15" rMBP 2.4Ghz - sufficient for FCP editing?

[NewBench]

I'm planning on purchasing several rMBPs for video editing. My workflow is all FCP which ran wonderfully on an older Mac Pro.

I'm looking at the 15" rMBP 2.4Ghz (the lower speed processor than the 2.7Ghz). Will be ordering 16GB ram from the offset. Will this be a sufficient system to run FCPX smoothly? I work with a lot of high resolution formats and shoot in 4k so hope that there won't be too many issues.

Any links to any recent threads which discuss this demand with rMBPs? All of the stickies seem to discuss non-retina and older models.

Thanks

 

[Squilly]

I'm planning on purchasing several rMBPs for video editing. My workflow is all FCP which ran wonderfully on an older Mac Pro.

I'm looking at the 15" rMBP 2.4Ghz (the lower speed processor than the 2.7Ghz). Will be ordering 16GB ram from the offset. Will this be a sufficient system to run FCPX smoothly? I work with a lot of high resolution formats and shoot in 4k so hope that there won't be too many issues.

Any links to any recent threads which discuss this demand with rMBPs? All of the stickies seem to discuss non-retina and older models.

Thanks

The rMBP is a beast. It'll be fine, other than the fact that it can't handle a 4K resolution (would probably just be downgraded to Retina).

 

[pgiguere1]

I don't use FCP with my rMBP (Only Premiere) but video editing renders are the kind of things you will never have too much CPU for, so it's hard to determine what you call "sufficient" since more power is always better.

If you haven't already, take a look at the Geekbench results to compare your current Mac Pro to the rMBP you want. It should give you an idea of the performance you will expect, since both FCP and this kind of synthetic benchmark will push your CPU at full load.

 

[e²Studios]

I use FCP with no issues on my 13" rMBP (i7 3.0 early '13) so I highly doubt you would have any with a a 15" quad core model. It runs great, if you have specific questions on using FCP with it feel free to ask.

 

[dusk007]

If the 2.4Ghz wasn't sufficient, you would be out of luck with a notebook anyway.
13% faster 2.7Ghz CPU wouldn't make a noticeable difference. Either they both do or neither does.

 

[maratus]

The rMBP is a beast. It'll be fine, other than the fact that it can't handle a 4K resolution (would probably just be downgraded to Retina).

I believe that it can through HDMI 1.4 port, but it's a software issue in Mac OS

 

[chmodme]

maybe

I edit a bunch of video on a 2011 Corei7 (2.7) with 16GB RAM. My unit also uses the AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1024 MB. Obviously my unit is non-Retina but as I use an external monitor it doesn't matter.

Using FCP X, and simple H264 video...well, it depends. If I can get away from applying something like NEAT, then I have sufficient horsepower and it is a good balance between performance and cost. If I need to work a clip or two over then it can augur in pretty well. It handles things, but it gets perceptibly more slow unless if I manage to shoot well enough to avoid serious cleaning up in post.

I think you'll be fine, but you will find yourself bogged down sometimes. I believe you will have plenty of horsepower, most of the time.

regards,
chmodme

 

[NewBench]

Thanks for the replies, fairly satisfied that we'll get adequate performance. Funny I should ask as one of the rMBP promo shots I recall was running FCPX.

Buying with the smallest SSD available as I think anyone running these semi-professionally/professionally will have an external hdd/raid type system anyway.

 

[cambookpro]

The rMBP is a beast. It'll be fine, other than the fact that it can't handle a 4K resolution (would probably just be downgraded to Retina).

It can - I remember a MBA doing the same though an external Thunderbolt gizmo. Link
Just because it can't display it fully doesn't mean it can't handle 4K being edited.

 

[ColdCase]

Thanks for the replies, fairly satisfied that we'll get adequate performance. Funny I should ask as one of the rMBP promo shots I recall was running FCPX.

Buying with the smallest SSD available as I think anyone running these semi-professionally/professionally will have an external hdd/raid type system anyway.

Reading/Writing to the internal SSD is much faster than any external drive, so you may want to have enough internal SSD to provide plenty of Cache and working memory. Externals are great for large sized raw footage files or for storing finished projects.

At this point in time, it seems to be more cost effective to build in the SSD capacity you want now than to add later.

 

[Doward]

I do FCPX editing in 1080p on my 2.5Ghz 2011 17" MBP. Your 2.4Ghz Ivy Bridge will be fine, CPU wise.

I will recommend 16 GB of RAM. I get 3-4GB of page outs when editing large clips (I currently have 8GB of RAM)

 

[maratus]

Reading/Writing to the internal SSD is much faster than any external drive, so you may want to have enough internal SSD to provide plenty of Cache and working memory. Externals are great for large sized raw footage files or for storing finished projects.

At this point in time, it seems to be more cost effective to build in the SSD capacity you want now than to add later.

Unless it's an external SSD, which is much more cost effective solution! With a 960GB Micron M500 in Thunderbolt enclosure you're paying the price of just an internal drive upgrade from 256GB to 768GB.

 

[ColdCase]

Unless it's an external SSD, which is much more cost effective solution! With a 960GB Micron M500 in Thunderbolt enclosure you're paying the price of just an internal drive upgrade from 256GB to 768GB.

Rotational drives will always be more cost effective for mass storage, but thats not the point here. I was just saying that if the OP needs SSD speeds, its more cost effective to get that internally and from the factory than a third party upgrade.

External SSD regardless of how they are connected to the rMBP, will be much slower (50%) than the internal SSD which is on the SATA bus. Why cripple an otherwise speedy SSD by throttling it with thunderbolt?

Bare 960GB 2.5 SSDs, if you can find any in stock, are now running $1000 to $3000. Consumer grade 512GB are ~$500+. I don't think anyone sells anything in between.

As posted previously:

"The 256 is the "lowest grade" on a rMBP 15.

The rMBP apple store upgrade from 256 to 512 is $300, buying a 480GB separately is $550. You lose money. You can get 768GB from apple for only $700. You can get that third party. You do end up with an extra 256GB hard drive going the DIY upgrade toute and buying a $30 enclosure (equivalent to a $250 external SDD).

so standard > 512GB via apple is $300
standard > 480 via third party is $550, but you have end up with a $250 portable 256GB drive (if thats of any value to you) $500-$250 = $300. You also down 6% of your storage space (32GB)

$300 with full warranty, $300 plus your labor without warranty and risk of damage... the difference is not as much as it was years ago..."

"Having done these upgrades myself on my 2012 cmbp I totally agree, money wise it is not worth it. But fun!"

Oh, by the way, the SSD in the rMBP may look like mSATA, but it is not.

 

[maratus]

Bare 960GB 2.5 SSDs, if you can find any in stock, are now running $1000 to $3000. Consumer grade 512GB are ~$500+. I don't think anyone sells anything in between.

Coming back in stock soon, this is a breakthrough in SSD price/GB

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148696&Tpk=m500 960gb&IsVirtualParent=1