Looking forware real world benchmarks that does take in account multiple formats.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
FCPX performance on M1 chip
- Thread starter PeterTheGreat17
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maybe for the real heavy workloads like editing feature length films you still need more power than an entry level system. But still, quite impressive.
Those will come next year. But to think that the entry level (Apple) machines are that capable. This was never the case before. I'm thinking this might lead to more FCP users, as the new M series Macs will handle every video file with ease, from budget Macs to the expensive ones.
Yeah, you don't need super expensive machine anymore. Bad for Apple sales. No? Haha! Nah, Apple will create superduper iMac pros at $5000 that will render everything blazingly fast while being dead silent. I'm really hoping this might push FCP usage more.
Staggering performance from the low-end MacBook Air, even using Rosetta 2 translation. I really am having a hard time believing what I am seeing, especially the lack of heat being generated in the MacBook Air. It would be interesting see something like this being done processing 8K footage.
What a waste of time. Imagine buying a Mac and NOT testing out Final Cut Pro. Also, he used an old, outdated version of Resolve.
To be fair, AMD drivers were not the best on Windows either until recently. When I first got my 5700XT, it was not much better than my GTX 1080. Several months later, I am seeing an average of 30% improvement with the driver advancements AMD has made.
I think i'll be keeping my 2013 15 inch Haswell quad I7 16gb ram, there really isn't much of a performance boost rendering 4k60 in FCP....
It's about time the hardware caught up with the software which was chewing up processors under the hood at the expense of basic editing tasks.
Now maybe it's time to really update FCP and end the "it's just iMovie" debate. Editing software should be able to recognize and edit virtually any playable media file you drop in it, for starters. PP and Resolve need to focus on media management too. The processor capabilities are there! The goal should be to make proxies optional, and to stop making us convert basic files Quicktime used to play.
Now maybe it's time to really update FCP and end the "it's just iMovie" debate. Editing software should be able to recognize and edit virtually any playable media file you drop in it, for starters. PP and Resolve need to focus on media management too. The processor capabilities are there! The goal should be to make proxies optional, and to stop making us convert basic files Quicktime used to play.
Yeah it's fun when old gear can keep up with the newest bottom specs, but the new computers are running more efficiently and what will happen is the new software built with the new machines in mind will create new limitations on your 2013 model. It won't be basic speed tests, it will be that you can't play 12k smoothly, they'll add in something like built in dictation but the feature won't work for you, or you buy a plugin effect pack and 30% of them aren't available.
Might not effect you, and there are some old workhorses that will be magic, so hang on to it, but I also wouldn't discount these new models simply because one render task wasn't improved.
Last edited:
TechCrunch has a nice Review that talks a little bit about FCX and Premiere.
It seems the the actual editing process is very good on. Mini in FCX even with 8K footage.
HE was surprised how well Premiere ran as well, scrubbing around with 6K footage with no hickups. Not as fast as and good as FCX of course.
Rendering times was quite slow, the Mac Pro crushed the M1 (as it should)
It seems the the actual editing process is very good on. Mini in FCX even with 8K footage.
HE was surprised how well Premiere ran as well, scrubbing around with 6K footage with no hickups. Not as fast as and good as FCX of course.
Rendering times was quite slow, the Mac Pro crushed the M1 (as it should)
Attachments
Here is the link to the review
techcrunch.com
The new Mac mini: The revival of the no-compromise, low-cost Mac | TechCrunch
There's nothing small about the latest Mac mini. Never mind the Mac mini's tiny size or low price. This diminutive desktop is a revolution for most users,
techcrunch.com
Here is an outtake:
Benchmarks paint with a broad stroke and often miss nuances. That’s the case here. While the first few benchmarks demonstrate the speed of the M1, the final test fails to capture a critical aspect of Final Cut Pro. Sure, it’s slower to export than an Intel-based system, but using the M1-native version of Final Cut Pro is much smoother than what’s available on older systems. I was able to easily manipulate, scrub and edit 8K footage without even a hiccup. Rendering takes longer, but editing is seemingly easier.
This to me is more important then export times, as I'm seldom on a tight deadline, as I'm a cameraman and usually don't edit my own material. The Mini gives me a cheap option to review my 8K footage at home
Benchmarks paint with a broad stroke and often miss nuances. That’s the case here. While the first few benchmarks demonstrate the speed of the M1, the final test fails to capture a critical aspect of Final Cut Pro. Sure, it’s slower to export than an Intel-based system, but using the M1-native version of Final Cut Pro is much smoother than what’s available on older systems. I was able to easily manipulate, scrub and edit 8K footage without even a hiccup. Rendering takes longer, but editing is seemingly easier.
This to me is more important then export times, as I'm seldom on a tight deadline, as I'm a cameraman and usually don't edit my own material. The Mini gives me a cheap option to review my 8K footage at home
Very few if anyone is do work where 10 minutes makes a difference, even in newsrooms.
It's an 18 hour render versus a 2.5 hour render where it starts to make or break.
I feel like getting one just to test it against my 5600m based 32gb i9 MacBook Pro 16”. But how could it compete? That GPU has a dedicated 8gb of HBM graphics ram and over 5 teraflops of compute performance. The m1 has 2.4 teraflops (about half) and the geekbench scores show that.
Editing in final cut isn’t just slapping on a LUT and calling it a day. Once you start layering on plugins (which will be running in Rosetta) and adding more complex effects that GPU is going to bog down.
Editing in final cut isn’t just slapping on a LUT and calling it a day. Once you start layering on plugins (which will be running in Rosetta) and adding more complex effects that GPU is going to bog down.
Slower to export because the competitor system was using a dGPU using 6x as much power.
Remember always these are the lowest end systems. It's astonishing that they are comparing favorably to the high end systems with vastly larger power budgets (and larger silicon dGPUs with dedicated HBM, big fans, ...)
If you want high performance 8K export, don't worry. In a few months Apple will release the (M1X? who knows what the name will be) upgrade to the larger MBPs, and you'll see something designed to match and exceed those dGPUs.
Yeah fair points newest bottom specs for the last 7 years to boot! By the time we see all those advances you spoke of on the software side, it will be on to the M3-M5 on the hardware side likely, so the nice part is... I can still wait for that mini-led touch screen with a 1080p webcam *Gasp*. That Mac Mini that Gary just did though got me thinking...?