Will 24" iMac suffice for FCS 2/CS3?

G75

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 28, 2007
23
0
Somewhere in the Milky Way.
So, I have a MBP 2.16 CD with 1GB RAM, and I am looking at getting a desktop to use for FCS 2 and CS3. Will the 24" iMac 2.8 C2E with a 750 GB HDD and 2 GB of RAM suffice for FCS 2 and CS3? (I will eventually upgrade the RAM to 4 GB from OWC (2x2) and put the 2x1GB from the iMac into the MBP.)

I have seen a lot of people disappointed in the ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO, and I was wondering if it could handle FCS 2 and CS3 (surely its not THAT bad? :confused:) but this is a big purchase and I want to be sure it will work properly.

I looked at the MacPro and thats a lot more $$$ particularly with a decent monitor.

So, will the iMac suffice? Also, is there anything else I should do to increase its performance?

Thanks for your help and I appologize if this has been posted anywhere else (I have been an avid reader for about a year and a half, but I never really got used to the search system.)

Thanks again!

--G75

EDIT: Just read through the FCS 2 reqs and it appears the 2600 PRO is in fact too underpowered to run the apps. (At least it is not mentioned. Perhaps the page has yet to be updated?)

EDIT 2: Just chatted with an "Apple Technician" via the online store, and she said the the iMac would do fine. However, I do not see where it says that the 2600 PRO is a supported graphics card. It says that the standard graphics card in the iMac Core Duo works, but as I under stand it these are Core 2 Duos. Am I correct? Or is looking at computers at 2 AM messing with my comprehension?
 

Pressure

macrumors 68040
May 30, 2006
3,925
244
Denmark
The Radeon HD 2600 Pro should do fine. I am saying 'should' as I have no experience with the new iMacs.

Even though the iMac may be enough you should definitely consider getting an external RAID setup for faster disk performance.
 

cluthz

macrumors 68040
Jun 15, 2004
3,118
3
Norway
http://barefeats.com/imacal4.html

Test of various Adobe Apps etc.
The new iMac is performing very well, only beaten by the Mac Pros.




FCS 2:
* The standard graphics card in any Mac Pro, MacBook Pro, iMac with Intel Core Duo, Power Mac G5, or iMac G5; 1.25GHz or faster PowerBook G4; or 1.25GHz or faster flat-panel iMac:
o ATI Radeon 9800, 9700 Pro, 9600 XT, or 9600 Pro
o ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 or 9600
o NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT, 7300 GT, 6600, 6600 LE, FX Go5200, or FX 5200 Ultra
* For 16- and 32-bit rendering: a graphics card with at least 128MB of VRAM
The 2600 is far more powerfull than most cards mentioned here, so it will run great, also the 2.8 iMac has several times the cpu power as a 1.25GHz Powerbook, which seems to be the minimum reqs.

I only think appla has forgot to update with never cards here, as you see the new MBP isn't mentioned, but the PB G4 is...
 

aliquis-

macrumors 6502a
May 20, 2007
680
0
Of course it will be sufficient, the card aren't that bad, it's just that current mid-range cards are quite much slower than the high-end cards and for gamers and other people who compare the price directly to a desktop PC the graphics card doesn't look awesome.

But it will work just fine for most people, but of course you could costum build a PC with something better.

It's not on the pages because they haven't thought about it and updated them.

(And the new card are better than the x1600 which was in the core duo.)
 

CanadaRAM

macrumors G5
The main thing to consider vs. a MacPro is that it is more difficult and expensive to set up a multi-drive system with the iMac, as you want to separate your scratch disk, data disk and System/applications disk onto three separate drives for speed. On the iMac you have to go Firewire, on the MacPro you can install 4 drives internally, and use a SATA card for more externally.
 

jonkemerer

macrumors member
Dec 28, 2006
50
0
Pittsburgh, PA
I have seen a lot of people disappointed in the ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO, and I was wondering if it could handle FCS 2 and CS3 (surely its not THAT bad? :confused:) but this is a big purchase and I want to be sure it will work properly.
I can't speak for Final Cut, but the graphics card has little / nothing to do with the performance of Photoshop.
 

dollystereo

macrumors 6502a
Oct 6, 2004
905
104
France
Dont get raids, they fail.
Get Something like Seagate external drives. You dont need Raid, unless you work with HD (real HD, nos HDV) In that case you should get the mac pro, with the raid card, and a 2TB internal Raid.
If you work in DVcam, no raid.
 

mchristopherson

macrumors newbie
Oct 18, 2006
10
0
Detroit
I have been trying to decide the same thing, my G4 tower is dead and I have been editing on my wife's MacBook. Everything works fine, but sometimes it runs very slow, probably because of the graphics card.

I am sure you will be fine with the iMac.
 

G75

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 28, 2007
23
0
Somewhere in the Milky Way.
Most likely HDV/AVCHD.

Well, I will most likely be using HDV or AVCHD. For AVCHD, I was plannning on importing into iMovie '08 and using that to convert into H.264 or using the "Export Final Cut XML..." option. (Since apparently FCP can't do AVCHD unless it is on a MP.)
 

AlexisV

macrumors 68000
Mar 12, 2007
1,605
95
Manchester, UK
So, I have a MBP 2.16 CD with 1GB RAM, and I am looking at getting a desktop to use for FCS 2 and CS3. Will the 24" iMac 2.8 C2E with a 750 GB HDD and 2 GB of RAM suffice for FCS 2 and CS3? (I will eventually upgrade the RAM to 4 GB from OWC (2x2) and put the 2x1GB from the iMac into the MBP.)

I have seen a lot of people disappointed in the ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO, and I was wondering if it could handle FCS 2 and CS3 (surely its not THAT bad? ) but this is a big purchase and I want to be sure it will work properly.

I looked at the MacPro and thats a lot more $$$ particularly with a decent monitor.

So, will the iMac suffice? Also, is there anything else I should do to increase its performance?

Thanks for your help and I appologize if this has been posted anywhere else (I have been an avid reader for about a year and a half, but I never really got used to the search system.)

Thanks again!

--G75

EDIT: Just read through the FCS 2 reqs and it appears the 2600 PRO is in fact too underpowered to run the apps. (At least it is not mentioned. Perhaps the page has yet to be updated?)

EDIT 2: Just chatted with an "Apple Technician" via the online store, and she said the the iMac would do fine. However, I do not see where it says that the 2600 PRO is a supported graphics card. It says that the standard graphics card in the iMac Core Duo works, but as I under stand it these are Core 2 Duos. Am I correct? Or is looking at computers at 2 AM messing with my comprehension?
The Radeon 2600XT/Pro hybrid is a powerful enough card for 3D games. The drivers under Windows aren't even fully optimised for it yet. Some people were complaining there wasn't a £300 card in the new iMacs, but I have been more than happy with it.

It can do anything 2D in its sleep, as will any card made in the last 5 years.
 

pimmie

macrumors newbie
Dec 21, 2004
12
0
As for the Radeon 2600 Pro in the new iMacs: I upgraded from a dual 2Ghz G5 with Radeon X800XT to a 24" 2.8Ghz C2E iMac. Just eyeballing performance in Autodesk Maya the 2600 Pro seems just as fast as the X800XT. They also have an equal amount of VRAM (256MB). But the one big difference: the iMac is totally silent, whereas the G5 with the terribly hot X800XT sounded like a vacuum cleaner. Maya and ATi drivers may not be in good shape for the 2600 yet though, some hardware rendering features in Maya aren't supported. But when I booted in XP with Boot Camp, the performance in Maya for Windows was even better and all the hardware rendering features were all present and spiffy. Weird, if you think about it... it's the same machine!