Is it really necessary to build a desktop for HD editing? I would like to be mobile with a strong laptop. Even though I think the new mac pro 17" should have a quad core option and at least one hdmi port, I'm thinking it would probably suit my needs. I'm totally inexperienced with video editing, but I have a decent camera and I would like a strong machine that will simply work, period. Any thoughts on the new Mac pro?

I think you are confused about Mac computers. The Mac Pro is the desktop, MacBook Pro is the laptop. The latest MacBook Pro does not have a quad-core option, they only use the Intel Core 2 Duo processors and they do not have an HDMI port.

I wasn't very clear in that post. I meant to write "macbook pro" and that in my opinion, they should offer a quad core and should offer at least one hdmi port, but I realize that is not offered. I'm just curious if the hardware configuration of the 17" macbook pro will handle high def video editing.

RAM-Specific Question
 

I followed this thread religiously since I'm building a brand new system for HD editing. Kadafi has been of great help listing out those items and several others, (particularly Justin) have really make that post very informative.

I have one question regarding RAM memory (Kadafi or any other member can help please). Which one is better to get (for RAM):

CORSAIR DOMINATOR 6GB 3x 2GB PC3-15000 1866Mhz DDR3
CORSAIR 12GB 6x 2GB XMS3 1333 Mhz 10666 DDR3 MEMORY?

I can't find the 12G PC3-15000 1866Mhz anywhere. (If you have a place, please send me the link) So is the 6G PC3-10666 1333Mhz faster/more powerful than the 12G PC3-10666 1333 Mhz?

Power Supply: I'm planning to get the PC Power & Cooling Turbo-Cool 860 ATX12 & EPS12V. Is that piece excellent?

Bluray Burner: I'm getting the LG GGW-H20L 6X Blu-Ray Burner 2X BD-RE 16X DVD+R, is that a decent piece or do you have even a better choice?

UPS: I don't know what that is. Please help.

Etc...: Please be more explicit so I make sure I have everything I need.

Thank you for your help.

I'll be producing/editing 5.1 surround sound projects. Does the HD sound have surround sound 5.1 capabilities? If you think not, please advise. Otherwise, thanks for the sound card saving$$$.

Justin, your post is very interesting. Would you recommend specific drives and/or drive array montages (RAID) which you know works (for you) for each of those 4 bullets above?

Thanks man!

The conventional wisdom is that the memory speed should divide evenly into your chip and front side bus speed for best efficiency. For example, my chips are 2.66GHz, the FSB is 1333MHz and the memory is 667MHz.

But this could be total nonsense and I may have bought it because I'm a dope.

Justin. Let's say I render 120-minute long HD/Film clip out to a 100Gig file. I would save it to the Render Disk set (RAID 0 according to your config).

Do you think I can copy/save a 100Gig file from the RAID system to a single External eSATA or USB2 Hard Drive??? I thought those drives can't save any single file larger than 4Gig. Please advise and anybody is welcome to enlighten me.

At this point, I'm tempted to go with the following config:

* Opsys/apps disk - Single 10K 300G Cache 32MB
* Read Disk Set - Single eSATA or USB2 1TB drive
* Temp and Scratch Disk files - Single eSATA or USB2 1TB drive
* Render/Storage Disk set - RAID 5 with 4 drives (2T minimum) for good storage safety.

Would anyone help with their opinion? Thanks.

Fire good, USB bad
 

No USB drives... at all! For storing your family pics, mp3s podcast downloads, etc or even backups, USB2 drives are fine. For editing, get the idea of using USB out of your head. You don't want it. Don't even have them attached whilst working in your NLE. Just leave 'em on the shelf.

The size of files is dictated by the file system in use on the hard drive. If you formatted your RAID in FAT32 it too would be limited to 4G files!!! IF you are on a PC format your hard discs to NTFS and you will not need to worry about file size regardless of if you use a RAID or external eSATA or USB drive.
My system comprises 250G boot, 250G temp, 2x 750G for editing, and several external drives as needed 2 x 500G eSata and 1T eSata. Project files are on the temp disc, backed up to the boot disc and I backup the boot disc to the temp disc. Externals are used for storage mainly. Finished projects go to tape or Bluray. Projects are HDV and AVCHD and I have seen no need to go to RAID. I use Edius, Vegas for editing and DVD Architect and DVDLab Pro for authoring, TMPGenc Xpress for encoding.

Ron Evans

I've actually made a full platform switch from Mac to PC, so allow me to address some concerns as well as tell you about some of the pitfalls I encountered.

1) Cost

PC equipment will cost less than a Mac for desktop systems. A similarly configured PC will cost about half a Mac Pro if you build it yourself. (Macs used to have the "Power Mac" line which was price competitive but they discontinued it.)

One of the advantages of the PC is that you can upgrade to faster processors in parts, rather than buying new computers. This is especially great for video editors because we don't need to transfer files over - just plop the old hard drive in the new system.

2) Performance

Though it depends on the editor you choose, I find that I get much better performance on a PC than I do on a Mac. First off, Final Cut Pro does not support multi-core performance. Compressor does, but that's usually only of use when doing a final render out. When you're trying to edit your work, being able to play a low rez/low framerate version of the video in the preview window makes cutting a hell of a lot easier. (NB: I use Vegas.)

Additionally, related to the cost above: You can get more raw power for the money than you can with the Mac solution.

3) Other Software Capabilities

Gotta give the edge to the Mac here. After Effects is fine on the PC, but the Final Cut Pro studio has LiveType, Motion, and Color. If you never, or rarely, use those programs, it makes sense to switch, otherwise the learning curve for AfterEffects is likely to be steep.

However, in the long run, it might be simpler and cheaper to rent a Mac for a day to render the graphics you need, and just take it home and insert it into your final project. At $200 a project in rental fees, it takes 15 projects to make purchase of a Mac Pro worthwhile.

4) Compatibility with Mac files.

I have had some problems with videos I rendered on the Mac being recognized on Windows - I had to buy a $80 codec and the Pro version of Quicktime for Windows just to use them, but that $100 was better than recapturing from tape. I also needed to buy a $20 program (NeoScene) for my inverse telecine needs with the HG20 in 24p mode.

However, other than pesky files created on the Mac, I find that I can use or convert just about anything - WMV, H.264, most MOV files, and this was often a problem when I was working with the Mac.

5) Ease of use

Final Cut Pro was much easier to use than Vegas at first, though the learning curve isn't that steep. My biggest problem was with color correction - but this was simply nomenclature. What Apple refers to as "single color wheel color correction" Vegas calls "Secondary color correction" - what Apple denotes with three sliders colored black, white, and grey, Vegas calls "Offset, Gamma, and Gain." - more technical for the pro, but less intuitive for the amateur.

Thanks Mike. I'll remember that!

Thanks for the format info.I assume formatting a hard disk to NTFS doesn't require complex algorythms.

So Ron, do you think I could go with one INTERNAL hard disk for Project files and another INTERNAL disk for Temp files? I'm still thinking about using a RAID 0 or 1 4-disk system for rendered files and an EXTERNAL hard drive for storage/archiving.

I assume the boot disc is the op/sys disk. How do you mutually back up the boot and the temp discs? Sorry, I'm not an expert and asking questions is the best way for me to learn.

Funny, that's not how I remember it. First, the "Power Mac" still exists, but has been rebranded as the "Mac Pro" with the switch from the PowerPC architecture to Intel. Also, one of the benefits of the switch from IBM's PowerPC to Intel was the lowering in cost. They have since become more price competitive, not less. They aren't as cheap as generic PCs, that's certainly a given.


While it is true that FCP does not currently support multi-core performance (we're all waiting for many changes in the next version anytime now), it's a bit of a specious argument. I can't think of a time that I hit a wall in FCP that was due in any way to the inability to use multi cores, and this is working with uncompressed 8-bit or even 10-bit HD! RAM and disc speeds are the usual performance culprits, and that's true of FCP, Avid, Premier and I would even hazard to say Vegas or any other NLE.

The processor really kicks up when compressing and compressor manages multi-cores just fine. So far in my experience, I have yet to have a moment where I cared about FCP having multi-core support or not. For me it is a none issue.

When was the last time you used FCP? This feature is just a menu item away. In fact, as of FCP6.0 (I can't recall if it was available in 5 or not) it will even dynamically adjust if you want it to.

That's a codec issue, not a file system issue. You are just as likely to encounter that using any NLE on any OS. Besides, most codec mismatch issues I have encountered were do to user error or misunderstanding. This isn't a problem characteristic of any system.

I seriously feel I need to stop here. This feels too much like bait for some sort of silly platform war, which is both pointless and against the rules of this forum.