-
Final Cut Pro H.264 performance
Hi guys,
I have a Hackintosh system (I mainly use Windows 10 but have been doing some experiments to run FCPX on Mac OS due to the excellent render times, and own all of the software I use), with the following specs: –
i7 4790k @ 4.3Ghz running Mac OS Sierra and Windows 10
Asus Pro Gamer Z97 motherboard
32Gb 2400mhz DDR3 Ram
Nvidia GTX 980ti (with Nvidia’s Cuda and Web Driver Installed)
Samsung 850 Pro SSD 512Gb (Windows 10 drive)
Crucial 512Gb SSD (OSX drive)
Kingston HyperX 256 SSD (Video Preview Drive for Premiere)
Samsung Evo 960 NVMe SSD 512Gb (Video media drive)
plus some other large mechanical drives for backup etcI wanted to ask a question about Final Cut Pro’s native h.264 editing capabilities. I know I should be transcoding for the best workflow, but consider me intrigued by a certain element of FCPX’s performance vs my normal NLE Adobe Premier Pro.
In Mac OS Sierra I am running both FCPX and Premiere Pro. Out of interest I tried to edit a Multicam project using my three Panasonic G7 cameras, shooting 24fps 100mb/s mp4 files in 4k. In both Windows 10 and Mac OS, Premiere is allowing me to edit these files natively on this system with no transcoding. I can’t scrub super smoothly through the timeline, but editing is smooth and perfectly pleasant with transitions, effects and rendering times exhibiting no issues at all. I’m not dropping any frames running all three angles at the same time plus the main viewer.
In FCPX, on the exact same system, I can’t even play back two 4k files at the same time in Multicam mode without incredible levels of stutter and dropped frames, let alone three, unless I let FCPX transcode everything first. In both cases the files are running off the NVMe SSD.
I wondered why there is such a performance differential between FCPX and Premiere with editing this h.264 footage within Mac OS? This is not meant to be a ‘premiere is better than FCPX thread’ – I am genuinely intrigued by this performance gulf.
Again, let me stress that I understand that transcoding to Prores will get me the performance I am looking for in FCPX, but I have great native h.264 performance in Premiere, so why not FCPX too? Could it be the 980ti GPU perhaps not utilising Open CL very well?
Thanks for any insight guys!
Tom Quayle
-
5 Replies
-
My guess is that it is related to the video card and the drivers involved to set up the hackintosh. If I understand correctly, Final Cut Pro is optimized for the stock graphic cards available in Real Macs.
I too have an hackintosh that I use for Final Cut Pro but I picked a laptop with the same graphics as a standard mac. I don’t work with 4k so I have no useful information to answer your question.Kirk Pitts.
video amateur.
Personal skateboard and band historian. 😉 -
Thanks, Kirk.
I’m pretty sure you’re right. I think the 980ti is just being massively under utilised in FCPX due to the Open CL framework. I’m just surprised at how big the difference is!
Cheers.
-
You should consider AMD Radeon based GPUs for the best Hackintosh performance.
I personally run two R9 280x GPUs, but many newer models are now available.
If you look through the GPU sub forum at TonyMac or in the BruceX thread on fcp.co you’ll get lots of info.FS100, EX1, GoPro, 2x Hacks, FCPX etc
-
[Tom Quayle] “…I tried to edit a Multicam project using my three Panasonic G7 cameras, shooting 24fps 100mb/s mp4 files in 4k. In both Windows 10 and Mac OS, Premiere is allowing me to edit these files natively on this system with no transcoding. I can’t scrub super smoothly through the timeline, but editing is smooth and perfectly pleasant with transitions, effects and rendering times exhibiting no issues at all. I’m not dropping any frames running all three angles at the same time plus the main viewer.
In FCPX, on the exact same system, I can’t even play back two 4k files at the same time in Multicam mode without incredible levels of stutter and dropped frames, let alone three, unless I let FCPX transcode everything first. In both cases the files are running off the NVMe SSD.”
This is interesting. I’ve done extensive testing with both Premiere CC 2017 and FCPX 10.3.x on my 2015 iMac 27, and have generally the opposite experience — FCPX is much quicker and more responsive on this platform.
As Duncan said, it is most likely a GPU/driver issue. Max Yuryev built an i7-6700K Hackintosh which had excellent performance, but (like Duncan) he used the AMD R9 280X — see below. That said, if your config using Premiere can edit three-camera H264 4k without transcoding, that is very good. I can’t do that smoothly on my top-spec iMac 27 using FCPX. You can probably get an R9 280X on ebay for $100, so you could try that if you’re curious. But your performance in Premiere is so good, I’d be happy with that.
https://youtu.be/I6ZJWPi_CBc?t=621
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
Because non-supported hardware = non-supported hardware….
Noah
FCPWORKS – FCPX Workflow
FCP Exchange – FCPX Workshops
XinTwo – FCPX Training
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up