MBP 15" 2011: Radeon6490M 256 Mo vs 6750M 1 Go for video/photo editing

[Hawaga]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)

Hi!

I'm going through a LOT of questions re buying a 15" MBP

Will the GPU make a difference for video and photo editing? (aperture/lightroom/final cut/AvidMC5/after effects)

Or is the higher end (6750M 1gb) dedicated to gamers & 3d artists?

I should be working 2d most of the time with a bit of 3d cameras in After Effects is all...

Thank you for your kind advices

 

[adnoh]

I think you want the best CPU you can afford which just so happens to come with the high end gpu.

Upgrade ram yourself and save some benjamins

 

[HBOC]

Aperture is WAY faster on my machine than on my old one. My new one is a Quad 2.2GHZ and my old one was a Penryn 2.5GHZ machine.

 

[Hawaga]

Yeah, and anybody could answer the question regarding the graphic card difference for the applications listed above in first post?

Thanks

 

[Mac-key]

I'm curious as to what real world users have to say about this as well

 

[Hansr]

Yeah, and anybody could answer the question regarding the graphic card difference for the applications listed above in first post?

Thanks

For those specific tasks that offer hardware accelerated GPU use for some of those applications it will matter. It's hard to quantify it accurately though because the CPU is also 10% faster. No easy way of breaking down which is attributed to the CPU and which to the GPU. But as a general rule it does make a difference, is the difference noticeable? Doubt it except for maybe hardware accelerated rendering.

 

[Hawaga]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)

Thank you. Well I guess I going for the higher end then.

Now gotta sort out if I'm going for the 17" (250$ up only...)

Cheers

 

[benpatient]

Getting an SSD and 8 GB of RAM will make a bigger difference, especially if you're dealing with lots of files (like, say 100,000 photo collections on Lightroom or Aperture).

The files themselves might need to be stored on an external drive as normal, but the database files can be on the SSD, which makes those applications screaming-fast.

I did the OWC 120gb SSD for my 15" in my sig. The difference when I put the SSD and RAM in was amazing. Photoshop opens in literally 3-4 seconds from a cold restart. Giant PSD files open almost as fast as you can click on them. It's so fast that I can immediately tell when an application is requesting something from the standard hard drive (which is still in the machine), because it's so bloody slow.

If you want best bang for your buck from a photo/video perspective, I would say get the 2.0 and add RAM/SSD. Of course, if you can afford all the upgrades, get them all!

you can't upgrade the CPU or GPU later on down the line, which is something to consider...Maybe you should get the 2.3/1GB, and then upgrade the RAM and add an SSD in a few months. Maybe by then the 8GB chips will be reasonably priced, and you could even go for 16GB.

Lightroom/Aperture will use as much RAM as you've got.

 

[Hawaga]

Getting an SSD and 8 GB of RAM will make a bigger difference, especially if you're dealing with lots of files (like, say 100,000 photo collections on Lightroom or Aperture).

The files themselves might need to be stored on an external drive as normal, but the database files can be on the SSD, which makes those applications screaming-fast.

I did the OWC 120gb SSD for my 15" in my sig. The difference when I put the SSD and RAM in was amazing. Photoshop opens in literally 3-4 seconds from a cold restart. Giant PSD files open almost as fast as you can click on them. It's so fast that I can immediately tell when an application is requesting something from the standard hard drive (which is still in the machine), because it's so bloody slow.

If you want best bang for your buck from a photo/video perspective, I would say get the 2.0 and add RAM/SSD. Of course, if you can afford all the upgrades, get them all!

you can't upgrade the CPU or GPU later on down the line, which is something to consider...Maybe you should get the 2.3/1GB, and then upgrade the RAM and add an SSD in a few months. Maybe by then the 8GB chips will be reasonably priced, and you could even go for 16GB.

Lightroom/Aperture will use as much RAM as you've got.

Thank you for your answer!

Don't you feel limited by your 120go OCZ for the system drive?

I was considering the 100$ 128gb SSD option from apple as third party prices are either same or above, and keeping media on external drive, but I would really appreciate having my 60gb or so music in the laptop. This + the system + apps that recquire lots of space for install & swap files (PS, AFX, Avid MC5, Lightroom etc...) ... I wonder if the 128 gb SSD is enough?

I really would appreciate your feeling from your experience and usage!