iMac Intel Duo, Macbook Pro or Dual G5 for HDV? at DVinfo.net

Steve Nunez · May 6th, 2006, 07:09 PM

Well I'm set to get a new FX-1 from B&H tomorrow and was wondering what's the speediest Mac for HDV editing: iMac Intel Duo, MacBook Pro or DualCore G5?

Assuming I'll have the version of FCP that runs on Intel Mac's which would be faster, better suited for 1080i HDV?

(I've edited FX1 footage on my Mac G5 Dual 2.5 w/4.5 GB ram and it wasn't as fast as I thought it'd be- I've heard the Intel Mac's are quite a bit better with HDV- hence the questions)

Thanks everyone!

Tom Chaney · May 6th, 2006, 08:14 PM

Hi Steve,

I just picked up an intel based MacBook Pro, it's about the fastest thing out there right now, and I like the portability.

If you research it on the net, you'll find that people are reporting that it is as fast as their dual G5.

If you can wait the rumors are that there will be intel based towers in August.

Good Luck,

Tom Chaney

PS look here : http://www.apple.com/universal/

Steve Nunez · May 6th, 2006, 09:00 PM

Tom, Yes I too have read the MacBook Pro absolutely flies with HDV- but have yet to read any posts about the Intel iMac which shares very similar specs to that of the MBPro and even allows 23" Cinema Displays to extend the desktop (which I have)......I kinda like the idea of a dual monitor setup which is what I'd have with a 20" iMac (I know the MBPro would also do the same)......the big plus for the MacBook Pro is it's portability- which is really nice but not essenial for me personally.

So I'm up all night trying to find users experiences with the Intel iMac and it's handling of HDV.

Thanks Tom for the reply.

Steve Nunez · May 6th, 2006, 09:10 PM

Tom, I checked out the link you put where it shows benchmaks for both machines. Initially it seemd as if the MacBook Pro was faster than the Intel iMac but they're comparing it to previous models of which the MBPro was compared to a Powerbook which is G4 powered and the iMac was benched against a 2.0 GHZ G5- so while they don't compare the 2 machines aginst themselves- it appears the iMac is actually the faster of the 2 machines. I wish they had the FCP 1080i render numbers for all the current Mac's- that would be a great indication of it's operation editing HDV.

Just thought I'd mention this small finding.

Dave Perry · May 6th, 2006, 09:17 PM

We have a dual 2ghz G5 and it does not do as well as I expected with HDV from our XL H1. I would personally take any of the current Intel Macs over the G5 unless it's a Quad G5.

Ron Pfister · May 7th, 2006, 01:13 AM

Steve, another thing to consider: AFAIK, the MacBook Pro has a CPU that is soldered to the logic board, while the iMac and the mini have socketted CPUs. This means that you can upgrade the CPU of the latter machines very easily, should you want more speed at some point down the line. Just a thought...

HTH,

Ron

Steve Nunez · May 7th, 2006, 06:12 AM

Ron, I wasn't aware of that- do you think Apple is going to support socketed upgrades?

The one BAD thing about the iMac is that it has a single firewire bus and this has caused problems for people trying to capture clips onto a "media" fw HD. The MacBook Pro is the same BUT you can use a card that would allow another FW connection that's different from the primary fw bus- meaning you could setup an ext fw HD and capture to it while using the primary fw bus to connect to the HDV camera.

Today is the day I'm set to get the FX1 and an Intel Mac and i'm still not sure which route I'll go- iMac or MBP!
Thanks for the info guys!

Tom Chaney · May 7th, 2006, 06:59 AM

Steve,

I went through the same thing before I made my purchase, the imac does appear to be a nice option.

Another thing that swayed my decision to the MacBook Pro was the imac can drive another display but you will need a converter, where as the MacBook is ready to go out of the box.

You may want to consider the 17" MacBook pro as well. I just finished installing FCP on my new MacBook Pro, and I have a Phillips HD LCD attached to it, with a LaCie 500 gig Firewire and I'm pretty happy - okay very happy.

Just one more note to add to the confusion, the gentlemen at the Apple Store did suggest an imac to me as well. But you are right, there is only one firewire bus that the two ports share.

Good luck with the decision.

Tom

Ron Pfister · May 7th, 2006, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Nunez

Ron, I wasn't aware of that- do you think Apple is going to support socketed upgrades?

Historically, Apple has never supported third-party CPU-upgrades, but this does by no means imply that they won't work. If you google for it, you can find a number of references of people who have successfully upgraded their Intel-Macs with faster CoreDuo-CPUs. These are original Intel-parts that can be bought from a wide variety of retailers.

FWIW,

Ron

Francois Camoin · May 7th, 2006, 10:23 AM

I think the 2 choices for serious editing (in the Mac world) are the G5 or waiting for the Intel desktop Macs. The Macbook Pro and the Intel IMac are both too limited in terms of expansion. Neither one can take 3rd party video or sound or import cards, and more important, neither one can take a separate Firewire card. Apple's implementation of Firewire is a bit less than optimal. My own G5 had constant difficulty with external drives until I added a third party three-port card. Since then, no problem. And you'll find you will eventually need serious external storage to edit anything over 30 minutes.

Nathan Troutman · May 7th, 2006, 10:50 AM

Amen to Francois. I've never heard so much G5 bashing. The intels are fast and they look great but professional?? I don't think so. Without upgrade options you're limited to what you have. Do the intel macs even have a PCI bus? What about the next greatest screaming fast video card. There's nowhere to put that inside either.

I have two machines: a dual 2.0 G5 and a dual 1.8 G4. That's right a dual 1.8 G4 that's almost six years old and it's ripping 10 bit uncompressed in final cut studio because it's a professional computer that allows you to buy RAID cards, capture cards, and stuff lots of extra Hard Drive space inside. And you can always pop out your original 466 G4 processor and drop in dual 1.8. Sheer processing can save you a few minutes in rendering but storage is super important, especially with HD. If you're planning to capture HDV and then convert to AIC, you're going to be eating 100 Gigs like peanuts at a baseball game.

Dave Perry · May 7th, 2006, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Francois Camoin

I think the 2 choices for serious editing (in the Mac world) are the G5 or waiting for the Intel desktop Macs. The Macbook Pro and the Intel IMac are both too limited in terms of expansion. Neither one can take 3rd party video or sound or import cards, and more important, neither one can take a separate Firewire card. Apple's implementation of Firewire is a bit less than optimal. My own G5 had constant difficulty with external drives until I added a third party three-port card. Since then, no problem. And you'll find you will eventually need serious external storage to edit anything over 30 minutes.

Both the MacBook Pro and iMac have considerably more than sufficient video cards and configuarability. Both have 256mb options and extended desktop. They are both faster than anything but a Quad Core G5. Right now, Apple's flagship video editing workstation is eithe the Quad G5 or the MBP 17".

As for Firewire, on bus is usually sufficient. I have 2 drives, a dvd burner and camera on one FW bus and have no problems. There can be issues with certain drives, G-Tech being one, and other FW devices. Our Dual proc G5 needed anothe card installed so that we could use the G-Tech G-Raids in conjunction with our AJA Io. That being said, the MBP allows for the addition of another FW bus through its ExpressCard/34 slot.

I personally would not buy a Quad G5 right now since the PPC structure is going out the door. Come this Tuesday, with the introduction of the iBook replacement, the MacBook, the G5 tower will be the only thing left to switch to intel.

Gary Williams · May 7th, 2006, 05:37 PM

I agree well said.

Scott Jaco · May 8th, 2006, 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Francois Camoin

And you'll find you will eventually need serious external storage to edit anything over 30 minutes.

I hope you are being very sarcastic! I have a fully loaded intel Imac that gives me over 33 hours of capture time in HDV 720p mode. It is a 500GB internal hard disk. That is just slightly better than 30 minutes.

Dave Perry · May 8th, 2006, 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Jaco

I hope you are being very sarcastic! I have a fully loaded intel Imac that gives me over 33 hours of capture time in HDV 720p mode. It is a 500GB internal hard disk. That is just slightly better than 30 minutes.

Scott,

That's lots of space but it's not a very good idea to capture your media to your system drive as far as FCP performance goes.

May 6th, 2006, 07:09 PM	#1
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	iMac Intel Duo, Macbook Pro or Dual G5 for HDV? Well I'm set to get a new FX-1 from B&H tomorrow and was wondering what's the speediest Mac for HDV editing: iMac Intel Duo, MacBook Pro or DualCore G5? Assuming I'll have the version of FCP that runs on Intel Mac's which would be faster, better suited for 1080i HDV? (I've edited FX1 footage on my Mac G5 Dual 2.5 w/4.5 GB ram and it wasn't as fast as I thought it'd be- I've heard the Intel Mac's are quite a bit better with HDV- hence the questions) Thanks everyone! __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

May 6th, 2006, 08:14 PM	#2
Tom Chaney Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 196	Hi Steve, I just picked up an intel based MacBook Pro, it's about the fastest thing out there right now, and I like the portability. If you research it on the net, you'll find that people are reporting that it is as fast as their dual G5. If you can wait the rumors are that there will be intel based towers in August. Good Luck, Tom Chaney PS look here : http://www.apple.com/universal/ Last edited by Tom Chaney; May 6th, 2006 at 08:52 PM.

May 6th, 2006, 09:00 PM	#3
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Tom, Yes I too have read the MacBook Pro absolutely flies with HDV- but have yet to read any posts about the Intel iMac which shares very similar specs to that of the MBPro and even allows 23" Cinema Displays to extend the desktop (which I have)......I kinda like the idea of a dual monitor setup which is what I'd have with a 20" iMac (I know the MBPro would also do the same)......the big plus for the MacBook Pro is it's portability- which is really nice but not essenial for me personally. So I'm up all night trying to find users experiences with the Intel iMac and it's handling of HDV. Thanks Tom for the reply. __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

May 6th, 2006, 09:10 PM	#4
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Tom, I checked out the link you put where it shows benchmaks for both machines. Initially it seemd as if the MacBook Pro was faster than the Intel iMac but they're comparing it to previous models of which the MBPro was compared to a Powerbook which is G4 powered and the iMac was benched against a 2.0 GHZ G5- so while they don't compare the 2 machines aginst themselves- it appears the iMac is actually the faster of the 2 machines. I wish they had the FCP 1080i render numbers for all the current Mac's- that would be a great indication of it's operation editing HDV. Just thought I'd mention this small finding. __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

May 6th, 2006, 09:17 PM	#5
Dave Perry Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Roanoke, VA Posts: 796	We have a dual 2ghz G5 and it does not do as well as I expected with HDV from our XL H1. I would personally take any of the current Intel Macs over the G5 unless it's a Quad G5. __________________ Dave Perry Cinematographer LLC Director of Photography • Editor • Digital Film Production • 540.915.2752 • daveperry.net

May 7th, 2006, 01:13 AM	#6
Ron Pfister Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Basel area, Switzerland Posts: 285	Steve, another thing to consider: AFAIK, the MacBook Pro has a CPU that is soldered to the logic board, while the iMac and the mini have socketted CPUs. This means that you can upgrade the CPU of the latter machines very easily, should you want more speed at some point down the line. Just a thought... HTH, Ron __________________ Ronald P. Pfister halimedia - digital solutions and services www.halimedia.com Last edited by Ron Pfister; May 7th, 2006 at 04:37 AM.

May 7th, 2006, 06:12 AM	#7
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Ron, I wasn't aware of that- do you think Apple is going to support socketed upgrades? The one BAD thing about the iMac is that it has a single firewire bus and this has caused problems for people trying to capture clips onto a "media" fw HD. The MacBook Pro is the same BUT you can use a card that would allow another FW connection that's different from the primary fw bus- meaning you could setup an ext fw HD and capture to it while using the primary fw bus to connect to the HDV camera. Today is the day I'm set to get the FX1 and an Intel Mac and i'm still not sure which route I'll go- iMac or MBP! Thanks for the info guys! __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

May 7th, 2006, 06:59 AM	#8
Tom Chaney Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 196	Steve, I went through the same thing before I made my purchase, the imac does appear to be a nice option. Another thing that swayed my decision to the MacBook Pro was the imac can drive another display but you will need a converter, where as the MacBook is ready to go out of the box. You may want to consider the 17" MacBook pro as well. I just finished installing FCP on my new MacBook Pro, and I have a Phillips HD LCD attached to it, with a LaCie 500 gig Firewire and I'm pretty happy - okay very happy. Just one more note to add to the confusion, the gentlemen at the Apple Store did suggest an imac to me as well. But you are right, there is only one firewire bus that the two ports share. Good luck with the decision. Tom

May 7th, 2006, 10:23 AM	#10
Francois Camoin Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Posts: 29	I think the 2 choices for serious editing (in the Mac world) are the G5 or waiting for the Intel desktop Macs. The Macbook Pro and the Intel IMac are both too limited in terms of expansion. Neither one can take 3rd party video or sound or import cards, and more important, neither one can take a separate Firewire card. Apple's implementation of Firewire is a bit less than optimal. My own G5 had constant difficulty with external drives until I added a third party three-port card. Since then, no problem. And you'll find you will eventually need serious external storage to edit anything over 30 minutes.

May 7th, 2006, 10:50 AM	#11
Nathan Troutman Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Hoboken, NJ (New York metro area) Posts: 105	Amen to Francois. I've never heard so much G5 bashing. The intels are fast and they look great but professional?? I don't think so. Without upgrade options you're limited to what you have. Do the intel macs even have a PCI bus? What about the next greatest screaming fast video card. There's nowhere to put that inside either. I have two machines: a dual 2.0 G5 and a dual 1.8 G4. That's right a dual 1.8 G4 that's almost six years old and it's ripping 10 bit uncompressed in final cut studio because it's a professional computer that allows you to buy RAID cards, capture cards, and stuff lots of extra Hard Drive space inside. And you can always pop out your original 466 G4 processor and drop in dual 1.8. Sheer processing can save you a few minutes in rendering but storage is super important, especially with HD. If you're planning to capture HDV and then convert to AIC, you're going to be eating 100 Gigs like peanuts at a baseball game.

May 7th, 2006, 05:37 PM	#13
Gary Williams Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Rocklin, California Posts: 287	I agree well said.