What MAC PRO Desktop for AVID MEDIA COMPOSER 5 ?

DC Films

New member
I'm upgrading my kit - new Mac Pro desktop & new Avid Media Composer (AMC) software...

I edit for a living, but my computer knowledge is pretty rubbish.

I was going to get the quad-core 3.2 Nehalem, £2,368. Then i realized that despite having 4 cores, it isn't a dual processor, and i'm told i need DUAL for HD editing work...

So, now i'm really stretching my budget to the dual quad core 2.4 Westmere, £2859.

Question: Will this be good enough to run AMC smoothly, or does it have to be the 2.66 12 core?

GRAPHICS CARD:
I can upgrade to the Radeon HD 5870, or is it better to upgrade to 2xRadeon 5770? Someone told me the 5870 is the better option!!!

Avid have only tested the Radeons on an imac and the 12 core 2.66. The rest are NVidia - and they reccomend NVidia in general...

Here's Avid's tested Mac set-ups:

http://cdn.pinnaclesys.com/SupportFiles/attach/Apple%20Macintosh%20Specifications%20for%20Avid%20Media%20Composer%20v5.0%20January%202011.pdf


Is there an NVidia card i should use instead of the Radeons?
If so, am i right in thinking that those Avid tested with don't seem as good as the Radeons?

'm hoping Radeons are as good as NVidia for AMC, since the NVidia are so much more expensive.

I'm really stuck and appreciate any advice.
Thanks
 
Along the same lines as the OP, I've been meaning to pick up a system to learn MC5 on (coming from FCP), but didn't want to shell out thousands on a new Mac or PC workstation for what might not be an enjoyable ride for me. Are older HP xw8400 workstations good enough to edit a couple of DNxHD streams + basic effects in realtime? These are the ones with 2 dual-core 2.66ghz Xeons (5150), 4GB RAM, and a Quadro FX 1500.
 
Well the system requirements vary for different operating system.If you are using windows then Intel Core 2 Duo 2.33 GHz processor or faster is sufficient.But if you are using mac then the Intel Dual or Intel Dual Core 2.66 GHz Xeon processor or faster, or Intel Core 2 Duo 2.33 GHz processor or faster (laptops) is required.Memory requirement would be the same i.e. 4GB RAM.
 
You can find everything you need here (pdf). Current as of March 2011.

If/when the link stops working, they should post a link to their latest requirements here.

And if that doesn't work, there's always this link. But be warned. At that last link they list the specs for PCs and Macs. I know that can sometimes cause Mac people to....
:violent5:​
 
Last edited:
You don't need dual cpu. A fast quad will do very well. As for gfx, neither of the cards you listed are workstations cards. If available you want to get something out of the the nvideia FX series. the cards you have listed are designed for gamers not editors. that being said they are very high end gaming cards and either selection would do fine.

Personally i recommend saving your money and getting a custom built i7 based system. The fastest i7 is neck and neck with the fastest xeon but the cpu cost half the price. I can build something on the i7 frame with up to 12 threads that will outrun most editing systems for a lot less then what mac charges.

If you want a mac, the lowest model with the 3.2 cpu will do fine for HD editing. I'd rather 4@3.2 then 8@2.4. Avid doesn't do as well as they claim at using multiple cores. More power on fewer cores is sometimes just as good if not better. You want at least 8 if not 12 gigs of ram. i'm not thrilled with any of their graphics options though. You will also want a raid, probably external since they limit you to 4 internal drives.
 
I'm amazed at how much Mac charges for their hardware. And like Richter said, there is absolutely no need to run Avid on a dual processor rig - it's way overkill. I do a lot of on-location editing using Avid 5.5 on my Asus N53SV-XE1 laptop. I can utilize AMA and edit multiple streams of HD without dropped frames all for under $900. Is it a supported Avid System? It's missing the "workstation" graphics card, so NO. But if you search you'll find that almost any Nvidia graphics card will do the trick.
 
Back
Top