Ispaying an extra £900 worth it for my type of video editing

Discussion in 'Digital Video' started by ukspeedtraps, Oct 30, 2013.

  1. ukspeedtraps macrumors newbie

    Oct 13, 2011
    I have

    iMac 24"
    2.93 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    8 GB 1067 MHz DDR3
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 256 MB

    Due to not liking the 27", I think its too overpowering, daft I know, but I occasionally use one in the office and really don't get on with it. I have a iMac 24" at home and like it with a Del 21.5" next to it as a second screen and it works well in FCPx or what I need but workflow speed is getting frustrating at times

    I an seriously considering the following as it must be far better than I have now for workflow speed.

    iMac 21.5"
    3.1GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
    16GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM -2X8GB
    512GB Flash Storage
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 1GB GDDR5

    Most of my video work is done on a JCV GY HM600, max 35mbps, records in MOV format so I get instant import into FCPx with no waiting and several GoPro cameras, GoPro needs post processing and takes time and while the old iMac works well, it does slow my workflow down at times when importing and rendering files. Its mostly all hobby video so i am not talking speed to save production time and money, more speed to save waiting all the time when its rendering.

    Is anyone using the new iMac spec above and how are they getting on. Would I be better spending more for the 27" spec and living with the big screen. Will there really be big improvements over speed. Is it really worth the £900 extra I will have to pay for the spec below.

    iMac 27"
    3.5GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
    32GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4X8GB
    512GB Flash Storage
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M 4GB GDDR5

  2. JAWWC macrumors regular

    Jun 1, 2008
    iMac 27" - Screen size is worth the money if you can get familiar with it, FCPX seems like it was designed for one screen and is awesome on 27".

    3.5GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz - The small step up probably won't make a notable difference.

    32GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4X8GB - For what you are doing more than 16gb is and overkill, don't buy extra RAM from apple anyway as you can upgrade later yourself.

    512GB Flash Storage - I would personally go for Fusion drive and an external, but if no external drive then all flash would be the way to go.

    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M 4GB GDDR5 - The extra VRAM will only really be noticeable if you do a lot of motion work or add many effects.
  3. martinX macrumors 6502a


    Aug 11, 2009
    I had a 24" iMac (which was just ridiculously large when I bought it), and eventually paired it with a 23" 1080p monitor. When it came time to upgrade, I wished Apple still had the 24".

    I got the 27" and love it. Still paired with the 23" monitor. I have 2 x 4TB external USB3 drives as Time Machines, and do FCP X editing on an external 2.5" USB 3 drive. Each of these drives is capable of around 120 MB/sec which is the limit (I think) of single hard drive speeds.

    In order to go faster, I'd need to start getting a RAID 0 setup (like a big Western Digital Thunderbolt drive system), or moving to SSD. Both are expensive.

    Still finding my way around the best set up for drives, but so far so good.
  4. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Jan 5, 2006
    Redondo Beach, California
    Going from the dual core iMac to a newer quad core machine will cut the transcoding time in half. Going with that SSD will make the entire edits experience more responsive.

    The difference between a 3.5 and 3.9 Gh CPU clock is not worth paying for as you'd never notice the difference. FCP X works well on my 27" screen. My 13" Macbook Pro runs FCP X also but I only use it when I have to for quick looks and simple rough edits.

    The big thing is (1) keep the project and event folders on the SSD and get as much RAM as you can. Having four core really mostly matters when yu are transcoding.

Share This Page