FORUMS: list search recent posts

OT: This iMac or this Macpro?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy

<< PREVIOUS   •   FAQ   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
xavier pilsudksi
OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 19, 2014 at 5:21:50 pm

Hey guys

Still in search of the right computer for my budget.
I couldn't help it but see what you thought about this:
My budget is max $1400
Either
Refurbished 21.5-inch iMac 3.1GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 (October 2012)
8GB memory

1TB hard drive

NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 512MB

or
Mac Pro 2x 2.26GHz Quad-Core (8 Cores) Xeon (Early 2009) MB535LL/A
Intel Xeon E5520 "Nehalem" processors
4.0GB (2x2.0GB)
PC3-8500 (1066MHz) DDR3 ECC SDRAM,
up to 32.0GB
640GB Serial ATA hard disk drive @ 7200RPM
DVD-RW/CD-RW SuperDrive-DL
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 graphics with 512MB GDDR5 memory
No AirPort Extreme card
Thx!


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 19, 2014 at 5:33:18 pm

The pro tower is more or less what I use at work and while it has always been super fast for SD work, I find mine chugs quite a bit handling HD in multiple streams. I don't see a dedicated AV drive in your specs for the tower, so add a 1TB or larger RAID inside or externally. Plus a monitor.

The imac will be cheaper and already *is* a monitor as well. It's similar to what I use at home. You'll need to budget for an external RAID drive for that as well. Considering Mavericks and the Tubemac, I think your better strategy is to work with the imac while saving for the next upgrade. But this is just my own opinion and I'm not an expert in all the differences between processors and graphics cards.


Return to posts index

xavier pilsudksi
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 19, 2014 at 6:52:16 pm

What year is the Macpro you use at work so I can compare. The one I"m looking at is a 2009.
You're right iMac comes with a monitor but I don't need one since I already have a home studio so this is not a "motivation" to lean towards the iMac.
I also have a Caldigit Raid storage. And that's for bringing this up because it reminds me that the iMac has NO firewire and my 2 year-old Caldigit (along with my other 2 G Raid) don't have USB3 or thunderbolt... So here's another several hundreds for storage... Unless TB to Firewire adapters perform well.

Thx for your input


Return to posts index


Bill Celnick
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 19, 2014 at 5:52:35 pm

Assuming similar price, I'd probably go for the iMac, simply because its not even a year and a half old, whereas the Mac Pro is 5 years old.

I have a 2010 Mac Pro that is still the backbone of my production work, and love the fact that it is very expandable, whereas an iMac isn't, but to me the age difference is a big factor - what are the warranties?


Return to posts index

xavier pilsudksi
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 19, 2014 at 6:47:55 pm

Warranties on the iMac are 1 year plus possibility to buy Apple Care.
On the MacPro it's only 30days....

Actually you brought up the point I always hear about: expandability of the MacPro.
I like that a lot. I might be wrong but it feels like I can start with a decent machine and slowly upgrade it whereas the iMac is.... what I get when I buy...

Waiting to hear more opinions.

Thx


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 19, 2014 at 7:34:38 pm

The imac can be opened up and new drives and RAM put in; I've had it done twice by local PC guys, not even the local mac-authorized place. And if you have thunderbolt, then you can add on exterior drives and modules galore. Sure, the tower is easy to open up yourself... but considering it's age, what will there be hanging around to put INTO it, apart from new drives?


Return to posts index


Bill Celnick
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 19, 2014 at 8:43:57 pm

I would agree with Mark - not just for the age of the hardware, but the age of the technology in both of these machines as well. Couple that with a 30 day vs 1 year warranty, if the dollars are the same, I'd do the iMac.

The 2012 iMac is still relevant, but the 2009 Mac Pro is in its twilight.


Return to posts index

xavier pilsudksi
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 19, 2014 at 9:59:34 pm

I'm ok working with older technology as long as it does the job in fact.
After reading all this it made me realize that all I need to know is if the iMac I listed here as at least the same performances as the MacPro...
Benchmarks maybe...


Return to posts index

David Gallessich
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 21, 2014 at 9:36:40 pm

Some benchmarks here:
http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks
(Four different categories including: single/multi core, and 32 versus 64bit)
These benches show really strong single-core performance on the newer iMacs, compared w every macPro.
(Wayyy better than the 2009 MP.) Multi-core not as good, but not shabby either.

I'm using a late 2013 iMac27 3.5Ghz with a TB-to-FW800 adapter and have no problems with it.
USB 3 IS having some 'sleep' issues with ext RAID, but pretty sure that's a mavericks/SansDigital problem.
Compared with my 2006 MacPro, performance is often around 3x faster converting to/from h.264 -
feels like night 'n day.

It does seem strange to be so much more reliant on ext storage.
That's one reason I went for maximum (1Tb) internal SSD.

Earlier I had some audio latency issues on the the FCP7 viewer, but this seems to be resolved now.
Some folks are reporting issues with iMac and ext (USB) audio devices: seems to be only w Mavericks.



FWIW


Return to posts index


xavier pilsudksi
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 21, 2014 at 10:50:40 pm

thx for the benchmark
I'm just confused with the single core vs multi and 32 vs 64...
Arent the mac pro and iMac multi core and 64?.... Why do they show up in the single core category and is this category relevent or should i just look at the mutli core / 64 bits results?

Depending which results I look at , the iMac 21" seems awesome. And then not so much...

Nice set up you have. I can't afford your iMac though....
I see it beats easily your 2006 Mac pro.
I wonder what it'd do against the 2009 mac pro I was looking at...


Return to posts index

David Gallessich
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 22, 2014 at 12:16:54 am

---
I'm just confused with the single core vs multi and 32 vs 64...
Arent the mac pro and iMac multi core and 64?.... Why do they show up in the single core category and is this category relevent or should i just look at the mutli core / 64 bits results?

---
Benchmarks only go so far.
One thing we're missing in this thread is software.
Usually the steps are: 1) determine the software, then 2) buy the machine.
We still don't know exactly what you plan to do with it, or how long you plan to use it.

FCP7 is 32bit, not 64.
Here's a fun piece of rumor on that subject, right after FCP7 was killed:
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/11/30/apple-scrapped-completed-64-bit-final-c...

CPU cores
FCP 7.03 (the last version, now end-of-line) doesn't always utilize multiple CPU cores.
Then, CPU horsepower matters a lot, because FCP7 also doesn't use the GPU so much. Other things like using SSDs for system drive and data drives (or RAIDs) can help a lot in overall workflow (even better if it's PCie, not SATA); but for pure crunching/rendering of video in FCP7, cpu can be the main bottleneck.

FCPX and the newest Compressor and Motion are built to use more of the computer's architecture, so is Adobe Premiere.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's one authority on this (from 2011)
http://www.larryjordan.biz/faster-rendering-is-possible/

"PARTS of Final Cut Pro do take advantage of multiple processors — especially any new feature added in Final Cut 6 of 7. You mention ProRes, but portions of Log & Transfer, Multicam, and Alpha transitions would also fall into this category.

However it is also true that the majority of Final Cut Pro does not support multiple processors – for example, dynamic updating of the interface, video scopes, many transitions, filters, and motion effects. In other words, the older parts of the system.

This is the reason that I say that until FCP is rewritten, you will not get the performance you expect from a multi-processor system. For some things, yes; for others, no."


and according to this (2013)...
http://www.larryjordan.biz/compressor-4-1-hardware-acceleration/
... with hardware acceleration available in the latest Apple Compressor software, you can get an iMac with i5 or i7 processor to really scream (though output quality may not be as good as multi-pass software encoding). Not sure, but from this article it appears that none of the Xeons (Mac Pros) will do this.


---------------------------------------------------------------------



As they say, "mileage may vary ..."

dg


Return to posts index

xavier pilsudksi
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on Feb 22, 2014 at 12:26:31 am

Thanks for taking the time to reply but I"m not tech savvy I guess and you lost me there sorry.... CPU GPU SATA PCies....

I edit professionally promos at work and I do side jobs from home: FCP 7, AE, AVID, one day PProCC I'm sure.
My side jobs are not consistent enough to pay for a $2000 computer.
This is why I am exploring computers in the $1400 range.


Return to posts index


xavier pilsudksi
Re: OT: This iMac or this Macpro?
on May 16, 2014 at 2:36:05 pm

to close the thread and in case someone had the same dilemma as I did:

I went for a used 2008 macpro. 256Gb SSD drive, 1Tb 7200rpm and 3Tb 5400.
Dual vid card.

SOld my 2009 mbp for $450
$600
$150 investment

I LOVE it!!!!


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]