Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Forums Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy Best maC for final cut pro 7

  • Best maC for final cut pro 7

  • Andy Cassidy

    April 23, 2011 at 4:20 am

    Filming in 60fps HD PIP with a dual quad core SSD for the o/s.
    Pondering the hex core (single) with a 240gb for the o/s.
    I’ve heard about the tray that holds 4 120gb ssd and increases speeds by10x. Rendring speeds Inc by 380%.
    but now I’m at a healthy 8k.
    Any suggestions? Thoughts? Ideas?
    I’m gonna pull the pin and Oder in about a week….

  • Torrey Loomis

    April 23, 2011 at 5:02 am


    SSD’s won’t speed up the rendering process unless you are laying off massive files like DPX or TIFF files that have a massive Mb size per frame.

    You should use a single SSD for the boot/app drive and put more of the $$$ into CPU, graphics card, and RAM. This will become increasingly important when FCPX comes out since it will maximize CPU performance with Grand Central Dispatch, gfx with OpenCL, and RAM via the new 64-bit code.

    Torrey Loomis
    President & CEO – Silverado Systems, Inc.
    (916) 760-0032 • FAX (916) 404-5258
    [email protected]

  • Rafael Amador

    April 23, 2011 at 11:54 am

    Agree with Torrey.
    An slow storage system will slow down the rendering because the CPU can’t access the media in time. Your bottle is the storage system. A faster one is the solution.
    Once the system is fast enough to access the media in time, your bottle neck is the processing (CPU/GPU).
    Your fast RAID will be able to access the media even faster than FC need it, but FC won’t be able to take advantage of this.
    So yo need an storage system up to your computer and the sequence you intend to edit (size, codec, layers, effects,..). A faster one won’t help to speed up rendering.

  • walter biscardi

    April 23, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    SSD do zero to increase rendering speed. For FCP 7, that’s all in the CPUs. For me they are a waste of money right now because of the expense vs. amount of storage you get. They will get cheaper, but right now, much cheaper to go with a SATA RAID.

    You say 60fps HD, but you don’t say the format you’re editing in. Any MacBook Pro, iMac or Mac Pro can handle ProRes 720 or 1080 editing today. Mac Pro is the most flexible.

    I would recommend the most Mac Pro you can afford, put in at least 2GB of RAM per core and get yourself a very fast external RAID.

    Walter Biscardi, Jr.
    Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
    HD Post and Production
    Biscardi Creative Media

    Blog Twitter Facebook

  • Andy Cassidy

    April 23, 2011 at 2:43 pm

    Yes, I have seen the SSD RAID. The unit that holds Four 128 GB SSDs. I was told to use this for my “scratch” disc. I will max out at 32 Gb RAM so I will pretty much have all I can do. I dont trust SSD for storage yet and as I am @ 8K for this setup I cannot justify more.
    I am using FCP 7 and will stay with it for some time so 64 bit is not a concern. I need to max out my system.
    Further thoughts?

  • Jerry Hofmann

    April 23, 2011 at 2:53 pm

    There’s little doubt an SSD as a startup disk is the cat’s meow. My new MBP has one and I’ve really seen a difference in the snappiness running apps, but for media storage, they are pricey, and likely not worth the investment at the moment. But as a startup disk? Do it! Boot your Mac in under 10 seconds, launch FCP in 3! Accessing application commands seems really snappy too. But not rendering times.


    Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog:

    Current DVD:

    8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17″ MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX – Cinema Displays I have a 22″ that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.

  • David Roth Weiss

    April 23, 2011 at 4:19 pm

    [Andy Cassidy] “I was told to use this for my “scratch” disc.”

    That’s simply absurd.

    Who told you that?

    David Roth Weiss
    David Weiss Productions, Inc.
    Los Angeles


    A forum host of Creative COW’s Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums. Formerly host of the Apple Final Cut Basics, Indie Film & Documentary, and Film History & Appreciations forums.

  • Neil Hurwitz

    April 23, 2011 at 5:02 pm

    I’d wait a little bit if you could
    See Below taken from MacRumors
    It wouldn’t surprise me if Apple put
    thousands of these in it’s new I-Tunes streaming complex.

    “According to 9 to 5 Mac, Apple is “toying with” a redesigned prototype for its Mac Pro line, narrowing the design from its current 8.1-inch width to something slightly over 5 inches wide. Combined with a slight reduction in height to around 19 inches, the redesign would apparently allow the Mac Pro to be rackmountable in server cabinets as a 3U component.

    Nearly eight years after the Mac Pro’s current design debuted, Apple is toying with a re-designed version of the product. The new design is said to be narrower at just over 5-inches and a few inches shorter at around 19-inches. One of the reasons that Apple might be making this particular Mac Pro prototype smaller is because it is able to fit on to a standard server rack.
    Apple of course used to offer its dedicated Xserve product line offering a thinner 1U component for rackmountable use, but the company discontinued the line as of January 31st of this year. The company has since introduced a new “server” configuration of the Mac Pro, but a redesign to accommodate both standard upright orientation and a sideways rackmounted one would likely be a welcome move for server fans despite the significant increase in rack space required.

    The report claims that Apple has developed a “stacked” drive configuration utilizing sleds capable of handling two conventional or solid state hard drives apiece, increasing the density of drives in an attempt to squeeze all of the existing components into the smaller form factor while still preserving space for expandability.”

Viewing 1 - 8 of 8 posts

Log in to reply.

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy