised by how well it worked. I was expecting the worst, which was why I waited so long before upgrading to an Intel Mac. Had I known how well it works, I would have upgraded sooner.

I upgraded from an old dual processor 2GHz G5 to a new 8-core Mac Pro 3GHz Xeon and I'm running LW9.2 CFM without any major problems. Sure it's slower than running a native UB on this machine but it's still FASTER than it was running on the older G5... So depending upon what machine you are upgrading from, and to, you can still see a speed increase by using the LW9.2 CFM until the UB is ready. And of course you can always use the LW9.2 UB while it's in open beta if you need to render something out faster than the CFM can handle it... And sure, you can always install bootcamp if you need to do that temporarily...

Scazzino
06-11-2007, 11:28 AM
As an example I used the /Lighting/quickroom68.lws scene from the LW9 Content with the following adjustments: I switched to the Perspective camera for all and set AA to 5 passes for the 9.2 tests.

First my baseline tests on the G5 with 2 threads
LW 9.0: 15m 21s (933 seconds)
LW 9.2 CFM: 15m 47s (948 seconds)

Then on the 8 core 3GHz Mac Pro with 8 threads
LW 9.0 under Rosetta translation: 3m 21s (201 seconds)
LW 9.2 CFM under Rosetta translation: 2m 47s (167 seconds)

So the 8-core Mac Pro 3GHz, even under Rosetta translation, is about 5.7 times faster then the old G5. The UB's much faster than that of course, but for that you need to join the Open Beta to see the UB results in the Open Beta forum... ;)

Scazzino
06-11-2007, 11:32 AM
One caveat about using Rosetta on the Intel that I noticed is that it uses more of the available RAM than without Rosetta on a PPC. So if you had a scene that needs to use 3-3.5GB of RAM on the PPC to render, it might run out of RAM under Rosetta on the Intel since Rosetta eats into the amount of RAM that an application has to use.

kiffanthony
06-18-2007, 11:53 AM
Hi Scazzino,

I see you have a similar setup to me (8 core mac pro, etc...)

Do you have issues with large poly scenes?

I use Macs due to being from a design/illustration background, but find them almost counter productive when trying to use them for 3d.

Have you tried Fprime 3 with 9.2 CFM? I find it works well, but runs out of memory very quickly and always crashes after using Fprime preview (unless I leave for about 2/3 minutes???? Rosetta I guess).

I would love to hear your thoughts...

Cheers

Kiff

dankayaker
06-18-2007, 12:25 PM
As for running LW9.2 CFM (non-UB) on the Intel Macs, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it. I was extremely surprised by how well it worked. I was expecting the worst, which was why I waited so long before upgrading to an Intel Mac. Had I known how well it works, I would have upgraded sooner.

I upgraded from an old dual processor 2GHz G5 to a new 8-core Mac Pro 3GHz Xeon and I'm running LW9.2 CFM without any major problems. Sure it's slower than running a native UB on this machine but it's still FASTER than it was running on the older G5... So depending upon what machine you are upgrading from, and to, you can still see a speed increase by using the LW9.2 CFM until the UB is ready. And of course you can always use the LW9.2 UB while it's in open beta if you need to render something out faster than the CFM can handle it... And sure, you can always install bootcamp if you need to do that temporarily...


Thanks Scazzino,

I'm going to get a new Macpro and run LW as you are . . .hoping for the best.

Dan

Scazzino
06-19-2007, 08:27 AM
Hi Scazzino,

I see you have a similar setup to me (8 core mac pro, etc...)

Do you have issues with large poly scenes?

I use Macs due to being from a design/illustration background, but find them almost counter productive when trying to use them for 3d.

Have you tried Fprime 3 with 9.2 CFM? I find it works well, but runs out of memory very quickly and always crashes after using Fprime preview (unless I leave for about 2/3 minutes???? Rosetta I guess).

I would love to hear your thoughts...

Cheers

Kiff

Hi Kiff,

Yes, as I mentioned above, Rosetta does eat up some memory. So a scene that just barely rendered on the G5 (PPC) would run out of memory on the Mac Pro (Intel) running LW under Rosetta. For those scenes you could run the LW UB if you joint the Open Beta. Sometime after Leopard is out all those memory issues should evaporate...

:D

Scazzino
06-19-2007, 08:32 AM
Thanks Scazzino,

I'm going to get a new Macpro and run LW as you are . . .hoping for the best.

Dan

Hi Dan,

The ride might start out slightly bumpy, but it should only get better. I was pleasantly surprised how well Rosetta runs LW. I saw a substantial (6x) speed increase with LW under Rosetta on the 8-core Mac Pro 3GHz over the old dual processor Power Mac G5 2GHz that I had. Depending upon which G5 you move from and which Mac Pro you move to, you should still see some speed increase even under Rosetta. Things will only get better from here on out.

:thumbsup:

dankayaker
06-19-2007, 12:49 PM
Hi Dan,

The ride might start out slightly bumpy, but it should only get better. I was pleasantly surprised how well Rosetta runs LW. I saw a substantial (6x) speed increase with LW under Rosetta on the 8-core Mac Pro 3GHz over the old dual processor Power Mac G5 2GHz that I had. Depending upon which G5 you move from and which Mac Pro you move to, you should still see some speed increase even under Rosetta. Things will only get better from here on out.

:thumbsup:


At this point I'll be happy if it's as around as fast as my old G5 dual 2.5 and stable.

kiffanthony
06-19-2007, 05:56 PM
Cheers Scazzino....

Kiff

redlum
06-25-2007, 10:44 AM
I guess if you own an intel mac the only way to use LW is to boot up on XP. Thank God Newtek sells LW with a dual license. I guess we have something to look forward to when Leapard gets released. I understand that Bootcamp come with it.

Scazzino
06-25-2007, 11:07 AM
I guess if you own an intel mac the only way to use LW is to boot up on XP. Thank God Newtek sells LW with a dual license. I guess we have something to look forward to when Leapard gets released. I understand that Bootcamp come with it.

No not the "only" way, that is "one" way to use it... ;)

I've been running LW 9.2 under Mac OS X's built-in Rosetta translation for about a month now on an 8-core Mac Pro without any major problems. If you join the Open Beta you can also use the LW 9.2 UB while it's still in open beta before it's officially released, for even faster rendering...

redlum
06-25-2007, 11:11 AM
No not the "only" way, that is "one" way to use it... ;)

I've been running LW 9.2 under Mac OS X's built-in Rosetta translation for about a month now on an 8-core Mac Pro without any major problems. If you join the Open Beta you can also use the LW 9.2 UB while it's still in open beta before it's officially released, for even faster rendering...

I'm stuck with my older (last years model) dual core PPC G5. I've used LW8 on my macbook pro and it works okay. I haven't done anything too complicated yet so I can't completely endorse it. Just simple objects and buttons, etc.

I did go for the 10.4.10 upgrade without any problems too.

Rick Hall
06-26-2007, 08:59 PM
Thanks . . not what I wanted to hear though. Bad timing for me.
If I upgraded to 9.2 would that help ?


I have used 9.2 on my Intel MacBook Pro. It is much faster than 9.0 on OSX. If you can get along without any 3rd party plug-ins, you should be fine.


Rick

dankayaker
06-28-2007, 10:43 AM
So far so good gents. I'm animating a model with about 550k polys . . . .nothing fancy animation wise. Renders pretty fast unless I try using ray traced reflections.