Picking a Mac Pro- Single Quad Core vs. Two Dual Core ? CPU vs. Ram/VideoCard?

R

ryvac

Veteran
I will be purchasing a Mac soon so I need some advice.

so my first question is does a Single Quad Core perform better then a Two Dual Core ? After all they are both 4 cores so are they the same?
I personaly feel like having two processors seem stronger but Apple replaced it's Two Dual Core to it's New Single Quad Core recently so does that mean the single quad configeration is better?

Also is it worth getting the 8 core for more $$$
I know people always say get the best Mac you can afford but I don't want to spend an extra $1k for just an 8% increase in rendering time (I think I read somewhere that it's an 8% increase of rendering time verses the previouse genaration Mac or something....sorry I could be totally wrong..)

Finally, does cpu really matter in video editing?
I heard before that video editing isn't cpu rendering so it's not worth getting an expensive 8 core Mac.
I heard Ram and video card matters more so it's better to just get a decent processor and have lots of Ram.... now is that ture?
should I just get a used Dual Core Mac and save money to increase the Ram and Video Card?


btw, I will be using it for mainly FCS for video editing. (maybe some photoshop, Shake, and 3d graphics too)
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Thanks a lot for the link.
looks like I'll just go for the dual core.
dont think the extra $$$ is worth it....
 
go to barefeats.com to evaluate what MacPro configurations including GPUs that make sense for the professional applications.

A Mac Pro 8 core Nehalem 2.26 GHz cpu with 6 or 12 GBs of RAM and the ATI 4870 seems to make the best value.

QMaster and Compressor will take advantage of all 8 cores significantly.
 
i have two 8 core mac pros. one 8 core Clovertown 3.0ghz with 1900xt and 12 gigs of ram and i also have a 8 core 2.93 Nehalem, 16gigs ram, 4870....and i honeslty cant tell one bit of difference between the two.

i also have the new FCP Studio that is supposed to be optimized for XDCAM and i cant feel any difference while working in the FCP timeline as far as RT performance goes....NONE!

the VAST majority of the time the multi cores are nowhere near being utilized. not even close. sure there are a couple of plugs in photoshop that are taking advantage and occasionally i see some usage in FCP but for the most part...nada.

supposedly (so some say) that "Snow Leopard" is supposed to fix that. i hope so but im not overly optimistic.

if you can wait until sept when SL comes out, this will be the final test and judgement if more cores will finally benefit.

Nehalem is supposed to be the big and bad CPU but so far....its hard to see any difference compared to my Clorvertown 3.0ghz 8 core.

as far as graphics go...for the extra $200 i would absolutely upgrade to the 4870 no matter what computer you get. this is a no brainer.

so, is it worth having 8 cores vs 4 cores? so far my answer would be for the most part...NO. i basically spent about $6,800 for a 2.93ghz Nehalem decked out and couldnt really tell any percievable difference from my 2 year old 8 core Clovertown. looking at the activity monitor i can only assume that a 4 core would probably keep up with 8 core from the sparse CPU activity that i see happening on my apps

now my 17 year old kid has my older 8 core but i am still left scratching my head saying WTF!

if SL doesnt help then i will feel like i wasted too much money on my Nehalem 8 core. a 4 core would have been the steal of a purchase IMO or at least the cheaper 8 core and not the ridiculous added expense for the 2.93ghz processor.

if you can wait until sept you should have the definitive answer.

david
www.davidprobst.com

recent video shot with EX-1 & 5DmkII...audio was live with Zoom H4n...5DmkII lenses used: 200mm 1.8, 85mm 1.2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fjehb82yFlQ
 
Last edited:
Hi David p,

Yes, I agree with your (expensive) assesment of the two Macpro's, My Pro supplier had stated that. If you had no Macpro at all, David S's, post re a- "A Mac Pro 8 core Nehalem 2.26 GHz cpu with 6 or 12 GBs of RAM and the ATI 4870 seems to make the best value." is very good advice,
but if your after value, get the earlier model and the savings can buy more ram a better display card and HDD's.
I have also found not much difference with 2 gig ram installed or 6 gig in the Macpro. Unless your into heavy PS crunching on big files 12 gig would be overkill for most other FCS pro apps.

Snow Leopard, hmmmm, it will be many months or maybe longer before that shows if it's a rock or a dud.

Cheers
Tom K
olinevideo.com.au
 
Last edited:
hi tom,

its good to see that there are other people out there that see things similar to my experiences. many of the benchmarks seem to illustrate something different so go figure.

Snow Leopard? what im not clear on is....do software makers "themselves" need to make their software multicore aware or is SL going to just do it for everyone automatically. my interpretation from what i have read is that apple is making it real easy for the software makers to make their software work with multicores...but its still on the software makers to make it happen. is this how you see it too?

with that said...then i could summize that apple already has the code in place for FCP (3) so when SL shows up we should get some sort of a significant boost?

does anyone know how this is supposed to work?

it sure would be nice to see software like Magic Bullet "Looks" at least play one layer in RT without the painful rendering to see it. currently even MB "colorista" makes the playback oh so slightly fluttery in its RT playback and im only talking 1280x720 XDCAM.

i just sold an old G5 1.8ghz, 1.5 ram & 256 graphics to a friend that is only editing SD in FCP 4.5 and he is smiling and giggling with lots of layers and CC...with smooth playback and here i am on the fasted MAC out there an i feel like i have been thrust back in time to something like my old G4 1.25ghz in earlier FCP where you could only get a couple of layers to play back before RT performance started to get raggy.

time for computer performance to catch up with these HD files.

come on SL!!!

david
www.davidprobst.com

recent video shot with EX-1 & 5DmkII...audio was live with Zoom H4n...5DmkII lenses used: 200mm 1.8, 85mm 1.2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fjehb82yFlQ
 
Last edited:
Hi David,
These been many posts on many forums about box speed and OS power, I come form the old days when my first splash into non-linear was a Quadra 950 with a daystar accel card witch took it to 110Mhz, running AVID MSP software, when rendering a 30 sec clip with only two layers to work with took upto 45mins to get to see.
Now we have an early Macpro 3ghz, believe me , we have come a long way. FCS on the Macpro is in my opinion the best "bang for buck" out there.
SL from what i've heard, it will be a de tuned leopard, because most things that leopard can do, is not used by most users, so a streamlined / faster OS makes more sense.
just load what is needed for most of your apps, (at least that's what i've heard).

I don't think there are many quantum leaps left out there to achieve, just fine tuning of the OS and apps.
Don't wait for miracles, just buy now what your budget can afford, we're all in the same boat.

Mine stops these days at FCS / Macpro.

Have a read of the sales blurb, it's all been said before for every prior OS release--
Snow Leopard enhances your entire Mac experience. In ways big and small, it gets faster, more reliable, and easier to use. It’s the Mac you know and love, made even better.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/

Cheers
Tom K
olinevideo.com.au
 
Is editing the only thing you'll be doing? In FCP?

If you're going to be doing any compositing work, especially in After Effects, I strongly recommend having as many processors as possible.

Of course, the more RAM the better as well, though this is fairly inexpensive.

I'd talk to a pro dealer about your options. I used dv411.com in CA (they ship anywhere). Ask for Cutter. Very well informed. Just be sure to have a clear idea of what you want to do with the system and your relative budget.
 
ryvac said:
I heard before that video editing isn't cpu rendering so it's not worth getting an expensive 8 core Mac.
Click to expand...

Video editing is *all* CPU, or at least about 80-90% of it. It affects how fast you can preview, render time and every aspect of editing. Video card are pheriphery accessory that most NLE don't even take advantage of (unless you get to the ultra expensive workstation cards) and RAM are just icing on the cake for preview, but will do zip to help along render speed.

Get the best CPU that you can afford, a good amount of RAM and skim on the video card. If you really want a huge increase in render performance, look into a 64 bit OS and an NLE that can take advantage of that architecture. The increase in rendering performance can easily be on the order of 50-200% faster depending on your source material and system spec.
 
will the new Final Cut Studio (3) end up being 64 bit when SL comes out?

Tom, you mentioned you Quadra 950...my first computer was a Quadra 800. yeah, we have come a long way. i remember when i could go make a pot of coffee while waiting for a simple gaussian blur to render in photoshop.

david
www.davidprobst.com

recent video shot with EX-1 & 5DmkII...audio was live with Zoom H4n...5DmkII lenses used: 200mm 1.8, 85mm 1.2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fjehb82yFlQ
 
Hi David p

Yes those days caused a few colleagues of mine to have heart issues, literally. I had an AVID qualified HDD (Big 9gig SCCSI) go down and cause me nearly to expire as well.
how things have changed, that AVID 9gig cost more than my current Macpro. the old Quadra/avid cost more than 12 of the latest Macpro's.
I used to use lots of COSA, which became After Effects in thos e early days , but most things can be done in FCP these days and faster. (depending on your resolution output needs)
Currently my Macpro renders a DVCPro50 QT 190min movie to m2v in 28 mins... and in the background to boot.. and 10 bit 30sec TVC's to mpeg in 12 secs. at those speeds why pay so much more for realtime set-ups?. Sure in a broadcast environment it's needed but in small post houses, not vital. (but it will come)
I'd wait a few months for the juries verdict on SL prior to any install... being on the cutting edge is not good for ones health I've found. just take a peek at apple forums..

Cheers
Tom K
olinevideo.com.au
 
Last edited:
Hi, I too am scratching my head over 4 core or 8 core, and feel like I don't have the patience to wait until Snow Leopard is out and shows it's abilities before upgrading my system. (I'm still power pc G5 fcp5)

I can buy a 2.66 4 core for a pretty decent price that is budget friendly for me, but am afraid that I'll be kicking myself down the road for not spending a bit more to get the 2.26ghz 8 core. Please feel free to chime in and help me decide.

Also, in regards to the Radeon HD 4870 - is it best to upgrade to it at purchase, or can I get the stock Nvidia 120 and just purchase a second card myself like this-> http://ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=35105&vpn=AX4870 1GBD5&manufacture=PowerColor&promoid=1069

Or is the upgrade one mac specific??
 
wow, very interesting to know that!
looks like the upgrade isn't worth it according to david's experience. (thanks for providing your experience)

so I guess I'll wait until SL comes out like everyone is saying but let me ask one question tho.
if SL changes in someway in october, what will be worth the upgrade if it changes ? in what way?
 
ryvac,

if SL does what "its" is supposed/hoped to do then...technically the more cores you have the better. right now most of the processes are only alive on 1 or 2 cores (out of 8) and the rest are just sitting there. my hopes is to see instead of only 100-200% core activity but rather 600-750% core activity. in protools i did an obscene test where i stacked up so many plugins that i was able to get the performance up over 750% (continuous) and the whole computer was still running very smooth and happy. thats the kind of CPU activity id sure like to see in FCP & apps.

with that said that much more core activity doesnt mean that your computer will be three times faster but it should at least be a very notable improvement to where you can actually feel in in your day to day work.

im not a computer geek and not so technical either but its not hard to see that we are driving a indy race care on a stock car race track....these computers are not yet allowed to work to their full potential....not even close.

the 4 core looks like a great deal compared to the 8 core *BUT*...right now it will only hold 8 gigs of ram which IMO could be a bit of a risk when Motion can bring a computer to its knees very easily and 8 gigs isnt much in that program. obscene amount of RAM in fcp is much less necessary though.

i havent yet seen any definitive conclusion from any SL beta testers that has confirmed that SL is a **true** game changer. anyone else seen anything??? im keeping my fingers crossed.

im hoping for the best. if it doesnt improve than i will just learn to live with it and go about my business having to be very thrifty in my FCP timelines when working in HD.

so, sept for SL. another poster above here gave some very sound advice that it could be worth waiting to see how the upgrade works before jumping in too soon...can be lots of bugs....remember the brutal spinning beach ball when Tiger first came out? i bought that the first day it was released. wont be quite that anxious this time around.

david
www.davidprobst.com

recent video shot with EX-1 & 5DmkII...audio was live with Zoom H4n...5DmkII lenses used: 200mm 1.8, 85mm 1.2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fjehb82yFlQ
 
Last edited:
thanks for your advise david,

SL is coming out in septemper and if the beta testers hasn't got the "true" game changer feeling already, it pretty much looks like it's not going to blow the 8 core world.....
that being said a 4 core would be my choice!
but thanks for all your real world experience david,
I was really disapointed when I heard your latest mac pro was strugling MB layers on your HD files. (because that's what I'll be doing mostly)
anyways, I'm sure softwares will catch up in just a few years and time will come when 8 core will be standard...however, when the time has come there will always be another newer computer apple sells and there will just be another thread called "8 core vs 16 core, which one should I get?"
:):):)
 
Staven said:
Hi, I too am scratching my head over 4 core or 8 core, and feel like I don't have the patience to wait until Snow Leopard is out and shows it's abilities before upgrading my system. (I'm still power pc G5 fcp5)

I can buy a 2.66 4 core for a pretty decent price that is budget friendly for me, but am afraid that I'll be kicking myself down the road for not spending a bit more to get the 2.26ghz 8 core. Please feel free to chime in and help me decide.
Click to expand...
as I was searching the 4 core mac pro, it looks like you can add another processor later if you really want to.
don't think it's the best way to go but if you really want the 8 core and regret buying the 4 core... just wanted to say there is a solution:thumbsup: (also the 4 core mac pro looks like it can handle upto 16gb of ram too, not 8gb)

however, the problem would be where to get the processor tho....haha
 
ryvac said:
as I was searching the 4 core mac pro, it looks like you can add another processor later if you really want to.
don't think it's the best way to go but if you really want the 8 core and regret buying the 4 core... just wanted to say there is a solution:thumbsup: (also the 4 core mac pro looks like it can handle upto 16gb of ram too, not 8gb)

however, the problem would be where to get the processor tho....haha
Click to expand...

thats good to know about the 16 gig option on the four core. price is not bad either.

pretty crazy that a person can add another CPU? i wonder if there is anything less "beefy" about the 4 core motherboard and associated inner components vs what is used for the 8 core.

i did notice in another post here that you can actually order a 4870 after the fact for cheaper than ordering from apple. this way you get to have the stock card as well. would the computer work properly if there were "mismatched" graphics cards vs multiple "matched" cards like you can order from apple?

david
www.davidprobst.com
 
yes I read you can add 4x4gb of ram and it works just fine.

also heard the motherboard is the same one used in the 8 core so it has the extra slot so you can add another processor.
but I read it's not something you would realistacly do, since it will probably be cheapter to just sell your 4 core and get a used 8 core instead. (besides it's only $500 difference in new from apple)

I don't know anything about video cards so I don't know about that...but I know you can get one on ebay and it has double memory then what apple offers (1GB!)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120456924685&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top