Obsolete Mac Pro VS Windows PC - What should I expect?

OK, I ordered a pretty fast PC from Amazon, kind of a no-name gaming PC but it had great specs, i7 3930 Six Core at 3.2 ghz.

Installed a Nvidia GTX 670, did the supported cards text file hack, and Premiere Pro 5.5 on it, along with Quicktime Pro, and fonts I needed. I also installed a nifty program called X-Mouse which allowed me to customize my logitech scrolling mouse to use Premiere Pro as I also using USB Overdrive on my Mac - indispensable software.

Got a KVM so I could use my 2 large displays currently hooked up to my Mac on the PC without totally disabling my Mac Pro 2008 8 core - it is my workhorse and I use it all the time.

Finally got the PC somewhat functional on with Premiere Pro and even got it working with projects and media via a fast network connection. It seemed like butter vs my old Mac Pro. My lack of being a Windows power user I'm sure was responsible for my ultimate failure at getting my Windows system, but there could be hardware issues with this particular PC as well. Ultimately it was a total pain to share projects and media that resided on my Mac. Using Premiere Pro on the PC was identical in many ways to the Mac, just faster.

However the PC started going downhill pretty much as I got it working. It wouldn't properly reboot, always spinning in the 'Shutting Down' screen. I had to hard restart it all the time.

Then things started to go south, probably due to system corruption from having to hard reset it. I installed a fresh OS on the other internal drive in hopes it would fix the problems, a whole new set of software to get Premiere Pro working well. Again, shutdown hangs, without any diagnostics other than windows coming up at the hard restart saying there was a problem with the previous shutdown, and wiping out a lot of stuff each time. Then in hopes of curing the ills, a reformat of the drives, reinstallation of Windows 7 Pro, and then the ability to actually install the OS. 2 reformatted drives that cannot b installed with OS. Epic failure. The replacement is on the way.

But this being said, the amount of time in order to make this environment 'cross platform' as well as the indiocyncracies of Windows (to me, I'm not bashing Windows - it seems to be a fine OS!) makes me rethinking the PC for Premiere Pro switch.

I realize the current Mac Pros are basically obsolete, however, MY Mac Pro really is, it's from 2008 and not the fastest model from that era (2.8ghz 8 core, non threading Xeon.)

Investigating "new" Mac Pros, I can get a 6 Core 3.3 ghz threading Mac Pro plus 32GB of RAM for about $3,500. I can get a 12 Core 3.09 ghz for $6,700 and a refurb 2.93ghz with 32GB for about $5,700. The Windows PC with everything I need is in the $4K range. I don't need any new peripherals to make it a direct replacement for my current Mac Pro, all PCI, peripherals will just work. I'm familiar with the OS, and all my apps and plugins will work, no KVM necessary, no cross platform issues. Just not as cost effective as the PC and perhaps slower.

However...

Disregarding the cost, my time is valuable and I probably spend a good 3 solid days getting something non functional to work. There will be continual inefficiencies because I'm not a Windows shop, and I don't foresee this.

Will any 'new' Mac Pro, regardless of the cost, get me to the speed using Premiere Pro of this 6 core 3.2ghz i7 3930K? If I get the answer that the Mac 12 core will get me there, it may be a viable option. If the 6 core will get me 80% there, it might be the 'best buy' option.

Thanks for any advice, really!

-Keith

[Alex Gerulaitis] "Another option is to get a Windows system with reputable support so that if it does experience problems, they will be quickly addressed. It'll likely cost $1K or more on top of the cost of components. Possibly worthwhile given the cost of downtime and trouble-shooting?"

Agreed.

I don't believe that cost efficiency is the reason to switch to PC, as buying a configured workstation from a real workstation vendor or VAR will cost just as much as a Mac. The advantages are that you can buy better performance on the PC side, and you can buy better support (on-site technician visits!) than is available from Apple.


[Keith Moreau] "Perhaps I'll do this more directly, please respond if you are:

1) Editors that have both Mac Pro 2010 / 2012 and 3930K i7 6 core PC's
2) Editors that have the newest Mac Pro, either 12 Core 2.93ghz or 3.09 ghz, or 6 core 3.33ghz AND a 3930 i7 6 core at 3.3ghz or higher Windows PC"

Keith, I think you'll have trouble finding someone with that experience here -- and especially with this subject line.

I'd advise you to perhaps start a new subject with "2010/2012 Mac Pro AVCHD Performance?" in the title to attract folks who may have that machine.

Good luck -- and I'm pretty curious to know the answer myself.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events

Yes, that seems like one of the top choices for switchers, but, what if I don't want to switch but 'upgrade' my aging 2008 to a 2010? Will I get something that I can scrub a few layers of AVCHD acceptably well or will it be the sluggish, somewhat frustrating experience I now have with my 2008 Mac Pro 8 Core?

That's really my question. I do realize that without any other factors, PC is THE WAY to go for price /vs performance. But what about just performance and accepting that the Mac Pro isn't a very good deal. Will I be happy with a "new" Mac Pro?

Hey Tom, I'm curious what specs you chose for the z820 (memory and graphics card)? Do you think there is a large performance improvement from the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 and the 400?

Cody Walters
JW Studio LLC
Houston Video Production
Houston Wedding Videographer

Final Cut Studio 3
Adobe CS5 Master Suite
Panasonic HVX-200
Canon 7D

I guess I'm going to try to bring this thread back to my original question, which may have been buried in my own verbosity in the original post. Perhaps I'll do this more directly, please respond if you are:

1) Editors that have both Mac Pro 2010 / 2012 and 3930K i7 6 core PC's
2) Editors that have the newest Mac Pro, either 12 Core 2.93ghz or 3.09 ghz, or 6 core 3.33ghz AND a 3930 i7 6 core at 3.3ghz or higher Windows PC

Now that the parameters have been set:

Is either Mac Pro slower or faster than your Windows i7 when playing AVCHD footage in single or multiple layers? Please try to quantify it. I'm not necessarily looking for the ultimate speed demon, I'm must seeing if replacing my aging Mac Pro 2008 with a 2010/2012 model is even worth considering.

Thanks so much!

One other thing. To simply answer your question directly, I have not seen tests between the current Mac Pros and I7 Windows 64 as to which is faster, on a totally identical kind of box. My Mac Pro (like yours) is older, and so my newer I7 is much faster on rendering with Adobe.

Al

The big difference is that HP can be optimized to effectively work with Adobe CS6 through HPs Performance Management software. They have worked in conjunction with Adobe to create the ability to easily alter the bios to work efficiently with CS6. Its also been certified to run CS6 (drivers, etc,) by actually testing the software on the computer.

With Alienware you get a computer.

Tom Daigon
PrP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
Mac Pro 3,1
8 core
10.7.3
Nvidia Quadro 4000
24 gigs ram
Maxx Digital / Areca 8tb. raid
Kona 3

[Keith Moreau] "Tom, what was the exact model you got, speed, config etc, and if I may ask, how much was it?"

Apologies for jumping in: Tom already answered some of these above: Z820 CTO with two E5-2687 (fastest available), GTX-50 which he is getting separately.

[Keith Moreau] "I went to the HP Site and found it really quite confusing and it also seemed the 16 core models were also lower speed CPUs. Do they offer a i7 model for those that might not need all those cores?"

True: the fastest clock is on a quad-core E5-2643 at 3.3GHz and 10MB cache; it's unlikely to be a good choice for CS apps that need the balance of memory and CPU speed, with cache size and the number of cores. A six-core E5-2667 at 2.9GHz, 15 MB cache is likely to be faster for most CS work-flows. Tom's E5-2687 is the fastest available (and the most expensive) choice.

Alex Gerulaitis
Systems Integrator
DV411 - Los Angeles, CA

Tom,

I don't disagree with you about HP's workstations being "certified" to work, and if one has the extra money for that peace-of-mind, so be it.

In my experience, as long as one buys quality hardware, you shouldn't have any issues. And it doesn't hurt to do a little research, google is your friend. ;)

For instance, I travel quite a bit, so I have to use a laptop for editing. Last August, I purchased an Asus G53SW to edit on. It has worked near perfectly with CS5.5 and CS6. Even though it has a GTX460M in it, which isn't certified for Mercury Playback, using the hack works great. It renders/exports very fast.

To add to that, in January, I purchased a Blackmagic Design Intensity Shuttle USB 3.0 card. Even though I read that BMD's USB 3.0 products are very finicky with USB 3.0 controllers, I took a chance anyway. After updating the USB 3.0 drivers on my laptop, it's worked like a champ. I've even tested it on an Asus G73 laptop, and it works.

I just feel that if you buy quality hardware, your odds of it working are pretty darn good. The money I saved was used to purchase other gear, so it was a win-win situation for me.

[Tom Daigon] "The big difference is that HP can be optimized to effectively work with Adobe CS6 through HPs Performance Management software."

Tom,

Are there any benchmarks to support this? In my testing, HP Performance Advisor does very little to optimize ISV apps (including any CS apps) unless there is a clear problem with the hardware or OS configuration i.e. sub-optimal memory configuration, not enough memory, etc.

In addition, there is very little in HP BIOS that can be tweaked for performance with the exception of Hyper-Threading which is on some HPs is turned off OOTB (out-of-the-box) - e.g. no over-clocking or timing options.

On the other hand I am shaving 20-30 seconds off boot times on nearly any supposedly "optimized" HP system by turning off unnecessary boot agents (network, SAS), taking out unnecessary services and run-at-boot OS and app modules. On top of that, showing my clients how to monitor memory and CPU usage helps more than anything else. HP doesn't do that - they can't for a number of reasons.

Yet on the other hand many of the options on HP site are sub-optimal as well: HP SSDs are 2 generations old, way over-priced; using SAS boot drives increases boot times by 10-20 seconds; HP memory is over-priced and fails more often than Lifetime, Edge or Kingston memory. Yet not every 3rd party SSD will work well in HP systems: BIOS compatibility issues.

Bottom line, there is more to system optimization than HP PA (Performance Advisor). It does catch some configuration errors but does little beyond that.

Alex Gerulaitis
Systems Integrator
DV411 - Los Angeles, CA

More detailed info in video on Performance Advisor.







Tom Daigon
PrP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
Mac Pro 3,1
8 core
10.7.3
Nvidia Quadro 4000
24 gigs ram
Maxx Digital / Areca 8tb. raid
Kona 3

Alex, we spoke on the phone several weeks ago. As a system integrator I understand your vested interest in folks buying from you. And you bring up interesting points regarding HP. But for my money, it is well worth the expenditure to have the repair support done at my place of business. No one in my detailed research comes close to matching that. And the serviceability I can do is reminiscent of the Mac Pro design which I really liked. Combine all that with a great price after discounts and I am a happy camper.

Tom Daigon
PrP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
Mac Pro 3,1
8 core
10.7.3
Nvidia Quadro 4000
24 gigs ram
Maxx Digital / Areca 8tb. raid
Kona 3

If you are more comfortable on the Mac, my advice would be to get the 2012 Hexacore 3.33 Ghz with 24-32GB RAM and an NVidia card, Quadro 4000 or a GTX 285 from eBay, the GPU in my Mac Pro. That is the system I'm using and it works great on CS6 with a very low frustration level. There is more than raw performance to computer life.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe

Keith, its not all or nothing for me. I will keep my Mac Pro and use it for internet use, making music (Im a rock/blues guitarist) and a variety of other functions. Its still runs great.
I will use the PC exclusively for editorial stuff. I do need the raw performance of a PC in order to comfortably deal with the wide range of codecs out there. It will be on the internet only for updating and installing.
It seems like a logical way to proceed to me :D

Tom Daigon
PrP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
Mac Pro 3,1
8 core
10.7.3
Nvidia Quadro 4000
24 gigs ram
Maxx Digital / Areca 8tb. raid
Kona 3

You are very welcome Keith. I wish you happiness in whatever configuration you end up with.

Tom Daigon
PrP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
Mac Pro 3,1
8 core
10.7.3
Nvidia Quadro 4000
24 gigs ram
Maxx Digital / Areca 8tb. raid
Kona 3