![Editing Editing](/uploads/1/2/5/5/125570698/185430089.jpg)
Iv edited 1080p on a 3.1 worked fine a tad slow but fine. Depends a lot on your workflow, if you read up you can aim your workflow for performance. Finalcut X on the other hand will work faster on a ATI card, your GTX960 is a odd option. Id look at used cards there cheaper and CS6 is not relay to GPU dependent unless doing tasks that relay use the GPU then if you are the GTX960 i think is not an ideal card. Well if you are using adobe you can use your copy on both windows or mac, for the same price as a macpro you can make a faster windows box. Worth thinking about.
Mar 17, 2015 In this video we will be testing the performance of the New macbook Pro 13' Retina Display in Video Editing and the software that will be used to perform the tests is Adobe Premiere, Finac Cut Pro.
Every thing i read about adobe and there apps says the GPU does very little once you have a GTX650 or faster, so 960 is fine just massive overkill and wont give much of a boost. CPU is still the most important thing, most the time. List of gpu effects disk speed is important but depends on what you do.
On my macpro 3.1 i had SSD boot drive WD Black media drive WD black scratch drive and was always CPU locked but i was working on 1080P video in h264 or prorez 422/422 LT. But if your doing multi cam you will need a faster drive. Been reading the adobe forums and redit seems AE is not likes CPU way over GPU so i was wrong. Some more links to look at PP cc cpu use top end GPU's PP cc notice at 4K it dose matter but thats on a much much faster cpu so id gess you will get cpu problems way before GPU problems. Click to expand.This thread is littered with misinformation. Please do not pay any attention to what ^ said.
First off, the 1,1/2,1/3,1 are not 'almost identical'. The 1,1 and 2,1 are close and considered the fairly obsolete range; but the 3,1 is a significant upgrade. If you have the option, never go lower than a 3,1. There is upgraded architecture, faster bus, faster memory, significant pci upgrades, 64 bit kernel support, etc. And the 2.8ghz 3,1 IS faster than the 2,1 3ghz. The extra ghz do NOT make the 2,1 faster.
The Harpertown vs Clovertown processors are a no brainer. And for editing 4k video - it HIGHLY depends on the video you're going to be editing.
Is it gopro 4k footage? Cell phone 4k? Or is it 4:4:4 4k shot on a red, or blackmagic, or something like the a7s with a shogun? You can edit gopro 4k on a somewhat basic 3,1 setup easily, but if you're editing pro-sumer to pro-level 4k footage, it will take some upgrades on any Mac Pro. You will need quick drives to access the footage; if the bitrate is significant, you'll probably want an ssd raid setup. That alone will make the 3,1 handle it fairly okay.
A decent GPU helps as well. From your posts, it seems like you mainly just want to be able to cut it without huge hickups; as render time doesn't matter to you. Your best/cheapest solution might be a 3,1 with a 240gb SSD in the PCI slot, and an additional 7200rpm drive. Assuming you do mostly short projects; the 240gb should be just enough; and when you're done, dump it all onto the 7200rpm drive. My personal recommendation would be to go with a 4,1 or 5,1 though; if that's an option. Yep sorry i was not clear, 8c means 8 core the 2,1/3,1 have dual cpu's each with 4 cores so 8 total cores.
They will work just will be slow. If you have adobe cs6 id relay think about making a windows box it'll cost the same as buying and upgrading a macpro and shude run faster. If your editing in h264 it will be slow but work, if your transcode to a better file like prores422 LT it will be easier on the system.
If your only doing a single track with color corrections it's not going to be to intensive on a HD so something like a WD black will work fine as a meida drive. (do try the h264 to see if it works at a speed your happy with) the links i posted display how PP scales with gpu and cpu (both how it scales with cores and number of cpu's) 2.1 3.1 i run the slower ram from the 1.1/2.1 in my 3.1 as it's a lot cheaper you do have the problem that your buying a computer that is 8 years old so if it fails it might be a problem to fix. But my 3.1 still works fine so maybe thats ok (the power supply is a tad hot but seems ok) also do you already have a mac? Even my sisters macbook pro 13' 2012 with an i3 cpu is fast. GH4 footage straight out of the camera is 4:2:0 and only 100-200mbps, so an SSD in the PCI slot should serve you just fine.
A lot of people get confused about processors and video editing; the editing itself does not require significant processing power. Most modern processors can handle it fine; it's being able to play it back and read the files quick enough that is usually the biggest bottleneck. The only thing you may run into is some slow downs with color correction; but assuming it's very minor, you'll be fine. Where you will notice a huge difference in processing power is when it comes to rendering out.
Iv edited 1080p on a 3.1 worked fine a tad slow but fine. Depends a lot on your workflow, if you read up you can aim your workflow for performance. Finalcut X on the other hand will work faster on a ATI card, your GTX960 is a odd option. Id look at used cards there cheaper and CS6 is not relay to GPU dependent unless doing tasks that relay use the GPU then if you are the GTX960 i think is not an ideal card. Well if you are using adobe you can use your copy on both windows or mac, for the same price as a macpro you can make a faster windows box. Worth thinking about.
Click to expand. Please don't go PC. I have a 2008 Mac Pro 3,1 with a 7970 inside and it rocks. The fact is like others have said here it depends on what kind of 4k and how fast do you want to go on a budget. If Money is NO Object thats different. The Barefeats website shows plenty of options to get well over a Gig/sec Transfer rate off of the PCIe slots. Raid on up to 4 7200 Drives is another good solution as the Most critical thing to consider when dealing with ANY Giant files.
The Budget is the key. Pack in there as much as you can afford 16Gig min. Then for Video. Cheap used AMD 7970 or 280X Cards are best bang for buck. Then there is the Rendering. I suggest @ $500 a pop, stack up as many Mac Mini's as you can afford for render Farm just like the Big Dogs do and you can move those along with you to any machine you can afford in the future.
Mac Pro 4,1 or 5,1 is preferred but a 3,1 is usually very cheap GREAT machine. My 3,1 w/ 10 gig ram, 8TB of 7200 Storage, and my 7970 is a $500 dream. Click to expand.Well, if you want to explore using a hackintosh, I recommend y. It's not a walk in the park, but it isn't rocket science any more. However, I have both a 2008 Mac Pro (3,1) with a flashed Sapphire 7950 and a 2010 Mac Pro (5,1) with a flashed PC Gigabyte R9 280x, and they just work - no problems with sleep/wake-up and OS X updates.
Hackintosh users are (generally) gamers, dual booting Windoze & OS X, but you will find prosumers using them as well. In my case, if I am doing critical work, I'm using my Mac Pros.