New Mac choice for FCPX?

Craig Seeman · June 13th, 2012, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick Gordon

It appears that the new iMacs might not be out until 2013, and that the "real" upgrade to the Mac Pros will be in the same kind of timeframe.

Yes, and I have a theory as to where Apple is heading. Looking at the new MBP Retina is a clue.

They may be consolidating iMac and MacPro. It will be a beast. It will have great connectivity. It may not have upgradable internals just like MBP Retina.

Dave Mercer · June 13th, 2012, 12:11 PM

For those editing with MBP, what do you think of using the 15" with FCPX.

I need to upgrade my 17" 2008 model, but am thinking of downgrading screensize to save some dough. I don't travel much with mine but need to hide it away in the safe when I leave the house, so desktop isn't an option.

I have an external monitor (a cheapy Dell) but it does the job for full screen preview.

Thanks!

Craig Seeman · June 13th, 2012, 12:53 PM

Which 15" ?
There's the Retina and the "traditional"
If you can afford it, I'd say get the Retina. It's where Apple is heading. It'll have a longer shelf life. The two Thunderbolt and two USB3 ports will make it a much better desktop replacement.

John Nantz · June 13th, 2012, 01:21 PM

I'm using a 2008 MacBook Pro 15" and it works okay for me but then I'm an amateur and not doing editing professionally. I've got a Mac Pro with a 23" monitor but I've been using the laptop for my editing because I like working in the kitchen dinette better than in our office - better lighting and the table has more room than my desk.

Perhaps one has to make better use of the features that allow one to zoom in on details. The more one uses FCPX the easier it gets. I was sidetracked a few weeks back and found I have to more or less "re-learn" many of the editing features. Arrrgh!

A couple days ago I through a quick video together, importing and editing, in a matter of minutes and even surprised myself. Granted, the editing was minimal - just adjusting clip lengths, but still, it went really fast. We have a cat that is going through chemotherapy and was having eating problems - loosing weight, chewing problems, and basically not eating. His walking and body movements were very slow and measured. I took some video of his eating and body movements and used the completed and edited video to show the vet. The vet found it very helpful. Thanks to the video we received some really good vet advice and he as really sprung back. As a result we hope he will have a good recovery.

I'd like to comment on the WWDC "New" Mac Pro but that would be off topic here.

Shane Coburn · July 9th, 2012, 08:10 PM

I have the following:
- 2009 MacBook Pro 13.3"
- Intel Core 2 Duo 2.53GHz
- 4GB RAM
- OS 10.5.8

So, it looks like at the very least I'd have to upgrade to Snow Leopard and add 4GB of additional RAM to run FCPX properly. Probably cost $100. But would it be worth it? Would it run decently? Is the video card suitable? (I can't upgrade that.)

Still, a refurb 13.3" will cost me upwards of $1000. Don't really have that right now. Is there some interim solution people are happy with?

John Nantz · July 9th, 2012, 10:17 PM

By comparison, I'm doing a lot of editing on a 2008 MacBook Pro 2.53 "Core 2 Duo". It originally had 4 GB Ram and ran fine albeit a little slower than I liked. Changed out the Ram to 8 GB and it speeded up measurably, especially rendering times. Since one tends to run rendering frequently this is a consideration.

The benchmark speed is 3627 with the 4 GB of Ram. Mac Benchmarks - Geekbench Browser
Bought my memory at OtherWorldComputing for $48~
The memory install on my computer was a piece of cake. On yours, though, it may be different. Seems to me there was an issue with changing the battery on that year or maybe it was the year afterward?

I'm running Snow Leopard but I can't speek to if you have to upgrade or not.

Shane Coburn · July 10th, 2012, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Nantz

By comparison, I'm doing a lot of editing on a 2008 MacBook Pro 2.53 "Core 2 Duo". It originally had 4 GB Ram and ran fine albeit a little slower than I liked. Changed out the Ram to 8 GB and it speeded up measurably, especially rendering times. Since one tends to run rendering frequently this is a consideration.

The benchmark speed is 3627 with the 4 GB of Ram. Mac Benchmarks - Geekbench Browser
Bought my memory at OtherWorldComputing for $48~
The memory install on my computer was a piece of cake. On yours, though, it may be different. Seems to me there was an issue with changing the battery on that year or maybe it was the year afterward?

I'm running Snow Leopard but I can't speek to if you have to upgrade or not.

Thanks for the reply and info, John. Sounds like I might just be able to upgrade the OS and RAM and be OK. Of course, I'd love to have optimal render time, etc., but as long as the FCPX features work on my laptop, I'd rather save the 1k+ right now.

John Nantz · July 10th, 2012, 10:34 AM

Most memory is really cheap these days and it is worth the cost for the additional speed and usability. By usability, I mean doing various things like dragging a clip from the Event browser to the Project window, or things like that.

What would be a real nice improvement, nice but not required, would be a switch to the 15-inch screen. The Generator window on the right side of the screen takes up some viewing area and this subtracts from the timeline. Since a lot of work is done in the Project Timeline window it makes it easier when there is more length available there.

As for upgrading, a refurbished one is certainly one way to save a buck but just buying used can work too. I got mine off a craigs list ad for $600. It took a while shopping for the right buy but I met the seller at the Apple store Genius bar and we did a thorough check of the computer and I made sure I was listed as the ultimate owner of the computer. I forget the term, Administrator? they use but one want's to make sure that you've got primary control over the computer.

The first thing the Genius bar person should check for is to make sure it isn't reported as stolen. The next thing would be the battery condition as this is an expensive replacement item. This whole aspect of taking care of the user is what I think helps to justify the higher cost of a Mac and to me it's worth it.

There was a site I went to where one could check what the "wholesale" and "retail" price was for a particular computer and this was a good guide to see if what you're negotiating for is a good value or not. When buying used one can also check for the good and bad features of the computer to see if these are important to you.

In checking the benchmark values I found that the i5 and i7 computers, while having the same speed as ours, 2.53, have much higher values. I don't know how this reflects in speed when running FCPX but I'm sure there is some positive effect there. Maybe when preparing for burning a DVD?

In 6 to 9 months when you're ready to upgrade the computer you're looking at today will be even a better price.

Larry Hill · August 21st, 2012, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Nantz

Several years ago a large number of Macs were daisy chained together somehow to create a large super computer. I don't remember the details.

Just for the fun of it:

Damian Heffernan · October 23rd, 2012, 02:42 PM

The new "boring" imacs have been released so it's time to either pick up an old one, or: will a Mac Mini do the job?
The old imac with an i7 will cost a few hundred less than the base model 27 inch or you can buy a top quad mac mini for $999. On board graphics but good processor and thunderbolt. What do you think about the hd4000 with FCPX? $1000 saving.

William Hohauser · October 24th, 2012, 02:39 AM

Apple says that the HD 4000 card will work so if you can get the proper Thunderbolt accessories you need then go ahead with the MacMini. Add some memory to it and use a good external drive to store the video files. There hasn't been a comparison review of FCPX on different Mac models that I know of but it's probably wise to figure that you will have longer render times with a MacMini than a MacPro with an OpenCL video card.

Update - I was wrong, here is a comparison: http://barefeats.com/fcpx01.html

Damian Heffernan · October 25th, 2012, 01:36 AM

thanks for the link awesome read

Nigel Barker · October 28th, 2012, 05:48 AM

That comparison is between a single 6-core CPU Mac Pro & a quad core iMac & quad core MBP so unsurprisingly there isn't a great deal of difference in render times.. What would be more interesting is to know how much better a dual 6-core CPU Mac Pro performs.

Craig Seeman · October 28th, 2012, 07:05 AM

One thing to note is that test is from Sept 2011.
Given the iMac has just been bumped to Ivy Bridge chips (Dec for 27" Quad i7) and the MacPro has only had a minor speed bump, one might suspect that the iMacs have moved up a notch yet again compared to the aging MacPro.

Yes, it would be interesting to see how a speed bumped 2010 12 Core MP would perform but I have a hunch that relative cost value would make one wonder whether it's worth the expense even for most professionals.

Next year's MacPro replacement is going to be interesting. I wonder if it'll be Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge Xeons (as Xeon chips tend to be a generation name behind)

Craig Seeman · October 28th, 2012, 07:12 AM

Barefeats just posted 13" vs 15" MPBr tests which include FCPX and Motion (as well as Photoshop).
13" versus 15" Retina MacBook Pro

I'd thought I'd add this given that the 2011 test didn't include Retina model(s).

June 13th, 2012, 12:11 PM	#32
Dave Mercer Major Player Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Lake Atitlan, Guatemala Posts: 346	Re: New Mac choice for FCPX? For those editing with MBP, what do you think of using the 15" with FCPX. I need to upgrade my 17" 2008 model, but am thinking of downgrading screensize to save some dough. I don't travel much with mine but need to hide it away in the safe when I leave the house, so desktop isn't an option. I have an external monitor (a cheapy Dell) but it does the job for full screen preview. Thanks!

June 13th, 2012, 12:53 PM	#33
Craig Seeman Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA Posts: 3,841	Re: New Mac choice for FCPX? Which 15" ? There's the Retina and the "traditional" If you can afford it, I'd say get the Retina. It's where Apple is heading. It'll have a longer shelf life. The two Thunderbolt and two USB3 ports will make it a much better desktop replacement.

June 13th, 2012, 01:21 PM	#34
John Nantz Trustee Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Seattle WA Posts: 1,254	Dave: 15" screen is okay for me I'm using a 2008 MacBook Pro 15" and it works okay for me but then I'm an amateur and not doing editing professionally. I've got a Mac Pro with a 23" monitor but I've been using the laptop for my editing because I like working in the kitchen dinette better than in our office - better lighting and the table has more room than my desk. Perhaps one has to make better use of the features that allow one to zoom in on details. The more one uses FCPX the easier it gets. I was sidetracked a few weeks back and found I have to more or less "re-learn" many of the editing features. Arrrgh! A couple days ago I through a quick video together, importing and editing, in a matter of minutes and even surprised myself. Granted, the editing was minimal - just adjusting clip lengths, but still, it went really fast. We have a cat that is going through chemotherapy and was having eating problems - loosing weight, chewing problems, and basically not eating. His walking and body movements were very slow and measured. I took some video of his eating and body movements and used the completed and edited video to show the vet. The vet found it very helpful. Thanks to the video we received some really good vet advice and he as really sprung back. As a result we hope he will have a good recovery. I'd like to comment on the WWDC "New" Mac Pro but that would be off topic here.

July 9th, 2012, 08:10 PM	#35
Shane Coburn Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 95	Re: New Mac choice for FCPX? I have the following: - 2009 MacBook Pro 13.3" - Intel Core 2 Duo 2.53GHz - 4GB RAM - OS 10.5.8 So, it looks like at the very least I'd have to upgrade to Snow Leopard and add 4GB of additional RAM to run FCPX properly. Probably cost $100. But would it be worth it? Would it run decently? Is the video card suitable? (I can't upgrade that.) Still, a refurb 13.3" will cost me upwards of $1000. Don't really have that right now. Is there some interim solution people are happy with? __________________ Me on Vimeo, LinkedIn, and Twitter

July 9th, 2012, 10:17 PM	#36
John Nantz Trustee Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Seattle WA Posts: 1,254	2009 MacBook Pro: Should be no problem By comparison, I'm doing a lot of editing on a 2008 MacBook Pro 2.53 "Core 2 Duo". It originally had 4 GB Ram and ran fine albeit a little slower than I liked. Changed out the Ram to 8 GB and it speeded up measurably, especially rendering times. Since one tends to run rendering frequently this is a consideration. The benchmark speed is 3627 with the 4 GB of Ram. Mac Benchmarks - Geekbench Browser Bought my memory at OtherWorldComputing for $48~ The memory install on my computer was a piece of cake. On yours, though, it may be different. Seems to me there was an issue with changing the battery on that year or maybe it was the year afterward? I'm running Snow Leopard but I can't speek to if you have to upgrade or not.

July 10th, 2012, 10:34 AM	#38
John Nantz Trustee Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Seattle WA Posts: 1,254	Increased memory is a cheap fix Most memory is really cheap these days and it is worth the cost for the additional speed and usability. By usability, I mean doing various things like dragging a clip from the Event browser to the Project window, or things like that. What would be a real nice improvement, nice but not required, would be a switch to the 15-inch screen. The Generator window on the right side of the screen takes up some viewing area and this subtracts from the timeline. Since a lot of work is done in the Project Timeline window it makes it easier when there is more length available there. As for upgrading, a refurbished one is certainly one way to save a buck but just buying used can work too. I got mine off a craigs list ad for $600. It took a while shopping for the right buy but I met the seller at the Apple store Genius bar and we did a thorough check of the computer and I made sure I was listed as the ultimate owner of the computer. I forget the term, Administrator? they use but one want's to make sure that you've got primary control over the computer. The first thing the Genius bar person should check for is to make sure it isn't reported as stolen. The next thing would be the battery condition as this is an expensive replacement item. This whole aspect of taking care of the user is what I think helps to justify the higher cost of a Mac and to me it's worth it. There was a site I went to where one could check what the "wholesale" and "retail" price was for a particular computer and this was a good guide to see if what you're negotiating for is a good value or not. When buying used one can also check for the good and bad features of the computer to see if these are important to you. In checking the benchmark values I found that the i5 and i7 computers, while having the same speed as ours, 2.53, have much higher values. I don't know how this reflects in speed when running FCPX but I'm sure there is some positive effect there. Maybe when preparing for burning a DVD? In 6 to 9 months when you're ready to upgrade the computer you're looking at today will be even a better price.

October 23rd, 2012, 02:42 PM	#40
Damian Heffernan Major Player Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: c Australia Posts: 234	Re: New Mac choice for FCPX? The new "boring" imacs have been released so it's time to either pick up an old one, or: will a Mac Mini do the job? The old imac with an i7 will cost a few hundred less than the base model 27 inch or you can buy a top quad mac mini for $999. On board graphics but good processor and thunderbolt. What do you think about the hd4000 with FCPX? $1000 saving. __________________ http://onarafilms.com/ http://gentlespirit.com.au/

October 24th, 2012, 02:39 AM	#41
William Hohauser Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York City Posts: 2,650	Re: New Mac choice for FCPX? Apple says that the HD 4000 card will work so if you can get the proper Thunderbolt accessories you need then go ahead with the MacMini. Add some memory to it and use a good external drive to store the video files. There hasn't been a comparison review of FCPX on different Mac models that I know of but it's probably wise to figure that you will have longer render times with a MacMini than a MacPro with an OpenCL video card. Update - I was wrong, here is a comparison: http://barefeats.com/fcpx01.html __________________ William Hohauser - New York City Producer/Edit/Camera/Animation Last edited by William Hohauser; October 24th, 2012 at 01:32 PM.

October 25th, 2012, 01:36 AM	#42
Damian Heffernan Major Player Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: c Australia Posts: 234	Re: New Mac choice for FCPX? thanks for the link awesome read __________________ http://onarafilms.com/ http://gentlespirit.com.au/

October 28th, 2012, 05:48 AM	#43
Nigel Barker Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK Posts: 3,531	Re: New Mac choice for FCPX? That comparison is between a single 6-core CPU Mac Pro & a quad core iMac & quad core MBP so unsurprisingly there isn't a great deal of difference in render times.. What would be more interesting is to know how much better a dual 6-core CPU Mac Pro performs.

October 28th, 2012, 07:05 AM	#44
Craig Seeman Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA Posts: 3,841	Re: New Mac choice for FCPX? One thing to note is that test is from Sept 2011. Given the iMac has just been bumped to Ivy Bridge chips (Dec for 27" Quad i7) and the MacPro has only had a minor speed bump, one might suspect that the iMacs have moved up a notch yet again compared to the aging MacPro. Yes, it would be interesting to see how a speed bumped 2010 12 Core MP would perform but I have a hunch that relative cost value would make one wonder whether it's worth the expense even for most professionals. Next year's MacPro replacement is going to be interesting. I wonder if it'll be Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge Xeons (as Xeon chips tend to be a generation name behind)

October 28th, 2012, 07:12 AM	#45
Craig Seeman Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA Posts: 3,841	Re: New Mac choice for FCPX? Barefeats just posted 13" vs 15" MPBr tests which include FCPX and Motion (as well as Photoshop). 13" versus 15" Retina MacBook Pro I'd thought I'd add this given that the 2011 test didn't include Retina model(s).