GH4 Can both of these iMac’s play back your 4K Footage Smoothly at Full Resolution?

V

Vardalos

Well-known member
Apple iMac maxed out processor & graphic card

3.5GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
16GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2X8GB
1TB Serial ATA Drive @ 7200 rpm
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M 4GB GDDR5

Priced this way:
$2,549.00



Apple iMac Retina with 5K Display maxed out processor & graphic card

4.0GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 4.4GHz
16GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x8GB
1TB Fusion Drive
AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4GB GDDR5

Priced this way:
$3,199.00
 
Dustylens,

If both maxed out iMac's will edit 4K material smoothly at full resolution which one would you chose and why?
 
I guess the next question is, will the maxed out iMac with Retina 5K display drive a second monitor like the Asus PB287Q UHD 4K? If it would this would be a very nice and reasonably priced set-up for editing with clients.
 
By all means yes get the latest version if you can. The retina iMac is a whole generation newer. The CPU is only slightly faster and the GPU only slightly better for some applications but since it is newer it will last you a bit longer. Of course the big feature of the retina iMac is of course the 5k display if you need that sort of thing.

Just a couple of things to think about.

1. The retina iMac cannot be used as an external monitor in the future. The target display mode has been a nice feature of the 27" iMacs but it doesn't work on the retina iMacs for this generation due to a lack of bandwidth support with the mini display port/thunderbolt port. If you plan on getting a Mac Pro in the future and would like to use the retina iMac as a display that will not be possible.

2. If for whatever reason you still use any software that takes exclusive advantage of CUDA then the retina iMac could feel like taking a huge step backwards. The list of applications that depend on CUDA is getting much smaller but there are still some applications out there that take advantage of it.

3. Running a second 4k display cuts GPU performance in half on each display according to Barefeats testing. So while it looks like a second 4k display will in fact work it might really kill your GPU performance in applications like FCPX or Motion. The suggestion is if you really need to use a second 4k monitor try to keep just the palette windows on the second display and nothing that really requires heavy GPU calculations. This is one of the primary reasons why Apple used two GPUs in the new Mac Pro. One GPU can be used to drive two monitors while the second GPU can be used to power effects and processing. The monitors or pixels a GPU has to drive the less processing performance it will have. Even on my current 27" iMac I notice performance drop when I add a second 1080p monitor. Driving a HD second monitor will give you much better overall performance.
 
I know you have a preference for Macs, and Lord knows I'm not trying to start that pc vs. Mac war :kiss:, but wouldn't a pc be easier to upgrade over time? I have a custom built pc, that I have had for a few years and eveytime it gets a little slow, I just upgrade a piece of it, like the grAphics card, add an SSD or ram.

This may be a cheaper option, especially if you are running Adobe tools for video edit. It's there much of a difference using premiere on Windows as opposed to a Mac? This really is an honest question, not a troll post, okay.
 
I have the entry iMac Retina and works perfect. Even you can increase the resolution until 6.5K to obtain more space for editing. It's crazy.
 
estarkey7 said:
I know you have a preference for Macs, and Lord knows I'm not trying to start that pc vs. Mac war :kiss:, but wouldn't a pc be easier to upgrade over time? I have a custom built pc, that I have had for a few years and eveytime it gets a little slow, I just upgrade a piece of it, like the grAphics card, add an SSD or ram.

This may be a cheaper option, especially if you are running Adobe tools for video edit. It's there much of a difference using premiere on Windows as opposed to a Mac? This really is an honest question, not a troll post, okay.
Click to expand...

Probably same reason why I won't switch to OS X: Likely the opportunity cost of switching isn't worth the difference in hardware.
 
and another thought: if you have to ask this question. do you really NEED 4k at full resolution on two monitors?
hell i do work for oil and gas clients and most of them aren't even asking for 2k... are you creating a hardware requirement for yourself that you don't really need?
 
You might find this interesting; I was able to get my old 2009-4Core Mac Pro to playback my GH4-4K footage smoothly. I’m using a two-monitor set up with 23” Apple Cinema Monitors. We replaced the Graphics Card that came with the Mac Pro with a Used Quadro 4000 card and “WOW” all of a sudden 4K plays back just like 1080P, perfectly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top