Video Editing and Production

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by kryzdafer, Aug 29, 2011.

  1. kryzdafer macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    #1
    I am a semi-professional video editor\graphic designer. I will be editing full length video documentaries. Will I be able to get by with a 8 core mac pro or is it a noticeable difference from the 12 core when it comes to rendering speed?
     
  2. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #2
    Depends greatly on the applications you will be using.
     
  3. goMac macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #3
    This.

    FCPX, for example, can tap the power of the 12 core.
     
  4. apeden macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2011
  5. blunti macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
  6. kryzdafer thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    #6
    Ill be using all of Adobe's applications basically
    FCP X
    Avid

    Do Adobe's applications use the 12 cores?

    I run a 2.8ghz quad core intel chip pc now will i be blown away by the mac pro?
     
  7. goMac macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #7
    After Effects might. Not really sure. Premiere might for rendering. The others definitely not.
     
  8. benr0ck macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    #8
    for video editing you're absolutely fine with an 8 core machine. FCPX im sure if its 64 bit or not- since QT PRO isnt 64 bit yet and compressor isnt, i kinda dont think so. I know FCP7 isn't. After Effects will run marginally faster on a 12 core, but RAM will give AE the biggest speed bump. 3D apps you'll see the biggest increase by upping cores and processor speed (or so ive found).
     
  9. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #9
    Get the 6-core. Best balance of core speed for Adobe and plenty of cores for After Effects. Extra cost may be necessary for memory in higher density (ie 8GB sticks) But you can get to 16GB cheaply with 4GB sticks. The 8-core 2.4GHz may be better ONLY for After Effects (and mainly for cheap memory options [8-slots] The slow clock pretty much ruins any benefit from having 2 extra cores), it will be slower than the 6-core 3.33GHz for all your other needs.

    You may want to wait though. Sometime between now and March 2012 we should have new machines with all the new stuff (Thunderbolt, SATAIII, Sandy Bridge Xeon)
     
  10. goMac macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #10
    FCPX is 64 bit. FCPX is also not QuickTime based.
     
  11. Rustus Maximus macrumors 6502

    Rustus Maximus

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    #11
    If I understood some of the FCPX demos correctly, Quicktime is actually going to die a painful death, no? AV Foundation is taking it's place.
     
  12. wonderspark macrumors 68030

    wonderspark

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Location:
    Oregon
    #12
    Adobe's CS5 Premiere and After Effects use all your cores. I'm on a 3.33GHz quad core, and it shows up as 8 cores on both of them because of hyper-threading. Of course, the four virtual cores get worked a little less than the actual cores. You can see in the screen shot below, during a render in Premiere, that four threads are pegged at max, and the other four are just a bit below max. All that's being used is Premiere and Firefox.

    It also uses all your RAM. I get by on 16GB for now, but 32GB would be nicer.
     

    Attached Files:

  13. goMac macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #13
    This would be correct. QuickTime is... at an end.
     

Share This Page