Can this thing run Final Cut Pro?

Discussion in 'MacBook Air' started by Laureate2, Jun 20, 2009.

  1. Laureate2 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    #1
    My father has the original airbook, and I love the size and design, but am aware that it had several major decision issues and limitations. Does the current version have enough power/capacity to effectively run Final Cut Pro? I'm much prefer this lightweight machine versus the macbook pro, but I don't want a meltdown everytime I try to edit a video.
    thanks
     
  2. drjsway macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
  3. noodle654 macrumors 68020

    noodle654

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Location:
    Never Ender
    #3
    I am not sure on this. I am sure it *could* run Final Cut Pro, but probably not very well. But, the MBA with the Intel X3100 CANNOT RUN Final Cut, as it is not a supported GPU. If you have the new ones with nVidia 9400, it could run it, but RAM would be a problem.
     
  4. arcangel6 macrumors regular

    arcangel6

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #4
    Hi,

    I did try Final Cut 'Express', not Pro using an external 128G SSD as the primary scratch disk with the new MBA to render a 2 minute 30 second video clip. The timeline consisted of three small not HD (~2mb) video files with two transitions. The program worked fine but much slower (as would be expected) with the following iStat measured average fan speed and processor temp:

    Fan: 6204 rpm
    Temp: 80 C (176 F)

    Would I want to do much video editing on this system? No, that is why I have desktop system on steroids. However, if I had too I could though I would likely avoid BIG projects and I am not sure how HD processing would go. As we all know, the MBA was not designed for this purpose.

    Regards,

    Joe
     
  5. CalMin macrumors 6502a

    CalMin

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    #5
    That's what you will get. At least until they release a MacBook Air Pro...:p
     
  6. dealfreak macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    #6
    On a side note would Aperature 2.0 work on a 1.86/128gb SSD? I'm currently run v 1.0 but noticed that the newer version would require a faster processor.

    Anyone have experience with this?
     
  7. Royale w/cheese macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    #7
    Don't know if this is considered thread jacking, but the requirements for Aperture 2 list the Macbook Air (without a processor speed) and all of the graphics cards that the Air ever came with, so it should work, it is supported. Whether or not at an accpetable speed, would be relative to the user, I guess. It is just that the RECOMMENDED configuration is higher, at 2.0ghz and better graphics.
     
  8. noodle654 macrumors 68020

    noodle654

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Location:
    Never Ender
    #8
    Aperture would run, but again, not well. Aperture uses A LOT of RAM, my 4GB MBP uses just about 2.5-3.5 when doing editing, not mention CPU alone! I am sure it will run, but it might be a tad bit sluggish.
     
  9. poematik14 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    #9
    I had this same question. How does it perform with heavy iMovie use and light Final Cut Express? Also, medium to heavy use of Illustrator and After Effects?

    I really want something light and powerful to do editing on the field. (And not carry a brick around from class to class haha)
     
  10. arcangel6 macrumors regular

    arcangel6

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #10
    Hi,

    See my response above regarding Final Cut Express. While it likely responds better than past MBA versions I would highly recommend you consider the 'brick' instead. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my new MBA but my needs are very different than yours......mainly MSOffice, some simple photo editing, watching vids and some very light vid editing every so often. Yes I wish it had more power.....but it is so dang light and sleek!

    I tried the netbook thing for a while and would say 13 is the minimum screen for me and they are just way underpowered especially for the Windows OS. The new MBA which costs 5-6 times more is a much better fit for me.

    I just sold my MBA 13 because for heavy movie and image processing I use my PC desktop (anabolic steroid version) which has more than enough power. I will likely replace the Dell when Apple revises the iMACs.


    Joe
     
  11. poematik14 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    #11
    Thanks for the advice. I also have a disgustingly buff roided out PC, but I cant stand windows based editing programs (Premiere, Vegas). I am in love with the intuitiveness of iMovie and FC, and thats a main reason why Im getting a macbook pro/air.

    Ive looked at alot of windows based laptops, and they are all cheaply made- granted they are much more powerful and less expensive, but they all are made of this nasty shiny plastic that flexes and just feels brittle and breakable. (Especially those HP's) Not something that would survive if I dropped it out in the field. Add to that they are all like 34839402 lbs and have like 30mins of battery life, even worse if I want to edit.

    I guess the Air isint for me then. I think Ill go with either a refurb 15" late 2008 MBP for 1349, or an upgraded 13" 2.26 MBP for 1300. Im gonna use it, again, for editing on the go and I might as well do all my creative (Illustrator, AF, audacity, etc) work on it too. The PC will be for gaming and porn now.
     
  12. thomahawk macrumors 6502a

    thomahawk

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Location:
    Osaka, Japan
    #12
    incorrect, i run final cut pro intensively everyday editing HD-like content on my macbook with the Intel X3100 gpu. i have had no problems. have 4gigs of ram and a nice cool environment and your good to go.

    as with the macbook air. i say work on the vids in a AC'd room or get a cooler for the thing. its alumnium and really thin so im sure it should cool much faster than a white plastic macbook
     
  13. aleksandra. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Location:
    Warsaw, Poland
    #13
    You're right, Air doesn't get nearly as hot as plastic MacBooks. Still I suppose it'll be a bit sluggish.
     
  14. noodle654 macrumors 68020

    noodle654

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Location:
    Never Ender
    #14
    Then I guess Apple's site is wrong http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/specs/

     
  15. aaquib macrumors 65816

    aaquib

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    #15
    ALL Final Cut Studio Applications. Not Final Cut Pro.
     
  16. Mhkobe macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    #16
    The macbook air can definitely run Final cut pro, but with 50 gigs or so total space just to install including the library files, you would have very little space left to do anything on a 128gb SSD. Also 2 gigs of RAM is gonna slow you down quite a bit. But still very possible. 9400M is NOT a good rendering card, so edit away, but if you are gonna render more than a small preview, use something else.
     
  17. Mhkobe macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    #17
    Not more powerful for price!! Look at the graphics chip specs on those compared to even the air.
     
  18. entatlrg macrumors 68040

    entatlrg

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Location:
    Waterloo & Georgian Bay, Canada
    #18
    I wouldn't want to do much Final Cut work on my MBA ... that's not really it's intended job ... it may be able to run it but you'll notice you're really working the machine, fan's running, machine quite warm.

    I'd get an MBP for that, 13, 15 or 17".
     
  19. poematik14 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    #19
    Have you looked at the Asus models? They have powerful 9800 series Nvidia cards last time I checked. Acer also has upper level 48 series ATI Cards as well. Dell too, but lately they have been as expensive as macbooks, full specced out.
     
  20. buddhahacker macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    #20

    I have around 7k images using the same system you quoted above and it runs fine. As a comparison, it runs faster than my 1st gen 17" MBP w/2G RAM and 120GB 7200 RPM HD.
     

Share This Page