Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Macbook Pro, basemodel, videoediting

M

macfriend1

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 14, 2007
143
0
Stockholm
Hi there

I am going to sell my macbook, bought one year ago, for good money. I then want probably buy a MACBOOK pro.
My question now: For editing videos (HD-quality) almost pro-like, does the base model suffice? Concerning graphic-card and ram. In the future I wanna go into pro-video editing and therefore need a good machine. The base model should work out well but I just need some confirmation from other ppl having made good experiences with this type.
Question2: will they be updated pretty soon? Personally, don’t think so. They just got an update.

Thanks a lot
macfriend
 
1. if u dont need 1080p go for the mid model. i am considering that one.

2. anyones guess
 
macfriend1 said:
I am going to sell my macbook, bought one year ago, for good money. I then want probably buy a MACBOOK pro.
My question now: For editing videos (HD-quality) almost pro-like, does the base model suffice? Concerning graphic-card and ram. In the future I wanna go into pro-video editing and therefore need a good machine. The base model should work out well but I just need some confirmation from other ppl having made good experiences with this type.
Click to expand...

A 2.4 gHz MacBook and a 2.4 gHz MacBook Pro on the same platform will run iMovie, Final Cut Express and Final Cut Pro with equal speed since these apps all use the cpu for their work (not the gpu). If you're going to do HD, then you should buy an external 24" display for your video playback and use your MacBook's display as the tools display.

If you want to use Color or Motion for your editing, then a MBP would be the better solution (but you should still invest in a 24" display) since these apps use the gpu. The MB will be a fraction slower in response time with an external display only because it has to compete with the system RAM for bus time. It will be hardly noticeable.
 
Cave Man said:
But that has no relevance to video editing performance, which was the point of your OP. Do you need a discrete gpu for other reasons?
Click to expand...

sure it has a relevance...

with my macbook I exported videos in full quality and e.g. the titles were just crappy as hell. This has nothing to do with the screen, I guess.

Macbookpro base model - mimodel - or supermodel?
 
macfriend1 said:
sure it has a relevance...

with my macbook I exported videos in full quality and e.g. the titles were just crappy as hell. This has nothing to do with the screen, I guess.

Macbookpro base model - mimodel - or supermodel?
Click to expand...

If you're set on the MBP, then the base model will be good.
 
I'm not a video editor but i've done light HD on my 2.2 MBP (4gb RAM/22" ext) and it's trundled along very happily :D
I would say save the money, get the base model and max the RAM/get another ext HDD and if you can get an FW800 caddy, all the better :D
 
@ OP: The biggest bottleneck for video editing is data bandwidth, so your money should go on the MBP with a FAST HDD. As caveman says, GPU only comes into effect currently with Colour and Motion. HOWEVER, perhaps with Snow Leopard (OS 10.6), Apple Pro apps could perhaps be the first to benefit from extra power from GPUs with standard editing, so perhaps for the future it is worth getting a machine with a discreet graphics processor.

Your priority though is HDD speed and storage.
 
in terms of horsepower even the macbook is within the range of the mbp the biggest changes are in the resolution and GPU. The 17" is capable of displaying HD at full res and well worth it for the screen real estate.

(note: I don't do video editing I got my 17" for the real estate)
 
thank you guys. finally bought the macbook pro basemodel. wow, this is a damn hot mac! firstly, couldn't afford macbook pro 17'. secondly, it doesnt fit in my bag :) too bad heh..
 
If I understand this thread correctly, GPU doesnt matter as much as a faster CPU for video editing. Could the same be said for photo editing as well? A faster CPU'd unit would be faster than a unit with a faster GPU? Maybe I will start my own thread.
 
Dan Lorth said:
If I understand this thread correctly, GPU doesnt matter as much as a faster CPU for video editing.
Click to expand...

Yes, other than for Motion and Color.

Could the same be said for photo editing as well? A faster CPU'd unit would be faster than a unit with a faster GPU?
Click to expand...

Yes, cpu speed is king for photo apps as well, with two notable exceptions: Aperture and Pixelmator. Both of these apps are written to leverage the multiple cores of gpus, thus perform better with dedicated graphics cards. PSCS3 apparently uses the gpu for one or two of its functions, but that will increase dramatically in PSCS4 according to Adobe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back