Blackmagic Forum

Guys,
I am watching initial reviews of apple M1 MacBook air and it is mind-blowing. Anyone tested DVR on it especially for those AI features. Waiting eagerly.
It is the fastest and most efficient 5nM processor. TIA

No, the fastest is in the mini and the MBP. Air is mildly throttled.

Uli Plank wrote:No, the fastest is in the mini and the MBP. Air is mildly throttled.

It is very impressive. I am waiting to see the results on how fast DVR neural engine features are? Buying a mac mini may be much cheaper than upgrading my current system.
I am currently using 8 USB ports all the time. It can be difficult to handle all things with only 2 USB ports. Also attaching 2 monitors will be a problem with the mac mini.

I'll be interested to see Fusion performance since these M1 chips have a maximum of 16G onboard which is way lower than Fusion (supposedly) needs.

I want to see how you'll be able to use 3 monitors. One being the grading monitor.

Who says that I/O devices are not supported? It has only been stated for eGPUs.

Note, currently no dongle support on M1 systems.
We are looking into what can be done.

As noted elsewhere the eGPU is not compatible.

aussiemartin wrote:I'll be interested to see Fusion performance since these M1 chips have a maximum of 16G onboard which is way lower than Fusion (supposedly) needs.

How much does fusion needs? I am sure it is better than what RTX 2080 can contribute.

I want to see how you'll be able to use 3 monitors. One being the grading monitor

Note, currently no dongle support on M1 systems.
We are looking into what can be done.

As noted elsewhere the eGPU is not compatible.

No dongle support? I am sure it is just an update away.

Fusion doesn't care that much about VRAM, it's RAM that will be too short.

Uli Plank wrote:Fusion doesn't care that much about VRAM, it's RAM that will be too short.

I just searched on the apple website, didn't find any 16GB RAM option with M1 chip. I think I saw that there will be a 16GB option in the launch event.

Yogendra Singh wrote:

Uli Plank wrote:Fusion doesn't care that much about VRAM, it's RAM that will be too short.

I just searched on the apple website, didn't find any 16GB RAM option with M1 chip. I think I saw that there will be a 16GB option in the launch event.

16GB ram is currently available as an add-on from Apple when ordering.

Yogendra Singh wrote:...Also attaching 2 monitors will be a problem with the mac mini.

You attach one monitor to the TB3/USB4 connector and one to the HDMI connector.

rick.lang wrote:

Yogendra Singh wrote:...Also attaching 2 monitors will be a problem with the mac mini.

You attach one monitor to the TB3/USB4 connector and one to the HDMI connector.

I saw a youtube live stream (can't locate it again) where the person found that attaching a monitor to the M1 via the USB-C port produced laggy mouse movements, whereas attaching via the HDMI port was smooth with no mouse lagging.

Do you recall if that monitor was 4K/5K/6K?

I’d not expect too much of pumping pixels to screens. It’s still an entry-level machine.

Puget system posted an article comparing $3500 Ryzen PCs with M1 MBP. They M1 works better for FCP only and not for the premiere or resolve.

rick.lang wrote:Do you recall if that monitor was 4K/5K/6K?

Here, I found the review @7:58 where they said the HDMI was better than the Thunderbolt 3 for attaching monitor to M1. They don't say if the monitor was 4K at least, but now you have the link you could message or email to them.

Yogendra Singh wrote:Puget system posted an article comparing $3500 Ryzen PCs with M1 MBP. They M1 works better for FCP only and not for the premiere or resolve.

Here's the article link:

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Apple-M1-MacBook-vs-PC-Desktop-Workstation-for-Adobe-Creative-Cloud-1975/

That is really magnanimous of Puget systems to do an M1 review because if it convinces people to go to Apple Silicon, it takes people away from their core business of supplying PC's. Then again, no matter how good or not the Apples turn out to be, there'll always be a market for PC's.

Even current Apple hardware was always doing well with FCP-X. Not surprising, they should know their own hardware.
And a $ 3,500 PC should perform better with general software or Apple is heading for world domination

What I'd really like to know how good it handles DR compared to a $ 2K gamer laptop under Windows.
If you need to spend twice as much for the same power on a PC, that would turn the world upside down.

We don’t know if the programs and games they are running have been run previously; the first time any Intel program runs under M1, Rosetta2 modifies the binary once to make it compatible with (but not necessarily optimized for) the M1. So first time may not be quick and smooth.

The monitor is 4K; when he is increasing the resolution in one dropdown, he mentions 4K is the highest resolution and HDMI peaks at 4K, right? So no idea why it wasn’t as nice via TB3 as HDMI. Since the TB3 connection is certainly not the bottleneck; I assume he has the top of the line M1 in the Mac mini.

The first review on Fusion with Davinci Resolve that I've seen.

Private?

Uli Plank wrote:Private?

The youtube channel posted the Fusion-related M1 review -- I saw it - but he subsequently deleted it.

Uli Plank wrote:And a $ 3,500 PC should perform better with general software or Apple is heading for world domination

What I'd really like to know how good it handles DR compared to a $ 2K gamer laptop under Windows.
If you need to spend twice as much for the same power on a PC, that would turn the world upside down.

Me too. I'm heavily invested in a laptop, Avid + DR world for a variety of pro needs. My current HP ZBook 17 G5 with 64GB ram and now upgrade to P5200 16gb Quadro. Even with the 6GB Quadro I had no problems working with 4.6K Braw and XAVC 4K, without proxy or optimisation. What I'm seeing here is impressive, but a 4K timeline played back that stutters at a simple dissolve, is not a conclusive test.

I think it is premature to describe the M1 as 'mind blowing' and 'insane' until we start seeing the pro machines and for me until Avid ports to it - 95% of my daily crust is earned in it. And what I do know is if it is an incredible game changer it will be the very first time that Apple have sold gear with performance and features for less than or even equal to HP, Dell and Lenovo. But if all this comes to pass it is the first time I will seriously look at a Mac when I come to upgrade in 1.5 to 2 years.

Right now there is a lot of dust that needs to settle…

Another way to look at it is that these new MacBooks (and presumably the Mac Mini) are roughly equivalent to a desktop that is around 4-5 years old. So if you have a PC from 2015 or 2016, be aware that these MacBooks likely won't be any faster.

That may be a true statement for most videos, but not HEVC 4:2:2 which the M1 is said to be able to decode in hardware, but no external GPU can, nor any desktop cpu. I also would like to know if it can decode AVC 4:2:2, does anyone know?

Did you guys see this https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzUyas ... 3zPkorqIBQ It may well perform well while editing but when exporting the lack of a powerful GPU will be the weakness. However for the cost of a GPU it may well be a good addition for Windows users to get access to ProRes RAW and ProRes export on a network with their Windows PC.

Fusion on M1 MacMini

I have the MacBook Air M1 base model , as a second machine.
I have a desktop PCs too, for my main editing workflow.

Of course for some codecs like apple prores, pro raw and hevc 4222 you can't beat the M1.

But don't expect miracles for Davinci or premiere , not yet at lest.

Premiere is running under emulation And Davinci is beta, so no real conclusions yet.

Fcpx flies but is not for everyone ... I use it when I want something fast and easy.

Here's another Fusion review on M1 with 8GB RAM. So far no reviews on a 16GB RAM model.

John Spirou wrote:I have the MacBook Air M1 base model , as a second machine.
I have a desktop PCs too, for my main editing workflow.

Of course for some codecs like apple prores, pro raw and hevc 4222 you can't beat the M1.

But don't expect miracles for Davinci or premiere , not yet at lest.

Premiere is running under emulation And Davinci is beta, so no real conclusions yet.

Fcpx flies but is not for everyone ... I use it when I want something fast and easy.

Can you pls check the difference in after effects RAM preview and rendering what is the difference compared to your PC>

I'm currently testing the base model M1 Mini with Resolve 17.2b, and it performs very well for editing, and pretty darned good (for the price) in color, but upon export, it can suffer.

I put a ten-node grade (two with some blur) on a UHD ProRes HQ clip, and exported it to UHD H.264, and the Mini averaged 5.5-6 fps. In comparison, my main color machine exported the same clip with the same grade at 75-85 fps, which is right on par with cost:efficiency, considering the big unit cost about 12x more than the Mini

[Mac mini M1; 8GB vs AMD 24-core 2970WX; 48GB; dual 2080 Ti SeaHawk EK GPUs]

The Mini was perfectly usable for grading, as long as you don't mind turning on playback proxies after a considerable grade is applied. For the record, the proxies looked great, I didn't mind using them at all.

For a low-cost office solution, I can see having several Minis (or other upcoming inexpensive M1 units) for editing/post, with a render server doing the heavy lifting once production is done. Would be cool to try just for fun, may do that next week.

SkierEvans wrote:However for the cost of a GPU it may well be a good addition for Windows users to get access to ProRes RAW and ProRes export on a network with their Windows PC.

John Spirou wrote:Of course for some codecs like apple prores, pro raw and hevc 4222 you can't beat the M1.

I'd just like to point out that Avid can do this on Windows already: Prores import/export and as of version 2020.10 linking to and editing with Prores Raw has arrived too. Since I would never deliver in a Raw format that pretty much covers all bases, for me. I appreciate many do not have or use Avid here though. I can though see the low cost second case use for M1 machines with some specific Apple software (FCPX, Compressor/Logic) that could make these machines very appealing in the future.

i have files from canon R5 that are unusable in my main machine, cause they are hevc 422 codec, which is not supported by any gfx card , and they are playing at 10 fps at most.

On M1 they are playing in real time, no pronlem at all, cause they are su[[orted by hardware .

Of course M1 are very entry level machines... we are waiting for the bigger brothers soon.

Yogendra Singh wrote:

John Spirou wrote:I have the MacBook Air M1 base model , as a second machine.
I have a desktop PCs too, for my main editing workflow.

Of course for some codecs like apple prores, pro raw and hevc 4222 you can't beat the M1.

But don't expect miracles for Davinci or premiere , not yet at lest.

Premiere is running under emulation And Davinci is beta, so no real conclusions yet.

Fcpx flies but is not for everyone ... I use it when I want something fast and easy.

Can you pls check the difference in after effects RAM preview and rendering what is the difference compared to your PC>

i dont use after very much, just for basic things (fusion user).

I tried some basic stuff and a little of 3d titles, its going ok on a HD comp.

RAM preview with full res is about 20 sec, but i thought After could use my hard disk as ram preview cash...isn' t that the case ?
Is there any setting to check ?

John Spirou wrote:i have files from canon R5 that are unusable in my main machine, cause they are hevc 422 codec, which is not supported by any gfx card , and they are playing at 10 fps at most.

On M1 they are playing in real time, no pronlem at all, cause they are su[[orted by hardware .

Of course M1 are very entry level machines... we are waiting for the bigger brothers soon.

Yes, M1 is not magic, we just need GPU makers to add HEVC 4:2:2 decode, and maybe even AVC 4:2:2 decode. It is assumed they don't do this due to having to pay licencing fee's. Apple pays, amd/Nvidia refuse. Maybe now there will be change

As a PC user with Resolve Studio getting a Mac Mini M1 seems like a better solution for some things my system cannot compete with now rather than spending a lot more for a new GPU to replace my 1080Ti. I can share a lot and not move from one system to the other but use both for different things. I have lots of Windows only programs so will not move to Mac only but getting a Mini may be a lot cheaper than a RTX3080 or RTX3090.

SkierEvans wrote:As a PC user with Resolve Studio getting a Mac Mini M1 seems like a better solution for some things my system cannot compete with now rather than spending a lot more for a new GPU to replace my 1080Ti. I can share a lot and not move from one system to the other but use both for different things. I have lots of Windows only programs so will not move to Mac only but getting a Mini may be a lot cheaper than a RTX3080 or RTX3090.

Thats exactly what I was also thinking, I had 2 M6000 and one of them stoped working early this year, and then the lockdowns forced me to shut down my studio which had started accumilating debt's as there was no work and rent was hitting the top of the roof , further I am not sure when market conditions would be congenial to restart. and reboot the studio.

A single m6000 cost 7 times the macmini and even dual top of the class Nvidia M6000 could not play back 4K 10bit h264/65 footage. This was frustating as my Iphone with 3gb ram had no issues playing multiple streams in LumaFusion which is like the cut page of Resolve. So it appears ram should be your least concern as the storage is so fast that you will not notice the difference when its starts caching to storage .

I think that in the current covid world even the 8gb MacMini is a good move and those who cannot afford to spend but already have Iphone SE should start using Lumafusion as your basic edit setup.

SkierEvans wrote:As a PC user with Resolve Studio getting a Mac Mini M1 seems like a better solution for some things my system cannot compete with now rather than spending a lot more for a new GPU to replace my 1080Ti. I can share a lot and not move from one system to the other but use both for different things. I have lots of Windows only programs so will not move to Mac only but getting a Mini may be a lot cheaper than a RTX3080 or RTX3090.

Guys this is getting out of hand. The M1 has the power of a gtx1060, you'll be bitterly disappointed if you leave your 1080ti for a 1060. In this thread a reader posts about his M1 encoding at 7fps while his PC does 79fps. Resolve needs a lot of compute power, and M1 does not have that, it does have hardware decode for video codecs that consumer GPU's don't and that takes stress off CPU mainly.

Remember Apple and BlackMagic are talking about effortless playback of source video. That is the same reason laptops ,tablets and phones talk about battery life when playing back Video files. They do that because they know such a task requires almost no gpu or cpu for smooth playback

Intel and Nvidia must be doing something wrong with their chip architecture as their latest offering fail to playback 4K 10bit h264/65 footage. Thats the bottom line.

I have no Idea how Blackmagic is able to achieve it on Apple silicon and fail to do so in the latest Nvidia chips.
certainly M1 is not a gtx1060 or even RTX3090 as both Nvidia chips fail to playback the latest Sony Panasonic and Canon offering as far as codecs are concerned.

Also SOC (single system on a chip) is radical in its design I am sure its going to change the computing industry and force Intel and Nvidia to do a rethink.
a 16gb m1 macmini along with all the blackmagic colorgrading hardware and Panels will cost you less than the latest Nvidia Intel combo.
Just spend your money wisely, because covid is here to stay.

offside...I think one has to congratulate Blackmagic and Apple esp. Blackmagic to be ready with the M1 ready system which is already working flawlessly.

To do efficient decode you either need a dedicated chip or gpgpu implementation of codec. First falls flat with any unsupported profile (nVidia does not support the 10bit 422 variant), another is sometimes difficult to do, chews on general compute resources and has the same potential incompatibility problem. M1 most probably has a dedicated hardware for decoding these formats. It is selection from wider set of features considered important. Take one, leave another. If it is more important than some other features, user can choose one device, if it isn’t, choose something else.

SOC will not change anything, it is old concept. At best it shakes the consumer-prosumer-ontheroad market a bit. It has, by design, no modularity, so will not, by design, replace anything anywhere where modularity is wanted for either expansion or failure replacement. Good luck replacing or expanding the faulty ram on M1. While it seems like a very nice design, it is operating in a small niche from all computers and use cases. World isn’t made up of only iOS app users and Resolve editors.

I agree that modularity has it's place and has been the main diving force in the industry. That said we are not in the gaming industry and the bulk of footage thrown at us by Panasonic, Sony and Canon are the very ones not supported by Intel and nvidia, so why waste precious money on them. Most of these cameras have recently hit the market and apple m1 fills the void.
I remember not many years back I used to pay a premium to avids proprietary hardware just for real-time playback. Look at what blackmagic has done by opening resolve to third-party codecs esp. those optimized for m1. It solves all those limitations imposed on our workflow by our dependency on Intel and nvidia.

CougerJoe wrote:The M1 has the power of a gtx1060, you'll be bitterly disappointed if you leave your 1080ti for a 1060.

Where did you get these numbers? I have been trying to find some data regarding this but come to the conclusion that it’s not comparable. Can you please link to the source? Much appreciated.

It’s interesting that some have great results with RED raw/BRAW and others don’t. Results are inconclusive and it’s hard to tell if the M1 can coop with long renders. As a mobile editing system, the MacBook Pro version seem to be superior over the Air because of better control of CPU/GPU throttling and temperature. Render seem also to be faster with the pro versions, not in the realm of a good workstation but better than the Air.

My interest in the M1 is purely portability and the chance to do work on the fly, not removing a good workstation.

Another thing. Black magic should come with some info if they believe the 8g ram version is good enough for BRAW editing or not. Have they said anything ?

Its much more than decoder encoder issue.

Rajiv Mudgal wrote:It solves all those limitations imposed on our workflow by our dependency on Intel and nvidia.

I agree. If this is the bottleneck in a specific workflow. Question is rather, what other bottlenecks are introduced in parallel and whether they are important for that workflow or not.

Sure there is more to all of this than encoder-decoder. Just as there is more to a SOC design than it is something that will obliterate any and all other systems. I watched that video with great interest to see when AMD is coming in. It came in the end, interestingly claiming M1 is the fastest cpu on earth, maybe rivaled only by Zen3. It is wishful thinking, because M1 doesn’t crush even AMD mobile cpus in general cpu benchmarks, much less the desktop or workstation class behemots.

So there is more to it, definitely. Most of what user sees isn’t “computer computing” anyway, for example when UI lags or some other annoying thing. It is an order of magnitude more dependent on software than hardware until it actually starts crunching numbers. M1 crunches some numbers well, gets its ass kicked in other areas and in the end makes a nice hardware running user friendly software that hopefully animates the whole hardware market more.

I think on the editing and grading side of post production apple and blackmagic produces a wicked brew more potent than my current l7 dual m6000+rrtx2080 which eats almost 1200 watts of power where as the 16gb mac mini beats it hands down and uses only 24 watts so that's a huge saving.

On the other side, the vfx side of the post production its wait and watch..

I also use fusion, boris fx, mocha pro, octane/blender and am not seeing the same performance, but that may change soon.
Jules Urbach of OTOY (Octane render) has announced that an M1 version of Octane is in development and that is it "FAST!", so far so good.

And that 16 core neural engine is currently under utilized, so let's see.

Have a look at this for some realism: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... ingle=true

Rajiv Mudgal wrote:On the other side, the vfx side of the post production its wait and watch..

I also use fusion, boris fx, mocha pro, octane/blender and am not seeing the same performance, but that may change soon.
Jules Urbach of OTOY (Octane render) has announced that an M1 version of Octane is in development and that is it "FAST!", so far so good.

And that 16 core neural engine is currently under utilized, so let's see.

I doubt it will make a dent in vfx, because power efficiency isn't an objective there. Efficiency is ofcourse good, more efficient at same compute power is better, but less compute for less power drain isn't a selling point. The laws of rendering are on the side of "do whatever it takes to make it go faster". Future might be ARM or some other RISC based processor family, but it most probably isn't by Apple, because Apple does not operate in a lot of areas and I think has no interest in doing that either.

It all kind of reminds me the quote by Master Zap from MentalRay who said that "ofcourse Renderman is fast, until you actually trace a ray". Ironically Mental Delay is now pretty much dead and Renderman traces rays like there is no tomorrow. Not sure if Apple is the Mental Ray here, or Renderman. But Renderman isn't sitting on its throne very comfortably, after Arnold kicked the door open with raw energy. And they are both looking over their shoulder where near-realtime gpu rasterization and raytracing are slamming left and right. But again, laws of rendering tell that near-realtime solutions will not kill off everything else.

Thats interesting benchmark sheet and strangely the realism of actual performance contradicts it, so it doesn't make sense, may be that's the nature of RISC processors and further how SOC affect the actual post production performance over and above benchmarks... Waiting to test octane.