PDA

View Full Version : Which used MacPro for FinalCut X?



Spartacus
11-12-2012, 05:10 PM
Yeah, in 2013 there will be new models, but I need a replacement now. The new Imacs sound nice on paper, but for working with a lot of footage a Macpro just seems better (is it?).
What I still donīt know - how important are multiple cores for Final Cut (X)?
Does a 4 Core cut it for editing (pun intended).?
Is 8 significantly better?
Is RAM maybe more important?
Just looking for the most attractive variant of used MPs for editing, donīt want to spend too much, because I think I will just need to bridge the gap, till
the new models finally come out (ok, if EVER....)
Iīm doing this for over a decade now and still know horsepoop about the computers behind the GUI :undecided

Cory Braun
11-12-2012, 05:42 PM
From my own personal use, if you are fine editing with ProResLT (the proxy option in FCPX), my bottom of the line MacBook Air from 2011 works fine.

dustylense
11-12-2012, 06:00 PM
I edit using the macbook pro retina and it's the fastest setup I've used. Replaced my 8 core Mac Pro which I still have.

KyleProhaska
11-12-2012, 06:52 PM
I have the 8-core 2.93Ghz version packed with RAM and ATI 5870. Fastest machine I've ever used. Other then going 12-core it's the fastest Mac you can buy regarding Geekbench scores. The new laptops are DustyLense said are insanely fast, but I still like using my MacPro for heavy lifting, especially long renders. That's me though...

Spartacus
11-13-2012, 01:37 AM
Thanks guys, I have a 2,2 i7 MBP and its pretty fast, but editing on a laptop isnīt that of a joy, if youīre used to two 24" screens. I transcode to LT most of the time, but was thinking FinalCutX along with background rendering and a fast machine maybe would be an option.
So to rephrase: More slower older cores of a MacPro or rather fewer cores but newer generation and thus faster? Is there a "sweetspot", what to buy?
Editing: P2 HD, h264 and AVCHD.
Thanks!

Exact
11-13-2012, 01:50 AM
Thanks guys, I have a 2,2 i7 MBP and its pretty fast, but editing on a laptop isnīt that of a joy, if youīre used to two 24" screens.

We edit with dual screens, but honestly the single large screen plus a MBP as a second screen works just as well. My 17" quad i7 MBP does a very decent job with FCPX, especially when hooked to a 27" monitor as the main screen.

Once you add thunderbolt (currently still expensive) then the storage advantages of the MacPro over the iMac are going to diminish.


I transcode to LT most of the time, but was thinking FinalCutX along with background rendering and a fast machine maybe would be an option.

Background *anything* seems to stop when ever I'm doing anything useful (like editing), so that background rendering is more like 'idle time' rendering. It's obviously welcome, but it's not really doing it in the background like many people think.



So to rephrase: More slower older cores of a MacPro or rather fewer cores but newer generation and thus faster? Is there a "sweetspot", what to buy?
Editing: P2 HD, h264 and AVCHD.
Thanks!

Personally, I love the fact that I have 8TB (4x 2TB) HDDs in my MacPro PLUS a couple of Sata SSDs and the optical drive (I maxed out the spare connectors on the Mobo). I also like the fact I have interchangeable / upgradable GPUs via the slots, the ability to add more cards, including DeckLink and SAS. Of course, most of this can be done now via firewire, but it's still a LOT more expensive.

In the end, the GPU will make as much difference to FCPX as the CPU will once you start adding colour corrections etc, so I'd be looking carefully at your GPU selection as much as CPUs.

Spartacus
11-13-2012, 03:07 AM
We edit with dual screens, but honestly the single large screen plus a MBP as a second screen works just as well. My 17" quad i7 MBP does a very decent job with FCPX, especially when hooked to a 27" monitor as the main screen.

Once you add thunderbolt (currently still expensive) then the storage advantages of the MacPro over the iMac are going to diminish.

Background *anything* seems to stop when ever I'm doing anything useful (like editing), so that background rendering is more like 'idle time' rendering. It's obviously welcome, but it's not really doing it in the background like many people think.

Personally, I love the fact that I have 8TB (4x 2TB) HDDs in my MacPro PLUS a couple of Sata SSDs and the optical drive (I maxed out the spare connectors on the Mobo). I also like the fact I have interchangeable / upgradable GPUs via the slots, the ability to add more cards, including DeckLink and SAS. Of course, most of this can be done now via firewire, but it's still a LOT more expensive.

In the end, the GPU will make as much difference to FCPX as the CPU will once you start adding colour corrections etc, so I'd be looking carefully at your GPU selection as much as CPUs.

Thanks mate! So how are the GPUs in the new Imacs? Do they outperform a standard GPU that would come with a used 2009/10 MacPro?
Actually I just wanted to go with an Imac, because when I opt for a 2013 MacPro later on, I think itīs better to sell than an old MacPro - the Imac will still be seen as the current model, the MacPro as old technology I guess.
BUT maybe with a used MP, with itīs "more space for everything" I will be happy after all and wonīt upgrade at all.

Edit: Looked at some benchmarks and it seems that most Xeon MacPros are outperformed by current i7 MBPs. Even the latest i7 MacMini is faster than older MacPros...

Exact
11-14-2012, 02:12 AM
Thanks mate! So how are the GPUs in the new Imacs? Do they outperform a standard GPU that would come with a used 2009/10 MacPro?
Actually I just wanted to go with an Imac, because when I opt for a 2013 MacPro later on, I think itīs better to sell than an old MacPro - the Imac will still be seen as the current model, the MacPro as old technology I guess.
BUT maybe with a used MP, with itīs "more space for everything" I will be happy after all and wonīt upgrade at all.

Edit: Looked at some benchmarks and it seems that most Xeon MacPros are outperformed by current i7 MBPs. Even the latest i7 MacMini is faster than older MacPros...

We ran a couple of 27" iMacs (pre-thunderbolt) with Quad i7 side by side with the MacPro for a year or so. If you exclude storage and expandability, the i7iMac kept up with the 8 core MacPro (2009) very well and was a pleasure to use. The ONLY reason we sold the iMacs was because adding storage was such a pain at the time and external USB2 and FW was too slow. If thunderbolt had been on these iMacs I suspect we'd still have them.

In addition as you suspect, we bought the iMacs from the Apple refurb store (effectively new, new warranty etc, but at a discount) and sold them a year later on ebay for only Ģ25 ($40) less than we'd paid for them Now THAT's depreciation I can cope with :)

Spartacus
11-15-2012, 03:35 PM
In addition as you suspect, we bought the iMacs from the Apple refurb store (effectively new, new warranty etc, but at a discount) and sold them a year later on ebay for only Ģ25 ($40) less than we'd paid for them Now THAT's depreciation I can cope with :)

Hehe, yes, great business skills you have there ;)

Hmm, so when the new 27" iMacs come out in December, the current ones will become available as refurbished, maybe thatīs an even better option for an in-between solution... Thanks!