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

which of these new mac pros is faster for final cut pro?

V

videoed

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 1, 2009
107
0
Hi,

considering a new tower and wondering where bang for buck is best.

if the following is correct:

1) Final Cut Pro is a 32bit app
2) Final Cut Pro can only use X# of cores (not sure what x might be if true)

then am I possibly better off with fewer cores, higher GHz?

which would be faster: 4x@2.8GHz or 8x@2.4GHz ?
 
FCP is very core and RAM limited right now, but having more cores and more RAM does allow you to run more applications concurrently with seeing a big slow down in performance. What other apps do you typically use? Also, eventually FCP will be 64-bit (hopefully) so at that point you might go "Dang, I wish I woulda bought a faster machine..."

If you plan on keeping the machine for 4-5yrs get the best you can afford. If you are the type that switches out machines every 2-3 years a more middle-of-the-road tower would probably be a better investment. Another thing to keep in mind is how business are you doing. If you have steady clients that typically have tight deadlines than getting the fastest machine you can will probably pay for itself pretty quick.


Lethal
 
thanks for the responses.

does anyone have an opinion as to which would be faster for running just FCP?

4x@2.8GHz or 8x@2.4GHz
 
thanks for the response

How's performance compare while rendering only in FCP?

Does FCP access all 8 cores for rendering and therefore faster

or does FCP limited to core # access equal on the 4core and 8core and
then therefore the 4core@2.8 is faster than the 8core@2.4 ?

or does the 8core have architecture so that 2.4 is faster than 2.8 ?
 
should be a lot

Mind goes about 75% of each core on my 4 core.
I can't speak for the 8 core machines, but it should be the same.
 
Strictly speaking for using FCP only I don't think there is going to be a significant difference between the two because FCP is very limited when it comes to accessing multiple cores. If you use Compressor and setup a virtual cluster the 8-core machine will fly by the 4-core machine as long as you have enough RAM (IIRC the rule of thumb is at least 2gig per core). If you are using CS3 or newer AE will take advantage of the extra cores (again, as long as you have enough RAM). If you need to run FCP, AE and Photoshop at the same time while exporting via Compressor and you don't want the machine to bog down get the 8-core.

Assuming you have the budget for a 'nicely equipped' 8-core that's the one I'd recommend to get. It will have a longer lifespan and allow you to do more multi-tasking than the 4-core. But strictly speaking for FCP 7 performance I don't know if the 8-core will offer enough of a performance boost to justify the extra cost. If Apple stays w/it's usual update schedule for FCP though a new version should be announced spring/summer 2011 and if it is the ground up rewrite we all think it needs to be then FCP 8 will most likely get faster w/the more cores you have.


Lethal
 
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