Re: FCP X hardware performance

COW Forums : Apple FCPX or Not: The Debate

VIEW ALL • ADD A NEW POST • PRINT

Respond to this post • Return to posts index • Read entire thread

Re: FCP X hardware performance
by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:58:15 pm

[Mathieu Ghekiere] "I'm wondering if Red Giant can optimize their Magic Bullet Suite more to speed up the render times."

Saphire Edge also needs a lot. If you really want to push things try using the Neat Video noise reduction filter. This on my 2008 Dual Quad MacPro. Things seems much more zippy on my 2011 15" MBP. The desire for a MacPro replacement is palpable. FCPX, once you start heavy lifting with some filter, really demands it.

Posts Index

Read Thread

Current Message Thread:

FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 2:04:45 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by olof ekbergh on Jun 2, 2012 at 2:18:45 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 2:41:44 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:10:58 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:54:27 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Bill Davis on Jun 3, 2012 at 1:01:39 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 3, 2012 at 1:49:03 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Bill Davis on Jun 3, 2012 at 2:02:22 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Hadley on Jun 4, 2012 at 1:20:05 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Chris Harlan on Jun 4, 2012 at 3:42:35 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Elias Huch on Jun 28, 2012 at 2:20:18 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Timothy Palmer-Benson on Jun 4, 2012 at 12:51:44 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by Mathieu Ghekiere on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:30:47 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:58:15 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 4:19:21 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 4:25:05 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 5:35:46 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 6:05:14 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 6:11:48 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 8:04:29 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 8:16:35 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by David Cherniack on Jun 2, 2012 at 8:26:09 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Lance Bachelder on Jun 4, 2012 at 2:16:19 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 4, 2012 at 11:16:59 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Lance Bachelder on Jun 6, 2012 at 12:13:12 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by David Cherniack on Jun 7, 2012 at 9:47:21 am
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 8:35:48 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 9:39:24 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Bret Williams on Jun 2, 2012 at 11:27:14 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 11:50:31 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 11:52:40 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 3, 2012 at 12:44:32 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Bernard Newnham on Jun 3, 2012 at 9:29:33 am
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 5:13:08 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 4, 2012 at 6:11:42 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 6:39:48 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 7:00:19 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 7:36:23 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 8:25:03 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 8:58:29 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 9:24:06 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 9:38:55 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 10:13:47 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 10:56:24 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Steve Connor on Jun 4, 2012 at 11:05:47 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 11:16:52 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 5, 2012 at 12:52:13 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 4, 2012 at 11:08:34 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 5, 2012 at 12:16:49 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 5, 2012 at 5:39:10 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 5, 2012 at 4:11:34 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 5, 2012 at 5:56:29 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Garber on Jun 3, 2012 at 6:47:31 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Steve Connor on Jun 3, 2012 at 6:58:36 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Garber on Jun 3, 2012 at 7:02:30 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 3, 2012 at 7:05:32 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Garber on Jun 3, 2012 at 7:07:54 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Garber on Jun 3, 2012 at 7:31:44 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Mathieu Ghekiere on Jun 4, 2012 at 8:22:52 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 4, 2012 at 8:31:54 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 9, 2012 at 2:01:34 pm


	LOGIN TO REPLY

FORUMS • TUTORIALS • MAGAZINE • STOCKYARD • VIDEOS • PODCASTS • EVENTS • SERVICES • NEWSLETTER • NEWS • BLOGS