Editing System for Premiere

[Rowdy Wiegmans]

Hi Ludmil,

Depends on how much you need the machine to render and the format of the footage you’re using. The higher the resolution and bitdepth the more processing power you need to do it quickly.

Waiting for your machine costs you money and time. The quicker you’re done the more time you save. 1000,- seems a lot but is quickly returned to your pocket depending on the above.

[Ludmil Kazakov]

this would be my remote system. I already have a m1 Mac Studio however even with that much power sometimes playback struggles with b-roll that are different codex. I am ok with that, but I wonder if I should get a used machine with higher components. this would be my remote system when I travel.. even now the i9 works but the fans kick in with the 4k sequences

[Mark Hollis]

Here is what I have noticed, editing with Apple’s silicon chips:

If you are using Apple’s native ProRes codec, Apple’s SoCs really speed up your workflow. This is because they have, on the chip, the Afterburner card. Back with the Intel Macs, you could stack up a bunch of them to deal with the Apple codecs and speed up your workflow significantly. This is now on-chip.

So, the slowdown in your workflows will occur when you are transcoding from other codecs to Apple’s native codec, supported in the hardware of the CPU. This is where you start. looking at Apple’s GPU cores. They will be doing most of the heavy lifting in transcoding.

So, if your acquisition formats have difficult codecs to change into ProRes, that will slow down your work, no matter where you are, in the field, in your facility, wherever.

Your purchase decisions need to take that into consideration.

Apple sells M1, M2 and M3 systems that are “binned,” this is to say that they have fewer than the maximum number of GPU cores. These are cheaper, but they do not help your workflows if you are transcoding. Also, you will have to transcode for deliverables and that will also be a GPU process (slightly speeded up by Apple’s on-chip encoder-decoder for ProRes. This needs to be an important consideration.

All of that said, Adobe lags the field when it comes to optimizing their applications for Apple’s operating systems and hardware. The most-optimized editing application today is DaVinci Resolve (the purchased version), followed by Apple’s Final Cut Pro. Adobe also lagged well behind other companies when Apple moved to 64-bit only applications.

Lastly, do consider RAM. I have found that the more RAM you have in your system, the faster your workflow, no matter what chip you are using. And do not purchase a system. with an internal SSD that is smaller than 1TB. On other forums, I have seen people suddenly finding that their emails do not fit on the boot drive, after having ordered an entry-level Mac. Obviously, your workflows will involve external drive(s), but the internal one needs to be large enough to suit your needs and. last long enough so that you don’t have to get another computer within a year.

[Ludmil Kazakov]

thanks for the feedback. I may be leaning towards a used M1 laptop with more RAM, since this is my remote system. and yes if I transcode everything to ProRes it will be smoother but for this project thats impossible. at this stage.. For all my other projects we use Pro Res LT and its so smooth 🙂 In the end I just dont know how much better it would be from my i9 laptop, which heats up with the 4k footage… is it worth spending 2k so my fans dont turn on while editing.. I dunno…

[Mark Hollis]

I did some pretty difficult transcoding on my wife’s M1 MacBook Pro (the first one released with the M1 chip). I had been using a 2009 Intel-based Mac Pro “flashed” to be a 2010. It had a Sapphire Pulse RX-580 and a lot more RAM than you can stuff into an Apple MacBook Pro.

My wife’s computer did every transcode in one quarter the amount of time or less. The fan never, ever started up. It did not get hot (and her previous Intel MacBook Pro got too hot to reasonably sit on her lap just doing office applications.

Apple Silicon outpaces Intel. in power usage and in heat.

Then I contacted some friends at a Nameless Broadcasting Company where I used to work. I brought Final Cut Pro into their shop, calling Apple and telling them to get their fannies into the plant so that it could be evaluated. They were looking to take the entire plant into Nonlinear editing. For the plant, they went with Avid NewsCutter and Symphony. Avid makes servers that are designed for the kind of large installation required. But, in the field, they saw the value of an Apple laptop running Final Cut Pro, so a lot of their overseas stuff is cut down on that.

They say that the M1 and M2 laptops are brilliant, that there is no noise when they are recording voiceovers into Final Cut Pro and that these laptops will edit an entire news package down to something reasonable to send over the Internet without needing to be plugged in.

Your purchase option should include the max amount of RAM and at least a 1TB boot drive.

[Eric Santiago]

Day job has me on a slew of M1 MBP 16″ with 32GB RAM as well as a 2019 MP somewhat loaded but only 96GB RAM.

The two are a perfect pair and can honestly say the M1 keeps up with it.

I dont see any M3s in the wild that would entice me to upgrade from the M1 MBP at the moment.

I most def will be upgrading my home 2013 Tube to possibly a Mac Studio M2 soon.

I say for the cost, stick with the M1 MBP for now.

We run all NLEs, Adobe CC, Pro Tools as well as Maya as reference.

[Rob Ainscough]

Are you restricting yourself to Apple only?

Most Windows based PCs at same or lower price point will perform faster than Apple’s M1, M2, or M3 CPU.

Not trying to push you away from Apple as I love macOS, but when it comes to raw performance in video editing/rendering a Windows based PC will out perform it rather easily (I’m mostly using AMD CPUs now, but still have a few Intel CPUs).

If you’re like me, I have 4 other computers in a RACK that I use to do actual final render work while I use my main PC for editing. I’m using DaVinci Resolve so it’s very easy to setup render servers/workstations so as to free my main editing PC up to continue.

Don’t get me wrong, I love my iMac but I don’t use it for this type of work. Just tossing in my 2cents since your title didn’t include must be for Apple.

[Ludmil Kazakov]

yes I will only work on apple. Also the people who hire me will only hire me if I work on apple. no questions asked.

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

I just recently went through the same process of comparing Apple and PC.

PC Portable Workstation won.
(Full disclosure: I do have an Mac Mini M1 that can run FCPX and Adobe).

But both on money and performance the PC has:
I9 13th generation processor
16′ Dreamcolor 4K screen
Latest NVIDIA RTX 3500 ADA developed for A.I. with 12GB
128 GB RAM
9TB Internal SSD with space for another 4TB (6,600+ Mbps).
+ I hang a external 2TB Samsung T9 (2,000 Mbps)
And, there is a 5-year next business day swap-out if something goes wrong (not including 80 countries on the watch-list, but still a large part of the land-based part of the planet is covered by that agreement).

I’ve added Blackmagic Resolve Studio to it, and already use an EIZO monitor for grading.

Money for this purchase was not the issue, but this was still more cost-effective than buying an Apple MacBook Pro, or even stationary one.

On the last broadcast job: Edit, vfx, audio mix and substitles, the system exported a 24 minute master to ProRes HQ in just under 5 minutes.

Even in places where all the other editing systems are Mac based, are the producers happy to work on a PC – in all fairness, they only care when something go wrong. And one thing with PPro, is that you can move the project file quicly to another system.

However, Windows 11 is a pain in the preverbial.

The one problem with most Apple products, is that you can not put more Ram or Storage inside it.

Just giving you a different view-point.
But only one person here knows what is best for you, and that is you.

Atb
Mads

[Mark Hollis]

Well, you have the answer below. But I have found Apple computers to be less expensive than the Windows systems and I built a facility specifying Apple systems (which my editors preferred). Windows systems are harder to manage while Apple systems just work. We did have a couple of Windows computers running Avid’s DS bought the same year as the Apple systems. And the Apple systems lasted, using the latest software and operating systems for over twice as long as the Windows systems. They had lower amounts of downtime. They had fewer issues with application corruption and corruption in the project files.

This may be the reason why the answer included what the client base wanted: Your clients don’t like downtime while you have to fix issues.

If you buy an Apple system at the top end, you will find it will outlast any Windows system. That cost-savings will increase profits. And not at the expense of your clients.