Which *new* iMac best for HDV editing/Final Cut? (getting my first Mac)

[hdpaul]

Please correct me if I am wrong:

Why should worry to get a 24" model for a "full HD" view, you do not edit the movie in a full screen mode. Final Cut has all other parts such as timeline, bin and effects window. The actual area you can see for the video is just a tiny box on the top-right corner. I believe dual-screen is a better option so go and get a 20" and a second screen for bigger editing area. Then get a usb or firewire output device to connect a full-hd display for full screen full quality rendering preview.

With the new introduced Final Cut Server you should not worry about the CPU speed too. just distrubute all your cpu intensive job to your other old computer or PC with XEON or Core2Quad which are all much cheaper to build.

I would get a 20" 2.8Ghz iMac and add as much RAM as possible and save the $$ for those I mentioned above

Typo?, the 20" is 2.66Ghz.

This is exactly what I ordered, with 4Gb Apple ram.
If I need to, I can use my old monitor for now, then if I want to upgrade the monitor, I'll go for a newer model. But I will not spend $1000 for it. There are some great monitors out there for much less than that, more like 3 or 4 hundred. Just my opinion.

 

[sfroom]

Why should worry to get a 24" model for a "full HD" view, you do not edit the movie in a full screen mode. Final Cut has all other parts such as timeline, bin and effects window. The actual area you can see for the video is just a tiny box on the top-right corner. I believe dual-screen is a better option so go and get a 20" and a second screen for bigger editing area. Then get a usb or firewire output device to connect a full-hd display for full screen full quality rendering preview.

With the new introduced Final Cut Server you should not worry about the CPU speed too. just distrubute all your cpu intensive job to your other old computer or PC with XEON or Core2Quad which are all much cheaper to build.

I would get a 20" 2.8Ghz iMac and add as much RAM as possible and save the $$ for those I mentioned above

I think we're straying too far from the propositions of the OP. He was comparing the 20" 2.66 to the 24" 2.8, without ruling out the top and bottom end models. Suggesting Final Cut Server may be outside of his means and/or intentions.

I think the suggestion to get the 24" has as much to do with screen quality as it does with 1080p resolution.

With regards to the suggestion of getting a 20" with an external display, I must disagree. The 20" TN display is too inferior to recommend, imo. When I buy an all-in-one, I want a high quality package...for my own use and with respect to resale value.

That being said, I recommend the 2.8 Ghz 24" to the OP. If he's on a budget, he could get a refurb 2.8 Extreme with a 500GB HD, at significant savings.

From what I understand, the ATI cards outperform the Nvidia's for core image/animation, so he may be better served by getting the 2600 PRO anyways (although performance of the 8800 could improve with time/driver maturity).

 

[ukmacmonster]

WTF are you talking about? You can get a 24" DVI display for $400. That way you have the entire display for 1080 viewing, and the 20" iMac display for clips and tools.

$400 will only buy another crappy 24" monitor to go with the crappy 20" monitor in the iMac. High quality 24" monitors are a lot more expensive, making the 24" iMac better value. That's WTF I'm talking about.

 

[Cave Man]

$400 will only buy another crappy 24" monitor to go with the crappy 20" monitor in the iMac. High quality 24" monitors are a lot more expensive, making the 24" iMac better value. That's WTF I'm talking about.

I guess if you want that crappy glossy screen of the iMac for playback, then whatever floats your boat. I'd take a 24" matte Samsung over it any day for video work.

 

[ukmacmonster]

I guess if you want that crappy glossy screen of the iMac for playback, then whatever floats your boat. I'd take a 24" matte Samsung over it any day for video work.

You'd choose a matte $400 TN display, I'd choose a glossy H-IPS Apple display costing about $900 if you had to buy it seperately. Whatever floats your boat exactly. That's why we're all different.

 

[Jagster222]

ATI Radeon 2600Pro or the Nvidia 8800GS which is better for iMovie

I am about to pull the trigger on a new iMac. I've read through the thread and I am a little confused as to which of the two graphic cards, the ATI Radeon 2600 Pro or the Nvidia 8800GS is better if you are working in iMovie to create movies. I will not use the iMac for games, but I want to be sure that I have the best video card for working in iMovie as I edit my home movies.

Is there anyone who can advise me on what to do? I am leaving on buying the 2.8ghz imac with the 320 hard drive and purchase an external drive to do my scratch editing. Would really appreciate if someone who is experienced in this area can tell me which card is best for what I need to do.

BTW, does IMovie use core apps or Motion? I am not even sure what these are, but in reading the thread it appears teh ATI 2600 Pro is faster/better than the Nvidia 8800GS.

 

[smoking monkey]

I am a little confused as to which of the two graphic cards, the ATI Radeon 2600 Pro or the Nvidia 8800GS is better if you are working in iMovie to create movies.

Tell me about it! I have been going over this topic for a while now.

check this out...

http://www.macworld.com/article/133253/2008/05/imac_benchmarks.html

I was under the impression that Ram and processor speed were more important for iMovie. only progs like motion and games and driving displays really need the GPU.
Please correct me if I am wrong!

BUT even if I am wrong that doesn't change the benchmark scores.

As you can see from the benchmarks, the 3.06 is clearly faster than the 2.8 in performing all the tasks.

The aged effect imovie comparison results in a 5 seconds difference! i'm guessing that's on a short clip. So the differential will only get bigger on longer clips.

What it doesn't show is a 3.06 with 8800 GPU v a 3.06 with 2600 GPU...

if you go to the apple store online you can click on the 2.8Ghz model and update the processor to 3.06 and choose which GPU you want.


Also, earlier in this thread I stated what happened when I called apple about this very question but in relation to MOTION. they recommended the 8800. Give them a call.

 

[D4F]

in it's current state the 2600 will outperform the 8800 in certain applications but that is a known issue and nVidia knows about it. I am not sure how this will affect Mac but the next forceware version is supposed to fix this thing.
Remember that you can not upgrade this card on a iMac so starting with a overall worse and old card does not give you much. The 8800 GS is a new chip and like always with nVidia it will improve.

 

[MacFerr]

What do you think, guys, about the 3.06GHz proc running too hot issue? (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/477628/)

 

[Grokgod]

20" vs 24"?

I am torn tween the the 2 options.

I want the smaller size actually because less heat etc, but the screen quality kinda bugs me, even though it's not really that bad, just from a side angle, it gets kinda yellow, weird.

It bugs though that for the amount of cash, shouldn't APple put a better screen in it?

I hate it when I get that unethical feeling from Apple.

But when I think about going 24" I get squishy also.

The faster chip means more heat more noise, i think its a 10 watt difference.

I guess I want to see and hear the difference tween the two in a quiet environment.

Sometimes I think that the 24" is too big but perhaps that makes room and creates less heat for the 2.6 35 watt chip?

I guess it comes down to what bugs me less,
Yellow screen from the sides or heat and noise from a hotter chip.

ANyone there care to comment of the 20" screen issues or if there is heat or noise differences in the 24"

Isnt the new chip cooler than the previous iMacs too?

Doesnt a larger screen mean more heat also?

I wasnt even considering the 2.8 or the 3 with Nvidia, so it's tween these issues for me.

TIA

 

[ukmacmonster]

Well I just upgraded from a 20" iMac G5 to a 24" 3.06 GHz iMac. The old G5 is definately much noiser and seems to run hotter too. In fact the new iMac has been almost silent so far, although I haven't stretched its legs yet with any processor intensive work. The screen is much bigger, but it doesn't take up significantly more desk space. If the cost is not a big issue I'd go for the 24" version. Despite all the talk and speculation, heat and noise do not seem to be an issue with the new iMacs of any size or processor spec. Quite the opposite from my limited experience.

 

[retrofraction]

I hope you get your computer on time!!!
I orderd one on monday , the printer has all ready shipped but the computer has not left the factory.

 

[D4F]

Just to update a bit here.
The 2600 is no longer much better than the 8800 so I would defo stay away from the 2600.

 

[smoking monkey]

But when I think about going 24" I get squishy also.

The faster chip means more heat more noise, i think its a 10 watt difference.

I guess I want to see and hear the difference tween the two in a quiet environment.

TIA

I have the 24 3.06 and I can say that this thing is very quiet. I can not believe how quiet it is. sure there is fan noise and the like but it is so minimal it hasn't registered at this point for me.

If you are a bit anal about noise and whatnot though I suggest checking them out but unless you are going to be using it in a totally silent evironment i can't see the problem.

BUT i was using a dual 800G4 prior to this and it sounded like I was in an airplane. it was incredibly loud and very very hot.

 

[R.H.]

I was in the exact situation last week, tossing up between the 2600 and 8800cause i was concerned about the performance of the 8800 with motion 3. barefeats actually then posted a new test when os 10.5.3 was released and it showed significant improvement with motion and the 8800 card. This gave me enough evidence to suggest that with each driver update the 8800 will in time eventually outperform the 2600, well thats just my punt but i was confident enough to go ahead with the purchase of the 8800 with that in mind, I also seem to recall reading that the faster the gpu eg 512 mb will significantly help rendering times in final cut which was also another factor that swayed me to get it. In the end i went for 24 inch imac w/3.06 ghz, nvidia 8800, 4 gig ram and 320 gig hd,. good luck with ur decision, i know its a hard one!!!