Anyone with thoughts on dual boot mac w/ maya

[Srek]

No problems here, we are using several MacPros and iMacs in dual boot with Win 7 and OS X 10.6
Cheers
Björn

[FrizzleFry0]

Good to hear. Do you know how much RAM you're using in your workstations?

[Srek]

In most cases 8 gig i think, in some more if i remember correctly
Cheers
Björn

[imashination]

All the training centres I teach at have moved to dual boot macs. no problems at all.

[cgbeige]

I run 10.6.2 and Windows 7 64-bit with no problems on this Mac Pro. I have 24 GB of RAM but I would recommend about 12GB minimum for 3D work.

But rendering in 2011 64-bit is faster on the OS X side (I've tested it) so I hope you're not doing it for the perceived added speed of 64-bit in Windows:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=6403012&postcount=811

[meleseDESIGN]

But rendering in 2011 64-bit is faster on the OS X side (I've tested it) so I hope you're not doing it for the perceived added speed of 64-bit in Windows:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=6403012&postcount=811


Holly cow, whole 6 seconds...

I better safe the money for the upcoming 6 Core Xeon Processors instaed of buying any of those 2011 Suites, the coming hardware candy will be much sweeter in performance for the money.

;)

[FrizzleFry0]

Thanks for the replies guys. The increased speed with OSX is interesting. I would have assumed that Windows would be quicker. This definitely makes the dual boot option look pretty appealing.

The other drawback I'm also running into with the macs are the graphics cards. We're really limited on options - Nvidia GT120 or ATI Radeon HD 4870. I've had a lot of issues with previous ATI cards' drivers and Maya, so I'm tempted to stay with dual GT120's and run dual 24" monitors.

And are many of you running Snow Leopard?

Thanks again in advance :beer:

[cgbeige]

The problems with ATI cards are only an issue on Windows. Apple writes the OpenGL stack that both ATI and Nvidia use on OS X so you don't get the crazy gimbal manipulator problems or display issues that Windows Radeon users get. The video cards choices are limited but gaming cards are officially supported so it's cheaper than having to get a Quadro for support. That said, I run a GTX 285 but it's not a BTO option on the Apple store so get the Radeon 4870 (I have the one that came with the machine and it works great with Maya and Mudbox). BUT the new Xeons just came out so there should be a new Mac Pros coming out any day. Since everybody has complained about the awful base graphics card, hopefully they'll update that and save having to upgrade to the 4870.

I'm running Snow Leopard in 64-bit kernel mode with no issues. Runs great with Maya 2011, ZBrush, Mudbox 2011 and all my other 3D apps (Topogun, Maxwell, Headus UV Layout, Realflow, etc)

And for reference - the 32-bit version of Maya 2010 for OS X renders the same speed as the Windows 64-bit one does. It's really only the increased memory usage and less glitchy UI that make the Windows versions before 2011 more appealing than the Mac one.

[olson]

Do yourself a favor and dual boot with Linux to use 64-bit Maya. If you're going to go through the trouble of dual booting for a single application then its worth doing right. Cheers!

[Jettatore]

CBeige your simply wrong. And we had this conversation already, in full, but your still saying stuff that is wrong....

http://download.autodesk.com/us/qualcharts/2010/maya2010_qualifiedgraphics_mac.pdf

Bigger check on it's own means qualified/certified (if you read the legend). Smaller check inside of a square check box only means tested and is actually not officially supported.

You can see that from the above list, directly from Autodesk, that there are currently no consumer gaming cards that are officially supported between Mac OSX / Maya 2010.

[imashination]

CBeige your simply wrong. And we had this conversation already, in full, but your still saying stuff that is wrong....

Those tables show me virtually every geforce and radeon card for osx has been tested and works, whilst virtually every quadro card either failed to run it, or ran it with problems. So, given the cheaper cards run it with less problems, who in their right mind would pay more money to be given more problems?

Unless im misreading your point, it sounds like youre saying he's wrong to recommend the gf 120 cards, when in fact theyre cheaper and run it will fewer problems.

[Jettatore]

My point is he's claiming you get some sort of extra added official support with the consumer end cards when you in fact don't. Those cards are -tested working- not officially supported.

There is also a whole list of cards on the Windows chart that are also consumer end that are tested working without issues, but are as well, not officially supported.

[meleseDESIGN]

Who needs official support for a graphics card from others then from those were you bought it anyway?
As the times when I still bought Quadros there wasn´t any more support offerings as for none Quadros.
I think nothing has changed since that, just the fact gamer cards are much better today as their Quadro counterpart as it wasn´t the case a long time ago.


;)

[Jettatore]

Completely agreed. I'd go with a gaming card on either Windows or OSX. It's just this statement..

"The video cards choices are limited but gaming cards are officially supported so it's cheaper than having to get a Quadro for support."

...that I take issue with because it's inaccurate. Which on it's own would be fine, but we already had a long discussion on this exact topic last week where we determined that statement was in fact, inaccurate yet he's still saying it. Something about that really upsets me.

[cgbeige]

Do yourself a favor and dual boot with Linux to use 64-bit Maya. If you're going to go through the trouble of dual booting for a single application then its worth doing right. Cheers!

This is just a bad idea. Linux is great for big iron and film studios who need to write their own code but not a low-maintenance studio. Just installing Maya on Fedora Core is a hassle because of the libraries (yum this, yum that) you need installed.

As for the whining about card support on OS X. I do beta testing for Autodesk. They support these gaming cards on OS X - I know for a fact. If I report an issue with a card in OS X, they say stuff like "I'm running the GTX 285 as well and I'll check that out." Or they say "I'll check on the system with the Mac Pro Radeon 4870." They address issues with these cards where they would likely only test Quadros and FireGL/FirePros on Windows. The irony is that the Quadro is the least checked from what I've seen but the Mac driver is exactly the same as the GTX 285 so it doesn't have any issues that the GTX 285 wouldn't have. I'm not saying that's a good thing for Mac Quadro users - it's highway robbery but my point stands: you get top-quality, official support with gaming cards on the Mac.

Prove me wrong - I deal with at least 6 QA heads in charge of Maya and Mudbox testing on the Mac. Get me 6 others to say differently and we'll have a tie...

I'm not saying that you can't get a stable gaming card Windows Maya setup. It's what I learned Maya on: an Athlon with a Geforce 6800 (yes, that was a while ago). I'm just saying that you can use the Mac side and you'll have fewer problems since on OS X there are:

- fewer 3D cards, so they are more likely to be tested
- fewer system variables (I don't have to worry about a crappy Turtle Beach driver mysteriously interfering with my video card)
- a single OpenGL implementation that is used for both Nvidia and ATI cards

I don't envy MS - Windows does a pretty good job with the ridiculous demands put on it: remain stable and predictable with a near-infinite combination of variables. But that clearly has a price: having to buy an expensive video card just for support because the drivers are managed differently.

[Jettatore]

Your ridiculous. Why don't you just show us where Autodesk officially claims to support these gaming cards, since your the one making the statement and the burden of proof is therefor on you.

When the software is out officially, if they support the cards officially and therefor promise to fix problems their customers may have when running these cards, that is completely different than a beta tester reporting an issue during development.... If they do that, then that is fine, but in 2010 they did not do this, and did not commit to that. And who is to say that they are not doing the same thing on the Windows side, which is basically the premise you were implying the entire time.

[cgbeige]

"Hi Dave,

I can't reproduce this on my Mac with Ati Radeon HD 4870. Although I can reproduce it in the UV view. That bug is slated to be fixed."

Rest of the email deleted.

[Jettatore]

Mate, they do support them. if you have a problem and call them, theyll help you exactly the same regardless of what gfx card you have. They dont hang up on you and send you a dead animal head in the post because you use a card not on their official list.

So if you make the same call and say your using a card on a Windows or Linux rig that isn't officially supported they will hang up on you and send you a dead animal head???

Edit: The forum screwed up the order of the posting several times in this thread, this was actually written after Imashination's quote above but it was posted to the thread somehow magically before it....

[meleseDESIGN]

This is just a bad idea. Linux is great for big iron and film studios who need to write their own code but not a low-maintenance studio. Just installing Maya on Fedora Core is a hassle because of the libraries (yum this, yum that) you need installed.

So by that said you mean it´s probably the best everybody uses a Mac Pro (instaed of PC), OS X (instaed of any other OS), Nuke (instaed of After Effects)...?

You´re a wild child man.

;)

[imashination]

Your ridiculous. Why don't you just show us where Autodesk officially claims to support these gaming cards, since your the one making the statement and the burden of proof is therefor on you.

Mate, they do support them. if you have a problem and call them, theyll help you exactly the same regardless of what gfx card you have. They dont hang up on you and send you a dead animal head in the post because you use a card not on their official list.

[Jettatore]

CBeige, they test Consumer Gaming Cards on Windows too, they even publish the results for the convenience of their customers. What is your point?

[meleseDESIGN]

Mate, they do support them. if you have a problem and call them, theyll help you exactly the same regardless of what gfx card you have. They dont hang up on you and send you a dead animal head in the post because you use a card not on their official list.

Exactly this were my experiences too when talking with the support peoples or asking in the Autodesk´s forum.
Because they like to sale their software and no gfx cards.

;)

[cgbeige]

haha. Look at the Windows chart and let me know when they get around to testing all the gaming cards that are "scheduled for testing." You don't know much about how Autodesk works, apparently. It's not a make-work program, it's a corporation interested in saving money by not testing products it doesn't have to.

I was going to get some design done today but I thought I'd buy a three-year-old Sapphire Radeon and test it out in Windows Vista 64-bit with Maya 2008 SP2. I'll be sure to report back with the results. haha.

[Jettatore]

I'll keep my eyes out for the official Autodesk 2011 Qualified hardware report, and I have my fingers crossed that they do indeed add official certified support for Consumer end gaming cards in 2011, even if it's only on the Mac platform, as they did not do this in 2010 according to their own documentation.

...Back to programming. Later.

[FrizzleFry0]

Thanks for all the responses. Hopefully most of the viewport issues with Maya 2011 is resolved. Is that something you were testing out as well, cgbeige? I may look into going dual 4870 if it's really that much of a jump over the GT120. Unfortunately there's not much modifying we can do without breaking the warranty with Apple so we'll be sticking with what's offered out of the box.

And you are correct about most of the issues with ATI drivers being PC related, as that was my first machine I started learning Maya on some years back.

[cgbeige]

Thanks for all the responses. Hopefully most of the viewport issues with Maya 2011 is resolved. Is that something you were testing out as well, cgbeige? I may look into going dual 4870 if it's really that much of a jump over the GT120. Unfortunately there's not much modifying we can do without breaking the warranty with Apple so we'll be sticking with what's offered out of the box.

And you are correct about most of the issues with ATI drivers being PC related, as that was my first machine I started learning Maya on some years back.

2011's viewport performs really well but I never had many issues with the previous versions. I very occasionally got a leftover edge highlight after undoing a series of edge loops but that's all I can remember.

Do you need dual cards? The 4870 has dual dual-linked outputs (for res over 1920x1200) - just get a converter for mini DisplayPort to DVI (the 4870 has a DVI and a mini DisplayPort connector):

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5106&seq=1&format=2

I have that and it works fine with my dual NEC 2490WUXi setup.

But wait a week. Seriously, they are on the verge of releasing new machines.

[Jettatore]

^Don't forget that if he still wants to dual boot, the card has to play nice with every operating system he wants to have Maya working on. Have you tested that card on Maya/Windows?

[cgbeige]

no - and I wouldn't recommend an ATI card for Windows Maya. That's also why I would wait a week to see what the new card offerings are since they are pretty lacking right now. The GTX 285 is the best option and it's what I run but it's not a BTO option. If you don't mind buying that card separately and swapping out the GT120 or whatever is built in, then you could go that way for the best cross-platform support.

[FrizzleFry0]

Will do. We won't be buying anything for at least another week anyway, so hopefully the next batch will upgrade the card.

[cgbeige]

ya, I wouldn't expect the price to be much lower though. I'm looking at the price of the Xeon X5680 3.3 GHz and they run $1,772.95 apiece. That's $3500 just for the processors at the high-end.

Considering I can swap them out of my dual 2.66GHz I'm going to get two much much later and upgrade this machine.

[Kai01W]

This is just a bad idea. Linux is great for big iron and film studios who need to write their own code but not a low-maintenance studio. Just installing Maya on Fedora Core is a hassle because of the libraries (yum this, yum that) you need installed.

Nah... I know smaller shops that use Linux.. And sorry, if, as an admin, you can't be bothered to install a couple of rpms (in most cases they are supplied on the Maya DVD anyway), maybe you should be looking for a new job.
There are admins that think Linux is actually easier to administrate cause the end user cannot change anything anyway and can't screw things up that much :-)
I agree though that if your machines are not dedicated to one rather defined set of tasks and need to be able to run and do anything you might be better of with a windows/os x machine.

-k

[olson]

This is just a bad idea. Linux is great for big iron and film studios who need to write their own code but not a low-maintenance studio. Just installing Maya on Fedora Core is a hassle because of the libraries (yum this, yum that) you need installed.

Heaven forbid students should actually get experience with industry standard software. :rolleyes:

Besides, its not about the perceived ease of installing software. Its a school where people learn and the budget is always a consideration. I wish my school would have run Linux because I've used it at every studio since graduating and would have greatly benefited from a head start on it.

[cgbeige]

look in the Maya forum at this active thread:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=7&t=822564

Do you really want to wish this on a lab when people can learn to use a Unix command line in OS X? My terminal is always open and I know how to use it (I use screen and ssh to check renders too), but I never see the issues that even that guy, an experienced TD, can't even fix. This really is the best thing about OS X: you get stability, a good choice of software (ZBrush, Topogun, Mudbox, design software, etc.) and a robust Unix system with access to gcc and llvm if you want it. You can even install fink or darwinports if you want to familiarize yourself with a yum/apt-get type of build environment.

I think Unix experience is important but if you're recommending people run Photoshop in WINE (don't forget to disable GPU image rendering or it will fall apart) for a school lab, then you don't have the lab or the user's interests in mind. Linux makes a lot of sense for film VFX but those companies invariably do content and asset creation on Macs or Windows because you can't get programs like Mudbox, modo or ZBrush on Linux. Pixar is one of those companies - they use modo and Mudbox on Macs but Linux for their custom software like Marionette, at the end of their production pipeline.

[olson]

The original poster is considering dual boot with Windows to run Maya, not to run everything in the lab like Photoshop (who even mentioned WINE anyway?). Also people have issues with software on other operating system too, that linked thread isn't the only thread in the world about Maya issues on a particular operating system. I still think dual boot with Linux is the best option for a Mac school lab that needs 64-bit Maya. :shrug:

[cgbeige]

give it a couple weeks.

http://grab.by/3b6n

works fine here.

[olson]

give it a couple weeks.

http://grab.by/3b6n

works fine here.

Probably a good call, but that isn't a free ticket to bash or discredit Linux. ;)

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.