Professionals Successfully Push Mac Pro to Absurd Limits With 558-Day Video Timeline in Final Cut Pro

[MacRumors]

After waiting for several years for Apple to release a new professional tower, the company finally released the new Mac Pro last year. With dual-GPUs and an innovative cooling system, the diminutive machine has impressed professional users.

FCP.co decided to test out Final Cut Pro X and their well-equipped 8-core Mac Pro to absurd limits. The site put 1600 connected clips into the GUI, and actually got the Mac Pro to play 50 'layers' of 4K video for a few seconds before it began dropping frames. It also made a 500,000 pixel wide project, useful perhaps for making (extremely wide) digital signage projects. Finally, the site successfully made a 558-day video time line -- roughly a year and a half.

We pushed FCPX and the Mac Pro to silly limits, of course nobody will make a year long or a 500,000 pixel wide timeline, but it's good to know the combination will go that far.

It seems that the real limitation is a hardware one, yes FCPX will do 16K, but you have to have the storage bandwidth to supply the huge number of pixels per second. When creating that huge timeline, we used the same clip over and over. Making the same timeline from different shorter clips wouldn't be as easy as we think very large numbers of clips within FCPX will slow the machine down.

Apple have however, built a combination that will be good for nearly all different media sized projects within the foreseeable future. The Mac Pro and FCPX handle 4K like SD, so 8K should be fine.

FCP.co notes that most of the limitations occur with the hardware, not artificial limitations with Final Cut Pro X itself.

Article Link: Professionals Successfully Push Mac Pro to Absurd Limits With 558-Day Video Timeline in Final Cut Pro

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

....And they said apple could not innovate.

 

[chirpie]

I hereby ban all instances of the phrase "iMovie Pro" or "iMovie on Steroids."

 

[Jcknows0]

I'm really excited to see the nMP over the next year or two with Broadwell to see how much the power/performace balance plays out before I dive in, was thinking of a hackintosh til then as I don't even have a 4k camera yet. The newer pcie-3 based flash coming out this year and faster ram by next year should push this even more into new territory.

----------

I hereby ban all instances of the phrase "iMovie Pro" or "iMovie on Steroids."

I heard the same thing from a good friend who is still using FCP 7 since he's heavily invested but after I took the plunge when 10.1 was released, showing him the benefits, his ears are perking up.

 

[iUsers]

Not bad!

That's pretty good! All that power for the low price of at $7,000!

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

....And they said apple could not innovate.

The MacPro does't drive stock price iToys drive stock price and Google has taken the innovation mind-share in that domain.

 

[GeneralChang]

The MacPro does't drive stock price iToys drive stock price and Google has taken the innovation mind-share in that domain.

What do stock prices have to do with it? Apple makes their billions by selling devices and computers, not by trading stock. Google makes their billions by selling ads. And it turns out Apple makes more billions than Google. So if you want money to be the deciding factor in who is more “innovative” then Apple wins anyways.

But seriously, money is the worst metric for determining innovation. They’re not related at all.

 

[Nunyabinez]

That's pretty good! All that power for the low price of at $7,000!

If paying $7000 for this kind of power is an issue for you then you definitely don't need that much power.

 

[robeddie]

....And they said apple could not innovate.

Using industry current parts from other companies (intel) to build a relatively fast computer is innovation? Its not like Apple invented super fast parts that no one else has.
I guess its 'innovation' that they were able to cram those parts in a small cylander. But a year from now are you still gonna be oohhing and aahing over that black cylander?
Probably not. You wont even think or care about how it looks.

 

[Nunyabinez]

Using industry current parts from other companies (intel) to build a relatively fast computer is innovation? Its not like Apple invented super fast parts that no one else has.
I guess its 'innovation' that they were able to cram those parts in a small cylander. But a year from now are you still gonna be oohhing and aahing over that black cylander?
Probably not. You wont even think or care about how it looks.

Did you think that Apple was going to build a machine with technology that didn't previously exist? Did you expect that it would have something other than an Intel CPU, or that it would have proprietary video cards?

What you described is exactly what innovation is for a company like Apple; to take existing technologies and integrate them in a creative way.

I don't know what your criteria are for being able to say that Apple innovated with the MP. Maybe you could enlighten us and tell us what would constitute an innovative MP for you.

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

But seriously, money is the worst metric for determining innovation. They’re not related at all.

Money is the best metric of innovation as true innovation generates money.

 

[robeddie]

Did you think that Apple was going to build a machine with technology that didn't previously exist? Did you expect that it would have something other than an Intel CPU, or that it would have proprietary video cards?

What you described is exactly what innovation is for a company like Apple; to take existing technologies and integrate them in a creative way.

I don't know what your criteria are for being able to say that Apple innovated with the MP. Maybe you could enlighten us and tell us what would constitute an innovative MP for you.

Its a relatively fast, but not the fastest computer available right now. What do YOU mean by innovation then. What exactly is so amazing about this machine?

 

[Parasprite]

....And they said apple could not innovate.

I have a feeling that you don't know what that word means.

 

[Freida]

Money is the best metric of innovation as true innovation generates money.

you couldn't be more wrong. Bugatti is perfect example. They have built the Veyron just to proof the engineering excellence. Not to make money! In fact, that project lost money but the result is pure delight. If you think that metric for innovation is money then I don't think we will continue this discussion in a constructive manner as you are blatantly ignorant to what innovation is.
Btw, the inventor of a wheel didn't make money, yet the innovation is still used!
For crying out loud, does everything has to be about money for you to even move a finger?

 

[Nunyabinez]

Its a relatively fast, but not the fastest computer available right now. What do YOU mean by innovation then. What exactly is so amazing about this machine?

I already stated what I thought was innovation. In the case of the new MP it's a third of the size of the previous MP with incredible power. It utilizes a novel approach to cooling with the single solid heat sink and one fan. It introduces a new philosophy in workstations; make a very powerful base machine that has the ability to be expanded externally via Thunderbolt 2.

To me that is quite innovative. The fact that there are machines that are faster by no means indicates that they are more innovative. In fact that's what most people around here complain about with things like the MBP. That Apple is simply upgrading to a faster processor and that is not "innovation."

 

[Chatter]

I have a feeling that you don't know what that word means.

Other way around bud. Its you who is confused. Look up a dictionary and come back. Or not. Doesn't really matter.

 

[Parasprite]

Other way around bud. Its you who is confused. Look up a dictionary and come back. Or not. Doesn't really matter.

Considering the hardware responsible for these numbers are designed and produced by companies that aren't Apple, I would think not.

That is unless you are talking about Final Cut Pro and not the hardware, in which case never mind.

 

[Blu Reel]

Ok I can't resist...

Taking the hardware tangent to the extreme, comparing how Apple is creating a new computer using "existing" technology to how HP, Dell, and the rest of PC industry are using "existing" technology to create a new computer, I would have to award Apple with the title of being innovative since the rest of the PC industry appears to be shrinking as opposed to growing, losing money (downsizing) as opposed to making money, rehashing the same old system and the same old way of doing things as opposed to...what's the word...innovating?

Ok I admit, this is a total troll post, but like I said in my title, I just couldn't resist

I've left gaping holes in my argument and logic...anyone?

 

[iUsers]

If paying $7000 for this kind of power is an issue for you then you definitely don't need that much power.

I don't need that much power. I build machines more powerful for less though. Not as fancy of a case, but you get the idea.

 

[kpac]

I don't need that much power. I build machines more powerful for less though. Not as fancy of a case, but you get the idea.

You should list what hardware you are talking about. Some very tech blog (ars technica I believe...?) said that for the price, you can't do better, performance wise, (not even talking about the design). That ain't my expertise, but I bet you can't build a Mac Pro clone for much less, if any less.

 

[melendezest]

OK, people saying the Mac Pro is not innovative need to shut up. It is. Period. It is unique in the market, nothing else is or has been, like it.

Whether or not you like the Mac Pro, or feel that Apple should have gone in a different direction, is another story.

This thing is powerful as hell, and while I'd rather had an updated "old" Mac Pro (both design and price-wise), I can see that Apple's target market would be happy. I am not in it, so it sucks to be me (kinda).

 

[iUsers]

You should list what hardware you are talking about. Some very tech blog (ars technica I believe...?) said that for the price, you can't do better, performance wise, (not even talking about the design). That ain't my expertise, but I bet you can't build a Mac Pro clone for much less, if any less.

E5-1650 - $550
2 Firepro D500 - $490 a piece ($980)
12 GB DDR3 1866 ECC - $180
Motherboard - $160
PSU - $90
256 GB SSD - $140

= $2,100~

Apple Mac Pro cost - $2,999

I don't even pay the prices mentioned above, anyone with Google does. I pay even less, probably $1,900. So $1,000 off. I didn't include a case or any 'innovation' though.

----------

OK, people saying the Mac Pro is not innovative need to shut up. It is. Period. It is unique in the market, nothing else is or has been, like it.

Whether or not you like the Mac Pro, or feel that Apple should have gone in a different direction, is another story.

This thing is powerful as hell, and while I'd rather had an updated "old" Mac Pro (both design and price-wise), I can see that Apple's target market would be happy. I am not in it, so it sucks to be me (kinda).

"It is. Period.."

That's not how you make a point. If fitting already existing components into a smaller case is innovative to you then Apple has a fan for life and doesn't have to do much.

The retina displays are innovative. Touch ID as well. Motion co-processor. They are plenty innovative, but shrinking a tower is not new. They shrunk the iMac a while back if you heard. They shrink things all the time.

 

[iBug2]

256 GB SSD - $140

This is the problematic part. A PCIe SSD costs a lot more than a regular one. So your computer would be around 2300$.

And 2 Firepro D500 - $490 a piece ($980) is also wrong. First of all, there's no D500 for sale. It's closest cousin is W7000 which costs 800 each, so if you go with that, you get 600$ more, and there, you reached the price of Mac Pro.

----------

but shrinking a tower is not new. They shrunk the iMac a while back if you heard. They shrink things all the time.

And they are all innovation.

 

[iUsers]

This is the problematic part. A PCIe SSD costs a lot more than a regular one. So your computer would be around 2300$.

And 2 Firepro D500 - $490 a piece ($980) is also wrong. First of all, there's no D500 for sale. It's closest cousin is W7000 which costs 800 each, so if you go with that, you get 600$ more, and there, you reached the price of Mac Pro.

Sorry I meant D300, and that makes my price correct. It depends on the SSD. I can get the 256 GB PCIE for about $300 though yeah.
----------



And they are all innovation.

If thats the case then every company can claim innovation.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Using industry current parts from other companies (intel) to build a relatively fast computer is innovation? Its not like Apple invented super fast parts that no one else has.
I guess its 'innovation' that they were able to cram those parts in a small cylander. But a year from now are you still gonna be oohhing and aahing over that black cylander?
Probably not. You wont even think or care about how it looks.

Did you think that Apple was going to build a machine with technology that didn't previously exist?

Cough..cough..Thunderbolt 2...Cough. A workstation using a single cooling fan about as quiet as a Mac Mini at 1/4 the size of conventual workstations. I'm sure Thunderbolt 2 will come out eventually for PC's.