Jump to content

New OS X compatible motherboard -> QUO

mobo

  • Please log in to reply
1604 replies to this topic

#401
iztech

iztech

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Please contact Intel regarding thunderbolt.

USB3 over Thunderbolt - give me a break!

What is the issue with video signal daisy chain? 



#402
Badeendje

Badeendje

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 210 posts

With this board using either available bios thunderbolt acts the same as it does on any hack, the device needs to be plugged in at boot up to be recognized. Hot plug does not work for me. I have a couple of external thunderbolt drives I can chain, I had one attached at boot up and then once at the desktop I plugged in the other. I could see the drive lights flashing but the system eventually dropped both and neither were accessible. Restarting the system took care of it.

 

Not a deal breaker for me but better thunderbolt functionality would be a plus.

Thanks. That's a real shame, so we probably need to wait till the chipset has support instead of a dedicated chip (for hotswap).

Still I wonder why apple can graphics patch through work and windows with Lucid VirtuMVP, so it might be we just need some sort of patching there.

 

USB3 over Thunderbolt - give me a break!

I never said anything about that, just USB3 is fast enough for external hard disks for now as hard disks and even SSD's are the limiting factor.
Must admit, not for a very long time anymore but still.
USB3 is on some macs now, and also works perfectly for hackintosh so for external hard disks you're better of with just USB3, for now, plus you get a working hotswap option (safe unplugging if you will).
Why I basically wanted thunderbolt for myself is just so I can use any possible upcoming new screens as they're probably thunderbolt (might be TB2 but we don't know again for sure, and more companies may use it as well this time around). Plus if I wanted to use thunderbolt for example a hard disk I would just have to turn to the back of the screen to daisy link instead of pulling my desk towards me to reach the back side of the case.

The cpu and memory is fast enough for me so this board was a candidate as a drop in replacement.

So here you go why USB3 still has the upper hand for most people, and if you need any faster you'd probably want a real mac for stability reasons as well.



#403
genzai

genzai

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco

Please contact Intel regarding thunderbolt.

USB3 over Thunderbolt - give me a break!

What is the issue with video signal daisy chain? 

Well thats a real bummer. The main reason i was interested in this board was the prospect of properly working thunderbolt ports (in other words hot-plug). Early on i had emailed QUO and asked if the thunderbolt ports would be fully working and was told they were working on it. Guess they couldn't crack it. 

 

Obviously intel isn't going to help, i am sure that comment is meant to assign blame, but if its working on real apple hardware then it should be a matter of getting the right DSDT, firmware, driver hooks and UEFI bits working together like any other hardware component. If TB worked i would try and grab a bunch of these for personal and pro associates' use but without that its not very interesting. Just wish one of these master hackers would put all the pieces together to make this work.

 

Cheers,

g\



#404
genzai

genzai

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco

I wouldn't get too hung up over thunderbolt - it's looking more and more of an 'almost ran' as time drags by and nobody else adopts it. http://9to5mac.com/2...-usb-announced/

Hmm, might be a bit early for that. in our industry (film and post production) its caught on quite well already. And if the new mac pro doesn't flop that will push it even harder into some markets. Granted it seems likely to stay a pro / high-end interface for the near to mid term but once intel integrates it directly onto the CPU it may still become more ubiquitous. USB 3.0 is great for as an external drive connector. But for attaching SAS RAIDS, 10GbE, and other hardware that used to require PCIe cards TB is quite useful. I think this tech has legs but time will tell. There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about what thunderbolt is for right now. Apple gets it (maybe TOO much) but intel is in a very good position to keep it alive and pushing it along since it makes the chips and chipsets we all use and it has pretty clear plans to make thunderbolt the external PCI bus of the future. Don't forget optical cable versions are coming at some point too.

 

 

Anyway, tech prophecy- or any prophecy for that matter- is a tough industry i would like to stay out of. But it sure would be great if master hackintoshers could figure out how to make the TB ports work like they do on apple gear!

 

g\



#405
^Andy^

^Andy^

    InsanelyMac Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 659 posts
  • Gender:Male

Hmm, might be a bit early for that. in our industry (film and post production) its caught on quite well already. And if the new mac pro doesn't flop that will push it even harder into some markets. Granted it seems likely to stay a pro / high-end interface for the near to mid term but once intel integrates it directly onto the CPU it may still become more ubiquitous. USB 3.0 is great for as an external drive connector. But for attaching SAS RAIDS, 10GbE, and other hardware that used to require PCIe cards TB is quite useful. I think this tech has legs but time will tell. There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about what thunderbolt is for right now. Apple gets it (maybe TOO much) but intel is in a very good position to keep it alive and pushing it along since it makes the chips and chipsets we all use and it has pretty clear plans to make thunderbolt the external PCI bus of the future. Don't forget optical cable versions are coming at some point too.

 

 

Anyway, tech prophecy- or any prophecy for that matter- is a tough industry i would like to stay out of. But it sure would be great if master hackintoshers could figure out how to make the TB ports work like they do on apple gear!

 

g\

Thunderbolt certainly does have serious tech potential but everything I have read indicates that outside of the apple/intel agreement it's not cost effective for other vendors to implement due to intels licensing costs being way too high. This is based on my own limited reading so I may be wrong and happy to admit to it if that is the case.

 

The problem I foresee is that the hackintosh world will never get to grips with thunderbolt because it's just not likely to crop up on pc motherboards - it's not really the target market. PC's can be upgraded internally for graphics, usb cards, raid cards etc so that's really not what thunderbolt is aimed at - its aimed at closed systems with external only upgrades such as the new mac pro (which came first chicken or egg?).


Sorry for going off topic btw :)



#406
maleorderbride

maleorderbride

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 282 posts
  • Gender:Male

Hmm, might be a bit early for that. in our industry (film and post production) its caught on quite well already. And if the new mac pro doesn't flop that will push it even harder into some markets. Granted it seems likely to stay a pro / high-end interface for the near to mid term but once intel integrates it directly onto the CPU it may still become more ubiquitous. USB 3.0 is great for as an external drive connector. But for attaching SAS RAIDS, 10GbE, and other hardware that used to require PCIe cards TB is quite useful. I think this tech has legs but time will tell. There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about what thunderbolt is for right now. Apple gets it (maybe TOO much) but intel is in a very good position to keep it alive and pushing it along since it makes the chips and chipsets we all use and it has pretty clear plans to make thunderbolt the external PCI bus of the future. Don't forget optical cable versions are coming at some point too.

 

 

Anyway, tech prophecy- or any prophecy for that matter- is a tough industry i would like to stay out of. But it sure would be great if master hackintoshers could figure out how to make the TB ports work like they do on apple gear!

 

g\

I have built quite a few hackintoshes for film and post product, but this is not the motherboard to use.  This motherboard is essentially 1.5 year old tech that is an "enthusiast
level product.  It is not a professional or workstation class motherboard.

If you are a professional who does film or post, you want a socket 2011 1P or 2P motherboard.  Anything else is a glorified iMac--like this motherboard here.  

I think Andy is dead-on, this is a product that differs very little from any other modern motherboard as far as hackintoshing, yet has several hardware limitations.  Plus, even if you want an "iMac" level computer instead of a workstation then this is an obsolete socket that does not support Haswell.  It is simply underwhelming.

 

The positives that I can see is that future products that might stem from and learn from this attempt.  A more hackintosh friendly 2011 motherboard with what seems to be essentially a custom BIOS (that does not cause KPs) and custom version of Clover built-in to allow UEFI booting would be nice if reasonably priced.

 

Despite TB being essentially unnecessary for a workstation, having one would go along way to quiet the people that need it for some reason or don't understand why it is unnecessary.  Plus, you can never control what kind of drive a client drops off.



#407
Geesu

Geesu

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 84 posts

Just received mine in the mail! Haven't built a hackintosh since like the 10.6 days.

 

Was just curious, is there a guide available for how to properly dual boot OS X and windows with this motherboard?

 

Should I just follow a generic guide?  Wasn't sure if flashing the bios is necessary, should i use chameleon, etc...

 

Thanks!!



#408
vegasloki

vegasloki

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts
  • Gender:Male

Despite TB being essentially unnecessary for a workstation, having one would go along way to quiet the people that need it for some reason or don't understand why it is unnecessary.  Plus, you can never control what kind of drive a client drops off.

 

 

For our applications Thunderbolt has become essential in that it saves time (money in labor) for the transfer of some content and for our large scale apps there aren't enough slots for I/O without an expansion chassis which in and of itself can be a nightmare.   Once the content is on the network it's not an issue but for getting content on and off the network and having flexibility in device interface it's an excellent tool.  I'd agree that large scale apps aren't using 37xx series processors but in my experience upgrading systems yearly isn't usually done so having a computer that is a a year or two out in technology is fairly common in large scale production.  In fact it's the standard.    We're judged on the quality of the work product, not how new the technology might be.


So here you go why USB3 still has the upper hand for most people, and if you need any faster you'd probably want a real mac for stability reasons as well.

There is more USB 3 because more devices are available and devices and technology implementation for Thunderbolt is pretty expensive at the point.  There are applications where Thunderbolt is a better solution but those are typically things that would have been utilizing the PCIe bus and not a serial bus.  I would agree that at this point, particularly given the cost structure, it's just not feasible for everyone to switch when for the typical user USB 3 is more than adequate.  However, that same sort of argument was made when the floppy went away, then RS232 ports and now optical media though in recent times the pushback when those technologies are deprecated is less and less.

 

No hot swap on the hacks is a bummer but my understanding is that it has to do with how the hardware, BIOS and OS communicate to make the resources (PCIe lanes) available at the swap.  I don't know what would be required to make it happen in a hack.



#409
maleorderbride

maleorderbride

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 282 posts
  • Gender:Male

For our applications Thunderbolt has become essential in that it saves time (money in labor) for the transfer of some content and for our large scale apps there aren't enough slots for I/O without an expansion chassis which in and of itself can be a nightmare.   Once the content is on the network it's not an issue but for getting content on and off the network and having flexibility in device interface it's an excellent tool.  I'd agree that large scale apps aren't using 37xx series processors but in my experience upgrading systems yearly isn't usually done so having a computer that is a a year or two out in technology is fairly common in large scale production.  In fact it's the standard.    We're judged on the quality of the work product, not how new the technology might be.

 

This is one of the misconceptions that I had in mind.  With a socket 2011 motherboard, which has largely been out concurrently with socket 1155 (the motherboard discussed in this thread), you can have up to 6 PCI-e x16 lanes on a 1P build or up to 7 PCI-e lanes on a 2P build.

 

Even if you do color grading, which is the most PCI-e intensive application one can do, you can do it with 6 PCI-e x16 lanes.  Because you have all of those built into your $360 motherboard you do not need to spend an extra $750 on a TB to PCI-e chassis or TB to X adapters.  Every single PCI-e card you might stick in that TB chassis can go internal.  It saves you time and it saves you money to just use a workstation motherboard.  That is my point.

 

I do understand that you receive data on TB drives sometimes.  If you need TB purely to transfer files to the network then have a Mac Mini do it.  Hopefully there will be PCI-e TB cards out for hacks eventually, but even if they are not hot swappable it really makes little difference.  TB is not as useful or as efficient of an option as a motherboard with PCI-e lanes available.

 

 

 

Secondly, you do not need to buy a new computer every year--you just need to buy the correct computer when you buy one (not necessarily the last socket to be released).  socket 2011 and socket 1155 both came out in 2011, granted there was a 6 month spread between them with 1155 being first.  Buying a socket 1155 now, in Q3 2013, after it is EOL is a decidedly questionable decision. 

 

Especially so, because if you are in a professional industry that needs more than 32GBs RAM, more CPU power than an i7-Quad Core, or lots of PCI-e slots (or might need these in the next 3-4 years) then you are shooting yourself in the foot with this motherboard or even with a Haswell socket 1150.  Those are iMac's in disguise.  

 

You should have bought a socket 1366 in 2009-mid 2011, then bought a socket 2011 if purchasing in 2011 Q3 until Q4 2014.



#410
^Andy^

^Andy^

    InsanelyMac Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 659 posts
  • Gender:Male

This is one of the misconceptions that I had in mind.  With a socket 2011 motherboard, which has largely been out concurrently with socket 1155 (the motherboard discussed in this thread), you can have up to 6 PCI-e x16 lanes on a 1P build or up to 7 PCI-e lanes on a 2P build.

 

Even if you do color grading, which is the most PCI-e intensive application one can do, you can do it with 6 PCI-e x16 lanes.  Because you have all of those built into your $360 motherboard you do not need to spend an extra $750 on a TB to PCI-e chassis or TB to X adapters.  Every single PCI-e card you might stick in that TB chassis can go internal.  It saves you time and it saves you money to just use a workstation motherboard.  That is my point.

 

I do understand that you receive data on TB drives sometimes.  If you need TB purely to transfer files to the network then have a Mac Mini do it.  Hopefully there will be PCI-e TB cards out for hacks eventually, but even if they are not hot swappable it really makes little difference.  TB is not as useful or as efficient of an option as a motherboard with PCI-e lanes available.

 

 

 

Secondly, you do not need to buy a new computer every year--you just need to buy the correct computer when you buy one (not necessarily the last socket to be released).  socket 2011 and socket 1155 both came out in 2011, granted there was a 6 month spread between them with 1155 being first.  Buying a socket 1155 now, in Q3 2013, after it is EOL is a decidedly questionable decision. 

 

Especially so, because if you are in a professional industry that needs more than 32GBs RAM, more CPU power than an i7-Quad Core, or lots of PCI-e slots (or might need these in the next 3-4 years) then you are shooting yourself in the foot with this motherboard or even with a Haswell socket 1150.  Those are iMac's in disguise.  

 

You should have bought a socket 1366 in 2009-mid 2011, then bought a socket 2011 if purchasing in 2011 Q3 until Q4 2014.

Absolutely everything you have said here confirms my confusion over the new mac pro and it's absurd new design. I always wanted a mac pro until they announced the new pedal bin shaped one :(



#411
vegasloki

vegasloki

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts
  • Gender:Male

 

 

Especially so, because if you are in a professional industry that needs more than 32GBs RAM, more CPU power than an i7-Quad Core, or lots of PCI-e slots (or might need these in the next 3-4 years) then you are shooting yourself in the foot with this motherboard or even with a Haswell socket 1150.  Those are iMac's in disguise.  

 

You should have bought a socket 1366 in 2009-mid 2011, then bought a socket 2011 if purchasing in 2011 Q3 until Q4 2014.

 

 

Expansion chassis have been part of our landscape for about 10 years or so.  It's not about the lanes, it's about fitting that many cards in the system with our I/O counts.  I'm in the audio dept, not the picture dept and deal primarily with music.  A typical large scale Pro Tools HD system I use is based on a octo Mac Pro though some of the Nuendo rigs are i7 950s and they're plenty big.  There is more than just drives with interfacing with Thunderbolt though we use drives like we used tape in the olden days.  It's about portability of interfaces in being able to interface different devices, in our apps particularly MADI and fibre channel.  You're thinking drives only but there are more advantages to Thunderbolt than connecting drives.  An example would be Hammerfall cards in a Thunderbolt enclosure, some sort of drive array and a Mac Book Pro.  Fits in a Pelican case and will be dumped to the SAN via fibre channel when we get back so the guys that mix it or put it to picture can have it or we mount it in one of our rooms if we are finishing it.  Much of our content capture happens remotely and until recently we'd have rigs racked up and ready to ship out  (or send a mobile) but using Thunderbolt as a means to interface what are normally PCIe devices we can have the same capability for many apps in a much smaller foot print and logistically be able to support it better.  We still need a truck for live to air but for many things a good flyaway rig that is compact and gets clean tracks is all we need.  For the studio rigs we'd need a card to interface the Magma chassis so we might as well use TB.  We've been implementing it as needed over the last year and it's been handy (though not cheap).

 

We could make a Pro Tools or Nuendo system out of the Quo board and have it deliver pro results.  But we don't because of several reasons I'm not going to delve into right now but our main obstacle isn't the resource capability of the board so much as no hot swap TB is a deal breaker. Part of it is the support (that we wouldn't get) from using non approved hardware and the grief from Avid for using it.  For us the Mac Pros and nice MPBs are some of the least costly items.



#412
maleorderbride

maleorderbride

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 282 posts
  • Gender:Male

Expansion chassis have been part of our landscape for about 10 years or so.  It's not about the lanes, it's about fitting that many cards in the system with our I/O counts.  I'm in the audio dept, not the picture dept and deal primarily with music.  A typical large scale Pro Tools HD system I use is based on a octo Mac Pro though some of the Nuendo rigs are i7 950s and they're plenty big.  There is more than just drives with interfacing with Thunderbolt though we use drives like we used tape in the olden days.  It's about portability of interfaces in being able to interface different devices, in our apps particularly MADI and fibre channel.  You're thinking drives only but there are more advantages to Thunderbolt than connecting drives.  An example would be Hammerfall cards in a Thunderbolt enclosure, some sort of drive array and a Mac Book Pro.  Fits in a Pelican case and will be dumped to the SAN via fibre channel when we get back so the guys that mix it or put it to picture can have it or we mount it in one of our rooms if we are finishing it.  Much of our content capture happens remotely and until recently we'd have rigs racked up and ready to ship out  (or send a mobile) but using Thunderbolt as a means to interface what are normally PCIe devices we can have the same capability for many apps in a much smaller foot print and logistically be able to support it better.  We still need a truck for live to air but for many things a good flyaway rig that is compact and gets clean tracks is all we need.  For the studio rigs we'd need a card to interface the Magma chassis so we might as well use TB.  We've been implementing it as needed over the last year and it's been handy (though not cheap).

 

We could make a Pro Tools or Nuendo system out of the Quo board and have it deliver pro results.  But we don't because of several reasons I'm not going to delve into right now but our main obstacle isn't the resource capability of the board so much as no hot swap TB is a deal breaker. Part of it is the support (that we wouldn't get) from using non approved hardware and the grief from Avid for using it.  For us the octo Mac Pros and nice MPBs are some of the least costly items.

I think we might be talking past each other, or about different things.

 

Audio guys have it the easiest as PT, CuBase and Logic consistently needing less PCI-e, less RAM, and less CPU than video guys.  If anyone could get by on a Haswell or IB i7-Quad Core then it is you guys, but I don't really see you making that argument here.

 

You indicate that there is some sort of problem with fitting that many cards in an audio build and maintaining "your I/O count." But you can fit that many in.  Just plug them in.  Your latency won't suffer because you have a full house and IRQ issues are so 2006.  You will not have lower performance in any way.  If you want a Fibre card, a 10GbE card, a PT Native card, a quad-monitor GPU, and any other PCI-e card you just plug them in internally simultaneously.  Instead of spending that 1K+ on a Magma chassis you can now put it towards a computer that is not obsolete.

 

Your next example is about using a (granted oldy but goody) 9 year old PCI RME Hammerfall card along with a MBP.  How is that relevant?  We are talking about towers here, not MBP's reliance upon TB.  I completely grant that TB is aimed at MBP, iMac, and Mac Mini users as they have no internal options.  Your example is off target and completely irrelevant to any discussion about a tower's motherboard as you can choose to have PCI-e slots.

 

What could make sense as an advantage is that the modular nature of TB allows you to have fewer fully "built up" computers as you just connect TB devices to whatever you need.  That might be a valid argument, but I would challenge you to run the numbers.  It might take less organization on the part of your IT guy, but it probably costs you considerably more money in the final tally.  TB chassis and Magma chassis are not cheap.  Plus, having a tower with a bunch of cables running off it is not exactly a streamlined workstation.

 

When you do start addressing towers, and studio rigs, you say that you still "need a card to interface the Magma chassis so we might as well use TB."  What?  Why can't you just plug whatever you have in that Magma into the PCI-e lane directly?  Am I missing something here or are you?  

 

You end by saying that no hot swap TB is a deal breaker for a workstation, but you have not yet shown why TB is even needed in an audio workstation.  There is exactly one audio interface that uses TB and it also support USB 3.0 as both supply many times the bandwidth it needs.

 

Oddly enough there is not hot swap TB (or any TB) on either of the two workstations towers that you say that you do use routinely.

 

 



#413
genzai

genzai

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco

wow, i had decided to stay out of the conversation because it had gotten so silly but now i feel compelled to respond. Clearly you are talking about a "different thing". I'll try to address several points, but please for the love of god don't let your bias for wanting TB to go away affect your logic so much... Even though it was not my post you were responding to i understand completely where he is coming from.

Also I apologize in advance since this has strayed a fair ways off topic.

 

 

Audio guys have it the easiest as PT, CuBase and Logic consistently needing less PCI-e, less RAM, and less CPU than video guys.  If anyone could get by on a Haswell or IB i7-Quad Core then it is you guys, but I don't really see you making that argument here.

 

 

So dead wrong. The fact that you put cubase and logic in the same sentence as PT is a flag right there, but i will elaborate.

Audio post production and high end tracking has ALWAYS been a more demanding process than the video side. In large film mixes, historically be it 40 highspeed dubbers in the back room, magma chassis full of HD DSP cards, or the more modern equivalent using HDX; there is a lot of gear involved. the extreme track count and DSP needs of audio requires very special setups. Track counts can reach into the hundreds, spread across 3+ DAW systems with a dedicated re-recording system to boot. With current versions of PT the entire session gets loaded into ram which has typically been far more demanding on the system then anything our video department machines have to handle which for the most part is ram previews and such. If your working native, system core count and overall power is even more important.

 

You indicate that there is some sort of problem with fitting that many cards in an audio build and maintaining "your I/O count." But you can fit that many in.  Just plug them in.  Your latency won't suffer because you have a full house and IRQ issues are so 2006.  You will not have lower performance in any way.  If you want a Fibre card, a 10GbE card, a PT Native card, a quad-monitor GPU, and any other PCI-e card you just plug them in internally simultaneously.  Instead of spending that 1K+ on a Magma chassis you can now put it towards a computer that is not obsolete.

 

 

In G5/ Mac pro terms it was very easy to exceed the palsy slot count internally. But even with a hypothetical 7 PCIe that isn't enough for many situations. Magma chassis are important to our industry. They produce no measurable latency. In addition to X amount of DSP cards you also need to provide tons of I/O, possibly several network interfaces, and depending on the need any number of other cards. Our hero systems have to have 6 monitors and though we usually drive video on a dedicated machine, some setups use blackmagic cards in the hero systems. regardless of what interface you are using, avid or third party, its also very easy to exceed I/O in many cases and need additional cards just to facilitate more audio i/o. I agree that i prefer investing in fast current machines and have no qualms building hackintoshes, we haven't bought a mac pro in a few years now and we use less magma chassis than we used to due to most of our hacks having enough slots but in many cases its still required or desirable.

 

Your next example is about using a (granted oldy but goody) 9 year old PCI RME Hammerfall card along with a MBP.  How is that relevant?  We are talking about towers here, not MBP's reliance upon TB.  I completely grant that TB is aimed at MBP, iMac, and Mac Mini users as they have no internal options.  Your example is off target and completely irrelevant to any discussion about a tower's motherboard as you can choose to have PCI-e slots.

 

 

There is nothing old about RME interfaces, some of the PCIe solutions are quite new and even the older I/O devices, as you mention, work great if you buy the newer interface cards. It is relevant because one of the big shifts since apple abandoned the traditional mac pro is people want to be able to move the gear from one system to another, including real macs with no PCIe slots. It is very relevant. 

 

Further i would really like to point out that apples decision to base the "new mac pro" completely around thunderbolt may have major repercussions. We obviously have no idea how successful the new mac pro will be. But the fact is there is now NO apple computer with a pcie slot. The implication is that we will become more and more dependent on TB whether we like it or not as drivers for older or newer PCI devices will be less and less likely to be updated or written for OS X.

 

Whatever your reasons for building hacks, this becomes an extremely relevant issue and we really should be taking TB very seriously at this point as OS X users.

 

What could make sense as an advantage is that the modular nature of TB allows you to have fewer fully "built up" computers as you just connect TB devices to whatever you need.  That might be a valid argument, but I would challenge you to run the numbers.  It might take less organization on the part of your IT guy, but it probably costs you considerably more money in the final tally.  TB chassis and Magma chassis are not cheap.  Plus, having a tower with a bunch of cables running off it is not exactly a streamlined workstation.

 

I'm not sure what you're on about here so i'll just skip it.

 

When you do start addressing towers, and studio rigs, you say that you still "need a card to interface the Magma chassis so we might as well use TB."  What?  Why can't you just plug whatever you have in that Magma into the PCI-e lane directly?  Am I missing something here or are you?  

 

 

I think i addressed this above, magma chassis are still relevant to us in certain situations and especially on hero systems. They also (as an aside) in some cases allow us to leverage older, perfectly useful equipment such as PCI-X HD cards, etc. Obviously to interface to a magma card we need a PCI(e) card in the computer and the point is valid that if this can be done over thunderbolt (which it can) then its a better solution in many ways and it also allows connecting to a real modern mac. We ARE talking about heterogeneous working environments right? We do have lots of real modern macs around you know.

 

You end by saying that no hot swap TB is a deal breaker for a workstation, but you have not yet shown why TB is even needed in an audio workstation.  There is exactly one audio interface that uses TB and it also support USB 3.0 as both supply many times the bandwidth it needs.

 

I'm not sure which one your talking about, but avid has a native TB interface which has been quite popular, UAD Apollo also comes to mind, and again we are going to see more of this now that all real macs are TB dependent.  

 

Hopefully this explains things now. Maybe we work on different levels or in different worlds but the main point is OS X and TB are sort of in lock step now and it will be a hugely unfortunate thing if current and future hacks continue to have semi-crippled thunderbolt support.

 

My 2 cents plus 50.

g\

 

 



#414
theconnactic

theconnactic

    Stubborn AMD user

  • Local Moderators
  • 2,905 posts
  • Gender:Male
Genzai, thank you: you just spared me to post something in the lines you did (but perhaps less summarized). The difference here is we use Logic (so I could elaborate how that's nothing wrong in putting Logic in the same sentence as PT - I don't know about Cubase - but that would be way off topic).

All the best!

#415
maleorderbride

maleorderbride

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 282 posts
  • Gender:Male

My apology.  I got carried way and overstated things, but the core issue is still (supposedly) this motherboard with exactly 2x PCI-e x16 and 2x PCI-e x1.  With a full-sized video card installed that drops you down to 1x PCI-e x16 and 1x PCI-e x1.

 

Even with two fully working TB1 ports, this specific motherboard that sparked this conversation, would be less able to function as an high-end professional workstation (not just audio) than something like an ASUS P9X79 WS (Full size video card+ 5x PCI-e x16).  This Quo motherboard maxes out at 32GBs of RAM.  A P9X79 WS can have more RAM than OS X can address. 

 

That (edit: I mean Genzai) thinks that the most important thing holding this specific motherboard back from being an audio workstation is a lack of hot-swappable TB is a severe misunderstanding of hardware.  That is the main point I tried to address. 

 

I do not think that TB has no utility, or needs to die.  But I do place it below picking out the proper motherboard and CPU socket in order of importance as you will be able to add a TB PCI-e card to your system very easily down the road.  While you could replace your CPU/Motherboard/OS Install, that is certainly less straightforward than installing a single PCI-e card.  I imagine we can agree on that--yes?

 

Magma chassis are not irrelevant in your industry, but they are an expensive way to arrive at what you want.  No one wants to spend $3K to make up for 3x PCI-e lanes they could have purchased for $110 more than this motherboard costs.

 

So, hyperbole aside, does that make sense?

 

 

I will need to do some reading on high-end audio post production as I have never heard or spoken with an audio guy that faces the same hardware limitations as someone say color grading a 5K film, or waiting 12 hours for their 12-core to render less than 10 seconds of effects work.


 

Hopefully this explains things now. Maybe we work on different levels or in different worlds but the main point is OS X and TB are sort of in lock step now and it will be a hugely unfortunate thing if current and future hacks continue to have semi-crippled thunderbolt support.

 

My 2 cents plus 50.

g\

 

I agree--it would be unfortunate if current and future hackintoshes require a restart in order to use TB devices that are attached to them.  I don't see that as semi-crippled, but depending on your workflow I can see how that could be the case for some professionals.

 

I do not quite see it as lockstep so much as Apple doing what Apple does--making a Maginot Line just because they can--because they largely have a captive user base.

But unless Apple/Intel/Motherboard manufacturers inadvertently fix that for us, then I do not see it as likely that much effort will be funneled into fixing it on hacks.  Hopefully I am wrong!  But for the vast majority of (pro) users there is already a solid option that is less expensive and has many times more bandwidth.  It's called PCI-e.



#416
ILL

ILL

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 14 posts

I think who wants hot swap TB (for PCIe) devices never try to use a TB expansion box on a regular MBP.

We're using a Sonnet box with a RED Rocket and 2 SSD in RAID 0 for render out (or 2x Aja Kona 3G) with a MBPr (late'12) and there's no chance to have them working if pluged after the boot. You can't even let the MBP to sleep just ON or OFF, for this reason the Sonnet box doesn't have a switch

We have a TB to FW800, a TB to Ethernet and a TB to HDMI that works after boot but no way to have PCIe lanes.

I believe (please correct me if I'm wrong) that the PCIe funcionality via Thunderbolt is simply not hot swap.

For me is not an issue with a "less than 10" boot time" and I hope QUO will boot as fast as a MBP with the system installed in a SATAIII SSD.

Than if QUO decide to ship my KS motherboard may be I can write something more than thoughts....



#417
joe75

joe75

    Renegade

  • Retired
  • 2,165 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

http://support.apple.com/kb/ht5219#22

 

Get over it already..



#418
^Andy^

^Andy^

    InsanelyMac Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 659 posts
  • Gender:Male

http://support.apple.com/kb/ht5219#22

 

Get over it already..

So broken by design then - well that's handy!



#419
toastie

toastie

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

http://support.apple.com/kb/ht5219#22

 

Get over it already..

 

Seems to be a limitation on TB when running Boot Camp.  Or does this limitation extend to OS X as well?  I would hope not.



#420
maleorderbride

maleorderbride

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 282 posts
  • Gender:Male

Seems to be a limitation on TB when running Boot Camp.  Or does this limitation extend to OS X as well?  I would hope not.

Looks like it extends a least partially to OS X as well as you cannot sleep and wake with Thunderbolt devices on a Mac running OS X.

 

26. Do Thunderbolt devices stay connected if my Mac hibernates?

If the battery in your portable Mac is depleted enough to cause your portable to hibernate, all Thunderbolt devices will be disconnected. After connecting to power and waking the system, restart your computer to reconnect your Thunderbolt devices.

 

 

 

OK, found some info about it and it looks like the issue ILL has is specific to the RedRocket card.  It is not hot-swappable on TB.  

http://www.reduser.n...bolt-RED-Rocket

 

So, any device that is on the "officially supported list" should presumably be hotswappable on a Mac's TB port with OS X.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: mobo

  Topic Stats Last Post Info

3 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users


© 2014 InsanelyMac  |   News  |   Forum  |   Downloads  |   OSx86 Wiki  |   Mac Netbook  |   PHP hosting by CatN  |   Designed by Ed Gain  |   Logo by irfan  |   Privacy Policy