To find out whether a PC or Mac is a best video editing workstation, we took three iMac systems and a PC workstation of a. On 4K, Bloom complains that the Mac Pro takes far too long to render video.With performance being the most important factor when deciding between a PC or a Mac, we take a look at why a PC is a better option to use Adobe’s Premiere Pro video editing application compared to a Mac or iMac Pro 2019. Memory is relatively cheap and you can change them by yourself, very easy to do.Philip Blooms problem with Apples professional options are that they are. With a 5K 27 display, an eight-core Intel Xeon W processor (capable of being upgraded to a full 18-core processor), AMD Vega graphics, and 32GB to 128GB of RAM, the iMac Pro is basically custom-made for 4K video editing, game design, or anything else that requires the most powerful computer possible.You will need at least 16GB ram to do anything with it, preferably the 32GB at least.The Radeon Pro 570 is okay, but it's a workstation class card - which sounds fine, until you realize that most workstation class cards are underpowered compared to their gaming counterparts - both AMD and nVidia do this. I believe i5 are 4 core max, where Ryzen is 8 core, and threadripper is 16 or 32 cores. I use a Windows based PC daily and have never so much as had a hard drive failure.But a core i5 is not going to work comparably to an i7 or even an AMD Ryzen 1800x chip.
Pro Vs Pc For 4K Video Editing 2017 Mac OS Software RevisionSo give it a year or two when things like web browsers stop working and that's the end of that.The nice thing about Apple hardware is that, well. With over a dozen patches and hacks to make the machine work, once it's stable, you basically never update anything again.Two of my closest friends swear by their Hackintosh's, but neither one can run the most recent software. Plus, for every Mac OS software revision, you have to fix the drivers and prey they work. :)Building a Hackintosh was way cool around 4 years ago, but it seems a lot of the modern boards now don't have driver support. Even XAVC-I 4k works fine after a lot of tweaing with things.So if you want a real computer, PM me and I can get you in touch with my guy. Pro Res XQ 4444 12 bit 4k in real time, smooth as butter.I'm currently, right now, playing back 2 streams of that in real time - not a single dropped frame. On this short I am working on for a colleague, I am editing DNxHR 444 4k footage. How 'modern' is the Mac Pro from several years ago really going to be? Yes, for the time they ran very good hardware, but does it have expandable PCI-e 3.0? Does it support the latest processor socket?I can't speak for how this might run on a Mac, but I recently completed an upgrade to my PC (Ryzen Threadripper 32-core, 2 x 1080ti GPU's, 65GB Ram), and I can say that I have experienced no issue playing back real-time. The only caveat would be graphics card drivers, which nVidia just announced they will continue supporting on Mac OS.This is why I personally recommend the older Mac Pro tower idea, because it's a tried and true machine with enough power to kick most new computers ass.My biggest concern with investing in older hardware, especially older Apple hardware, is lack of upgrade-ability. Once they went to true 64 bit hardware, it's easy to upgrade and make things work. Ps2 emulator mac emuparadiseHaving used PC's for over 20 years now, I can say that I have never experienced the issues that most Mac-enthusiasts say PC's suffer from.The only real disadvantage in my mind is the lack of ability to export in ProRes on a PC (there are workarounds to this, but it's not pretty). Many people will say 'choose a Mac - it just works', as if to assume a Windows-based computer does not 'just work'. For the price, the performance cannot be beat by any off-the-shelf Mac Pro. Not trying to put you off looking at Mac, but I'd also just as highly consider a PC-based system. If you owned one, you'd understand how good they are. Those Mac Pro towers are amazing. If you REALLY need to export ProRes, buy a cheap Mac book or something and export on that.Just some food for thought. It's not as backward as it might seem on the surface. You can just as easily export DNx format, and that can also be opened on Mac's. Personally, if I was to ever want the OSX operating system, I would most assuredly go through this route. Not a big problem if you're experienced, but a huge problem if all you're trying to do is edit.I agree with most of what you're saying - except for the processor stuff - You don't need a dual core with Ryzen and Ryzen Threadripper (no reason to think thread-ripper wouldn't work if Ryzen base does), the thread-ripper has up to 32 processor cores, which exceeds even top of the line Intel Xeon dual processor configurations. What always kills me about Windows is that at some point, I need to fix something that goes wrong. There are only benefits to running Mac OS, specifically things like Final Cut X, Pro Res integration and the plethora of other "issues" that always work their way into a windows enviornment. We use to replace Dell and HP workstations every other year, but the Mac Pro's lasted us until the companies went out of business or the leases ran up.Now yes, in 2017 they're getting long in the tooth so to speak, but they're so damn cheap and price vs performance using Mac OS, not much beats it, not even the newer Mac Pro trash cans. A system like this, dual booted with Windows, Linux, and MacOS would be a great combination. And the cost to perform ratio just skyrocketed. This setup could just as easily outperform a modern Mac Pro replacing the Ryzen base with a Threadripper CPU, allowing access to 32 cores - which is vastly more than Intel even offers in its dual Xeon configurations.Yes, it's more work - and might not even be up OP's alley - but it does work and is stable once you get it setup. Linus does say, in the video, that it outperforms the top of line iMac at less cost.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorAmanda ArchivesCategories |