FORUMS: list search recent posts

iMac Pro vs PC performance

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Oliver Peters
iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 23, 2018 at 9:04:51 pm







- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 24, 2018 at 9:39:50 am

Does Adobe prioritze Apple development?

Really?


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 24, 2018 at 12:25:02 pm

Doesn’t look like it. There’s another video floating around of the dell xps vs the MacBook Pro 2018 with i9 processor. Not only does the MacBook Pro outperform nearly everywhere, fcpx and resolve are sometimes 5-6 times faster than premiere pro.

Terrible.

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 24, 2018 at 12:39:48 pm

[Tom Sefton] "Not only does the MacBook Pro outperform nearly everywhere, fcpx and resolve are sometimes 5-6 times faster than premiere pro."

I don't think you can ever do a definitive comparison, because any of these tests are very codec-dependent. I think it's valid to say with a given, common set of parameters, the same software performs one way on machine A and a different way on machine B. It's an entirely different matter to do that with software, unless you test a much wider range of parameters. Plus, remember that most of these reviews are performed with local storage. It gets a lot more ambiguous when SAN/NAS storage is part of the equation.

I doubt Adobe or Avid or Blackmagic prioritize a particular OS. Rather, I think they try to stay as current as possible with each, since they have users in each camp. We tend to be Mac users and see Adobe on a lot of Macs, but that's really a generalization. Across the board - corporate, broadcast, worldwide - I'm pretty sure there are plenty of PCs running Adobe apps. Most likely more, by a wide margin.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 24, 2018 at 12:47:12 pm

I use to do this dance back in the day when Maya was ported over to the Mac.
But also did the same dance when it was from Irix to Windows.
For me its all about the user experience.
I deal with all types of PC laptops at work (corporate level) and sure some can crunch numbers faster than a MacBook Pro, but man the ease of use and never having to deal with the PC eco-system is enough for me to stay with any decent MBP.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 24, 2018 at 1:01:01 pm

[Eric Santiago] "but man the ease of use and never having to deal with the PC eco-system is enough for me to stay with any decent MBP"

IBM came to pretty much the same conclusion a couple of years ago.

https://www.businessinsider.com/an-ibm-it-guy-macs-are-300-cheaper-to-own-t...

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Robin S. Kurz
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Oct 7, 2018 at 9:10:56 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Tom Sefton] "Not only does the MacBook Pro outperform nearly everywhere, fcpx and resolve are sometimes 5-6 times faster than premiere pro."

I don't think you can ever do a definitive comparison, because any of these tests are very codec-dependent. "


So you're saying that PPro is actually FASTER than FCP on the same machine, but only with certain codecs?

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Youtube | Facebook


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 24, 2018 at 1:04:51 pm

I don't understand that video. He showed the PP 2018 12.1.2 update notes saying H264 *decoding* is supported on the iMac Pro and MacBook Pro. Yet he is editing C200 RAW which has nothing to do with decoding H264 -- that is a separate code path.

Not related to his issue, but in PP 12.1.2 on my iMac Pro running macOS 10.13.6, I can turn Premiere>Preferences>Media>"Enable hardware accelerated decoding" on/off and I can't tell any difference. They are both slow, much slower than FCPX or Resolve on the same hardware. In general PP has always been slow at 4k H264 decoding. As of 2018 it is vastly faster at *encoding*, ie exporting to H264, but decoding is still very sluggish on Macs.

I'd be interested if someone with PP 12.1.2 and a contemporary Windows machine could try JKL timeline responsiveness at 1/4 res for a 4k H264 timeline with "Enable hardware accelerated decoding" both on and off, and observe any difference. It is conceivable H264 decoding works *better* on Windows than Mac. However this wasn't his main issue -- he got side-tracked mentioning it, and it has nothing to do with C200 RAW decode performance.

His issues were:

(1) PP 12.1.2 timeline perf. for C200 RAW is much slower on his Windows PC vs iMac Pro. That is interesting, but (to my knowledge) RAW cannot be accelerated by Quick Sync, AMD's UVD, etc. Maybe some aspect of RAW conversion such as de-bayering is better implemented by some Apple framework that Adobe used on macOS. I think Apple did some performance work at the AV Foundation layer to facilitate RED RAW performance -- that was well demonstrated when the iMac Pro was released. Maybe some of this carried over to other RAW formats. However I don't think it's because Adobe developers are "prioritizing the Mac platform".

Every RAW conversion pathway is unique, just like it is for stills. For stills we are accustomed to Adobe Camera RAW or other converters handling this, but for video it's not as standardized. You can't grab a new camera, shoot some RAW video and expect all NLE software to immediately work perfectly. One hope for ProRes RAW is it would unify RAW post processing, and when a new RAW camera is released it would more likely work immediately (at least in FCPX). By "work" this means both function plus provide consistent performance.

(2) He reported slow export performance of C200 RAW to (H264?) on his Windows PC vs iMac Pro. He wasn't specific what export format, whether ProRes or H264, but he said the iMac was faster.

(3) He reported slow export performance of Sony XACV-4k from PP 12.1.2 on Windows PC vs iMac Pro. At 05:22, it appears he's using the 2160p Youtube preset for export. I have tested XAVC-S 4k export performance many times between PP 12.x and FCPX on an iMac Pro, and Premiere is often faster, as of the 2018 version. After seven years of not using Quick Sync or AMD's VCE, Adobe is finally using this and it's fast. They are still slow on the decode side, IOW for timeline operations but for export it is (at last) fast. However Premiere has many different export options and it's easy to accidentally invoke one which slows things down.

I don't have a high-end Windows machine to test, but I personally doubt that PP 12.1.2 is slow exporting 4k XAVC-S to single-pass VBR 4k H264 at 30 mbps. For that task Premiere 2018 is faster on my 10-core iMac Pro than FCPX 10.4.3 is. In fact Apple really needs to get their act together on FCPX 4k H264 encoding on the iMac Pro -- that one task is slower than a 2017 iMac, likely because their use of AMD's UVD/VCE decode/encode hardware needs optimization.


Return to posts index

Bernard Newnham
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 24, 2018 at 4:40:43 pm

Since he doesn't need that useless PC any more, I'll happily take it off his hands. As it will of course be free - terrible thing, rubbish - I'll buy it an RTX 1080Ti.

Bernie


Return to posts index


greg janza
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 24, 2018 at 5:27:45 pm

[Joe Marler] "I'd be interested if someone with PP 12.1.2 and a contemporary Windows machine could try JKL timeline responsiveness at 1/4 res for a 4k H264 timeline with "Enable hardware accelerated decoding" both on and off, and observe any difference. It is conceivable H264 decoding works *better* on Windows than Mac. However this wasn't his main issue -- he got side-tracked mentioning it, and it has nothing to do with C200 RAW decode performance."

My PC system is relatively contemporary even though my CPU is a few years old I have a ton of ram and I work off of NVMe drives. I tested a mxf wrapped 4k H264 file shot on a CANON, EOS C300 Mark II. Premiere has no issues with this file at all in full res much less 1/4 quality. JKL is without hiccup. It also makes no difference whether "Enable hardware accelerated decoding" is turned on or off. Premiere performs identically.

I've also worked on the new imac pro. It's a very nice computer and it's very fast. Did I notice my work-flow significantly better as a result of being on the new hardware? no. However, the new machine runs circles around the last generation of imacs in terms of performance.

Windows 10 Pro | i7-5820k CPU | 64 gigs RAM | NvidiaGeForceGTX970 | Blackmagic Decklink 4k Mini Monitor |
Adobe CC 2018 |Renders/cache: Samsung SSD 950 Pro x2 in Raid 0 | Media: Samsung SSD 960 PRO PCIe NVMe M.2 2280 | Media: OWC Thunderbay 4 x 2 Raid 0 mirrored with FreeFileSync


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 25, 2018 at 11:26:26 am

[greg janza] "My PC system is relatively contemporary even though my CPU is a few years old I have a ton of ram and I work off of NVMe drives. I tested a mxf wrapped 4k H264 file shot on a CANON, EOS C300 Mark II. Premiere has no issues with this file at all in full res much less 1/4 quality. JKL is without hiccup. It also makes no difference whether "Enable hardware accelerated decoding" is turned on or off. Premiere performs identically.

I've also worked on the new imac pro. It's a very nice computer and it's very fast. "


Well, that's very interesting. On most of the 4k H264 codecs I've tested, Premiere 2018 timeline operations are quite sluggish on both my 2017 top-spec iMac 27 and 10-core Vega 64 iMac Pro. This includes XAVC-S material from the Sony A7RIII, UHD 4k from the Panasonic DVX-200, and many other cameras.

Even FCPX on an iMac Pro is no speed demon on this material, but it's much faster than Premiere on any Mac I've tested. However even with FCPX I usually find it necessary to transcode to proxies, and when those are used in Premiere it also is lightning fast.

If you were using XF-AVC Intra, an NLE can handle that much faster than the Long GOP version. I tested some All-Intra 4k H264 material from a Canon XC-15, and it was very fast on both Premiere and FCPX.


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: iMac Pro vs PC performance
on Sep 25, 2018 at 1:44:58 pm

On this topic, maybe someday vendors won't be needing a post sticky for forums such as Black Magic.
I noticed at the top of the list "Approved Windows Motherboards for Desktop Video Products".
Not a knock on PCs, I too have a plethora of workstations I live with daily e.g. Dell, Boxx, HP, etc...
Just saying.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2018 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]