GH3 Macbook Pro & GH3
- Thread starter Zim
- Start date
I have a similar macbook pro but with 2.6GHz i7 and only 256GB SSD and it handles GH3 MOV 50Mbps footage very easily.
I've been using Adobe's Premiere Pro which is 64-bit and works very nicely with the nVidia GeForce 650M in my MBP. Your results may vary if you're using FCP X.
I've been using Adobe's Premiere Pro which is 64-bit and works very nicely with the nVidia GeForce 650M in my MBP. Your results may vary if you're using FCP X.
OR FCP7 as well...FCP 7 is running on 32bit architecture. Switch to Premiere!!
I picked up a refurb Retina 2.3 i7 w/ 8 GB RAM for a series of location films this summer, primarily for field backup and viewing.
It's so fast and flexible that I've ended up editing all of the projects on it (right in the middle of them) rather than on our 27" studio systems.
I dump everything to the Retina and an OWC 1GB Mercury portable and then sit down with the Red Sox game on and edit away in the living room in the evenings.
I post everything with Filmconvert, a good deal of secondary grading and often Magic Bullet looks and the Retina handles it all perfectly, and chugs through renders faster than any of our systems.
You have to remember that FCPX has been optimized for the Retina and a lot of the pro editors were writing about the inherent speed f the combination as soon as the upgrade came along.
If you're getting a Retina, you're not going to see the real benefits unless you make the move to FCPX, and trust me, it's a worthwhile move on every level (coming from a producer that's worked with FCP since 1.0).
It's so fast and flexible that I've ended up editing all of the projects on it (right in the middle of them) rather than on our 27" studio systems.
I dump everything to the Retina and an OWC 1GB Mercury portable and then sit down with the Red Sox game on and edit away in the living room in the evenings.
I post everything with Filmconvert, a good deal of secondary grading and often Magic Bullet looks and the Retina handles it all perfectly, and chugs through renders faster than any of our systems.
You have to remember that FCPX has been optimized for the Retina and a lot of the pro editors were writing about the inherent speed f the combination as soon as the upgrade came along.
If you're getting a Retina, you're not going to see the real benefits unless you make the move to FCPX, and trust me, it's a worthwhile move on every level (coming from a producer that's worked with FCP since 1.0).
Zim
Veteran
dan.carter
Well-known member
dustylense
Veteran
I have that same laptop and it will cut Gh3 like butter. You might also want to look at this Lacie Big 5 10TB hard drive array. I have it and am getting 790MB/sec disk performance. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=910591&is=REG&A=details&Q=
PegLeg Media
Well-known member
I am also about to get a MacBook Pro for editing with fcp 7. Does the 13.3 or 15.4 size make a difference? Someone said the 13 inch MacBook could handle editing very well even with the same specs. Since I'll be using it with an external monitor most the time size doesn't matter to me but I'll get the 15inchnif it performs better.
and I just tried to edit with FCPX on my friends 15inch 2011 MacBook Pro i7 with 8gb memory and the computer couldn't handle it. Every click would bring up the wheel of death for 3 minutes till i just gave up. So I don't see how everyone is saying how easily the MacBook pros can handle editing so smoothly.
and I just tried to edit with FCPX on my friends 15inch 2011 MacBook Pro i7 with 8gb memory and the computer couldn't handle it. Every click would bring up the wheel of death for 3 minutes till i just gave up. So I don't see how everyone is saying how easily the MacBook pros can handle editing so smoothly.
The MBP13s have dual core processors with built-in graphics. The MBP15s have quad core processors with discrete graphics. So while the 13s can get the job done, the 15s will definitely perform better and rendering will be quicker. If I didn't care about portability, the 15 would be top choice.
I suspect something else is going on with your buddy's MBP. I run FCPX on a 2011 MBP13 i7 and it is reasonably responsive, a 15" should be even better.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Zim is that a quad core or really old dual core MBP. Core i7 can be either. The reason I ask is because there is not a huge difference between a 2.2ghz and a 2.6ghz quad core. I use a 17" quad core 2.2ghz MBP and while my render times may take 20% longer then the latest MBP the editing process itself is virtually the same. Upgrading your RAM might be an option as well
If you do have just an older dual core machine then yes it would be a pretty big upgrade. With that said however I used to edit AVCHD material on a dual core iMac with 4GB no problem. If you are using FCP6 you really have to convert your footage to ProRes to work with it. If that is the case you have to make sure those ProRes files are on a fast enough hard drive. A full internal drive or a cheap USB2 drive will not cut it and may be the cause of most of your problems.
If you do have just an older dual core machine then yes it would be a pretty big upgrade. With that said however I used to edit AVCHD material on a dual core iMac with 4GB no problem. If you are using FCP6 you really have to convert your footage to ProRes to work with it. If that is the case you have to make sure those ProRes files are on a fast enough hard drive. A full internal drive or a cheap USB2 drive will not cut it and may be the cause of most of your problems.
Zim
Veteran
The Apple website has the retina at 2.7GHz with a turbo boost of 3.7. You can also upgrade to 2.8 GHz for $250. Not sure how much difference .1 makes? Also the flash storage so they claim that is four times faster. So I wonder if this model is faster than the one on the chart?