iMac or Mac Pro for video editing?

[tjgonzo]

Hey guys, recently I have been expanding my bussiness to include video work. I work with .MOV files out of my 5D Mark II but, ocasionally work with AVHD. My current MacBook Pro is starting to show it's age when it comes to rendering and intensive video editing (2011 MBP w/ 6750 1gb)
I am looking into getting either a second hand 5,1 Mac Pro or an iMac. Possibly a second hand iMac with GTX680 (late 2012)
I know the i7's in the iMac are very capable but, I really like the idea of expandabilty with the Mac Pro.
The display of the 27" iMac is a huge plus though.
What are your thoughts on this?

 

[VirtualRain]

Hey guys, recently I have been expanding my bussiness to include video work. I work with .MOV files out of my 5D Mark II but, ocasionally work with AVHD. My current MacBook Pro is starting to show it's age when it comes to rendering and intensive video editing (2011 MBP w/ 6750 1gb)
I am looking into getting either a second hand 5,1 Mac Pro or an iMac. Possibly a second hand iMac with GTX680 (late 2012)
I know the i7's in the iMac are very capable but, I really like the idea of expandabilty with the Mac Pro.
The display of the 27" iMac is a huge plus though.
What are your thoughts on this?

I don't do a lot of video editing anymore, but when I did, I found my 2009 Quad Core Mac Pro more than capable. I'm assuming your 2011 MBP is a dual core? If so, moving to a Quad Core with 12-16GB of RAM is probably a great move. The form factor and GPU probably won't make a difference... you could use any of the Quad Core Macs (MBPr, Mac Mini, iMac, or Mac Pro) that suits your needs.

 

[tjgonzo]

I don't do a lot of video editing anymore, but when I did, I found my 2009 Quad Core Mac Pro more than capable. I'm assuming your 2011 MBP is a dual core? If so, moving to a Quad Core with 12-16GB of RAM is probably a great move. The form factor and GPU probably won't make a difference... you could use any of the Quad Core Macs (MBPr, Mac Mini, iMac, or Mac Pro) that suits your needs.

My current MBP has a QC 2.2ghz i7. Great processor but, my video card is a bottle neck. I am wanting the desktop form factor.

 

[gavinstubbs09]

For me here's my plan. I had a 2.4GHz Aluminum iMac and am in the process of buying a 2.66GHz Mac Pro (since they can be sub-$300) which still get a Geekbench score from 8,000 to 10,000 which is still more than my Custom Built with a 1090t AMD 6-core.

And my MBA is kinda bad for Premire 24/7 because this thing will probably overheat from working too hard.

 

[tjgonzo]

For me here's my plan. I had a 2.4GHz Aluminum iMac and am in the process of buying a 2.66GHz Mac Pro (since they can be sub-$300) which still get a Geekbench score from 8,000 to 10,000 which is still more than my Custom Built with a 1090t AMD 6-core.

And my MBA is kinda bad for Premire 24/7 because this thing will probably overheat from working too hard.

Which 2.66 model? 2009?

 

[gavinstubbs09]

Which 2.66 model? 2009?

Whoops, forgot about the 2009 edition! Just took a look at ones with the Xeon 5150 2.66GHz and they are still in the 5-6000 range. Still not bad! My MBA isn't much higher than that.

 

[OS6-OSX]

You will be hard pressed finding a 2009 MP for sub $300!
2006 Yes!

 

[gavinstubbs09]

I've been watching Mac Pros like a hawk the past week or so. As soon as PayPal gives me my $300 from the iMac I sold on the 18th, I'm getting one!

 

[deconstruct60]

r and GPU probably won't make a difference... ..

For video editing? That is highly dependent upon the software being used. Video editors built on tech from 3-4 years ago yes relatively indepedent as long as good enough GPU. Current applications not so much.

 

[phrehdd]

If you get the Mac Pro, you will need to get a decent monitor. - At least as good as the iMac screen (and preferably better). You need to consider this cost as well.

Additional drives - depending on your software, some work well with a 'scratch' disk to do their work. With a Mac Pro you add internally or externally a hard drive. With an iMac, you add (in general) externally a drive and then again the consideration of how to connect it - Firewire, TB and USB 2 and USB 3. TB and USB 3 are preferred for their speed. Consider the cost of additional drives.

Video - Mac Pro has options for replace or add more video cards and iMac does not (in general). Depending on your software, you might be able to take advantage of hardware enabled video as opposed to just using software controlled video. - Another consideration.

There is no right answer here as both should fair well but it comes down to how you like to work, what upgrades you might want later etc.

Just more peanuts from the gallery.

 

[td2243]

I'm in the same boat. I'm waiting to see the MP prices before I make a decision. From everyone I've talked to, it seems a maxed out iMac would do the trick, but the extra umph from a MP might be nice.

 

[alphaod]

Wait for the new one?

 

[blanka]

Basically all Macs except the hex-cores today are in the 13000-15000 geekbench score range.
That includes MBP, iMac i7 (not the i5's), Quad Mini's and the doorstopper-model MacPro's. So as far as rendering is concerned, no difference.

Then there is storage: you work with huge files. On a MacPro you can insert 4 Seagate Barracuda 3TB drives and have a warp speed high capacity storage. On all other macs, you need to take that external, preferably to a Tunderbolt storage, which again equals all Macs.

Last thing is display.
One question: what framerate do you work with: 24, 25 or 30 fps?
If you use the last, go ahead with an iMac, with all other rates, you need a monitor capable of handling them all. Apple does not offer decent support for video framerates.
The Dell U2713HM seems a very affordable nice sRGB calibrated display that does support video rates and offers the same iMac panel but now in matte.

I would say: best deal is 2.6 Mini, with good SSD inside (vector or Samsung 840 pro), a Dell U2713HM and a nice tunderbolt storage cluster accepting 3,5 inch drives.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

At the moment the only way a 6 core 3.33Gh Mac Pro loses to any other current MBP or iMac is in single core performance. Thanks to the Mac Pro's upgradable nature you can change everything really, except the Motherboard/Logicboard which is still based on X58 tech.

Then again though, even the newer x79 tech with Ivy-Bridge EP still doesn't have native support for USB 3. Easily solved with a PCIe card.

My spec is in my signature, and I use it with FCPX, along with Screenflow and it works much better than my 15" rMBP did.
Mostly due to the fact that I just added nearly all my storage internally. A quieter, and faster environment.

With my MBPr I had to deal with Thunderbolt storage, and it was expensive and very noisy (Lacie).

I sold the macbook, and got a refurbed Mac Pro, and for the money you'd spend on a Decent External thunderbolt storage system you can easily buy bunch on fast/reliable HDD's.


The most important thing to do really is what the extra week or two, and see what happens with the new Mac Pro. I love it's specs, but it's form factor just puts me off.

 

[Tanax]

At the moment the only way a 6 core 3.33Gh Mac Pro loses to any other current MBP or iMac is in single core performance. Thanks to the Mac Pro's upgradable nature you can change everything really, except the Motherboard/Logicboard which is still based on X58 tech.

Then again though, even the newer x79 tech with Ivy-Bridge EP still doesn't have native support for USB 3. Easily solved with a PCIe card.

My spec is in my signature, and I use it with FCPX, along with Screenflow and it works much better than my 15" rMBP did.
Mostly due to the fact that I just added nearly all my storage internally. A quieter, and faster environment.

With my MBPr I had to deal with Thunderbolt storage, and it was expensive and very noisy (Lacie).

I sold the macbook, and got a refurbed Mac Pro, and for the money you'd spend on a Decent External thunderbolt storage system you can easily buy bunch on fast/reliable HDD's.


The most important thing to do really is what the extra week or two, and see what happens with the new Mac Pro. I love it's specs, but it's form factor just puts me off.

I don't see how it's more quiet since you can just get a HDD-enclosure and put it in a cabinet where it won't make much noise for you to hear.

 

[Digital Skunk]

It doesn't matter really unless you plan on doing one or these things:

1.) Upgrade the internals - In which case the Mac Pro is the only solution

or

2.) Upgrade the system to the maximum and stave off upgrading the machine for 3 years. - in which case the iMac is fine.

I personally did number 2 and it's the best machine I've used to run Avid MC outside of a custom built rig made by Avid running off of a server chassis. The iMac doesn't look and feel as powerful when looking at it and putting it on your desk, but I've churned through hours upon hours of footage with an eSATA scratch attached and have had no issues.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

I don't see how it's more quiet since you can just get a HDD-enclosure and put it in a cabinet where it won't make much noise for you to hear.

have you seen how expensive Thunderbolt cables start to get with increased length?

Also my Lacie D2 is in a cabinet inside my desk, and You can still clearly hear the vibrations from it. Despite being on two silicon rails.

My entire system at full load, isn't nearly as loud as that Thunderbolt/USB3 external drive.

 

[gavinstubbs09]

The fact the Mac Pro doesn't have thunderbolt is killing me. We are ordering a bunch of stuff and it has to be FW800 or Mini Displayport. I was looking at a Thunderbolt display, but of course the Mac Pro is only mini displayport. This ruins it quite a bit as all other macs in this lab have TB.

 

[Gav Mack]

I paid $650 for my 3,1 octo 3.2 with 32gb ram. Geekbench over 12k that's great bang per buck.

 

[pertusis1]

Basically all Macs except the hex-cores today are in the 13000-15000 geekbench score range.
That includes MBP, iMac i7 (not the i5's), Quad Mini's and the doorstopper-model MacPro's. So as far as rendering is concerned, no difference.

Then there is storage: you work with huge files. On a MacPro you can insert 4 Seagate Barracuda 3TB drives and have a warp speed high capacity storage. On all other macs, you need to take that external, preferably to a Tunderbolt storage, which again equals all Macs.

Last thing is display.
One question: what framerate do you work with: 24, 25 or 30 fps?
If you use the last, go ahead with an iMac, with all other rates, you need a monitor capable of handling them all. Apple does not offer decent support for video framerates.
The Dell U2713HM seems a very affordable nice sRGB calibrated display that does support video rates and offers the same iMac panel but now in matte.

I would say: best deal is 2.6 Mini, with good SSD inside (vector or Samsung 840 pro), a Dell U2713HM and a nice tunderbolt storage cluster accepting 3,5 inch drives.

Don't get a mini. It won't hold up to video editing.

 

[VirtualRain]

Don't get a mini. It won't hold up to video editing.

Unless you're doing a lot of really fancy effects, that's not true. I can edit HD video just fine on my 5 year old 4,1 Mac Pro (~9000 Geekbench)... which is significantly slower than today's Mac Mini (~12000 Geekbench).

HD video editing was maybe a stressful workload for computers 7-8 years ago, but now I can do it on my iPhone.

 

[Gav Mack]

Unless you're doing a lot of really fancy effects, that's not true. I can edit HD video just fine on my 5 year old 4,1 Mac Pro (~9000 Geekbench)... which is significantly slower than today's Mac Mini (~12000 Geekbench).

HD video editing was maybe a stressful workload for computers 7-8 years ago, but now I can do it on my iPhone.

I wouldn't like to do it on a Mac mini. I maxed out a pair of 2011 i5's with 840 EVO m500 960 with 2nd hard drive and 16gb of ram only a few weeks ago. It produced fast results using FCP X and Compressor but the little thing didn't half get hot and the I've never heard the fans go that fast before.

They've stuck them on a zalman laptop cooling pad tilted flat

 

[tjgonzo]

Unless you're doing a lot of really fancy effects, that's not true. I can edit HD video just fine on my 5 year old 4,1 Mac Pro (~9000 Geekbench)... which is significantly slower than today's Mac Mini (~12000 Geekbench).

HD video editing was maybe a stressful workload for computers 7-8 years ago, but now I can do it on my iPhone.

If I were to get a 2009 or 2010 8 Core MP, would I see much difference in speed in Premier/ FCPX compared to my current MBP? (QC i7, 8gb RAM and 6750 1GB) I will be using an SSD for the system drive and the HDD for storage and scratch.

 

[Santabean2000]

If I were to get a 2009 or 2010 8 Core MP, would I see much difference in speed in Premier/ FCPX compared to my current MBP? (QC i7, 8gb RAM and 6750 1GB) I will be using an SSD for the system drive and the HDD for storage and scratch.

I think so. FCPX is multicore-aware and will enjoy the extra oomph.

MacPros with their no fuss HDD options and great cooling make them the obvious choice for paid work. iMacs are for consumer IMO.

 

[VirtualRain]

MacPros with their no fuss HDD options and great cooling make them the obvious choice for paid work. iMacs are for consumer IMO.

LOL... We do a lot of creative work (artwork and video) both in-house and with several contract shops, and neither us nor any of them use Mac Pros. All the creative professionals I've seen use MacBook Pros.