-
FCP X’s sluggish responsiveness: related to lack of Lion???
Not a criticism, just a question.
After experimenting with and learning FCP X since it came out, I notice that it often responds sluggishly to keystrokes and mouse overs.
For example in the timeline when using the nudge keys it can take several seconds before the clips actually move. Also when video skimming through any clip using JKL keys, skimming or scrubbing never seems to be smooth, but instead jerky and erratic.
Could this possibly be due to FCP X being beyond Snow Leopard’s capacity to handle effectively?
Will Lion increase FCP X’s speed and responsiveness?
-
9 Replies
-
I’m running it on the new iMac and it is silky smooth at all times.
-
Could be the drives, speed, Footage Size and type, any number of things, Ive noticed H.264 runs kind of slow on my Machine (2.26 8 core) not near as slow as FCP7 treats H.264,
I wear many hats.
http://www.gregburkepost.com -
Actually RAM is a very key ingredient. Start at 12GB and work your way up.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
You have to try out Lion to realize that it is as quirky as FCP X. Trust me you dont want to touch it with a foot long pole. So my reply would be that FCP X runs best on Snow Leo & if you are having any performance related issues then they can be fixed without changing your OS.
-
I think at this stage I’m willing to try anything regarding FCP X. I’m editing a 4 minute video, Apple Pro Pres 720p59.94, and FCP X has crashed 7 times in one hour performing simple cut edits. I just sent Apple feedback regarding this issue. Those FCP X updates can’t come a minute too soon.
-
For me, FCP X has been equally stable on both Snow Leopard and Lion. But I’d say that some of the newer features of Lion are pretty big irritants. And someone who is already pissed off at the lack of Pro control over FCP-X might just be pushed over the edge.
-
[Rahul Duggal] “But I’d say that some of the newer features of Lion are pretty big irritants. And someone who is already pissed off at the lack of Pro control over FCP-X might just be pushed over the edge.”
do tell…
are you testing FCPX on the golden beta?
your description is short but scarey (isn’t everything these days…)
would like to read more.
thanks in advance
about the sluggishness
as we tested X on many systems in past weeks, i can say that hardware and its age is key feature in performance.
RAM+CPU-age+Graphic-card+drive speed makes a very big differenceHector Berrebi
prePost Consulting -
Hello everyone,
I forgot to mention that I’m running FCP X on a 2008 2. x 2.8 Ghz Quad-Core Intel Xeon with 8 GB of RAM, a 1TB hard drive that’s 70% free, and an ATI Radeon HD 4870 graphics card, so it doesn’t seem to me like my specs are that bad, but I may be wrong. Please corect me if I am.
-
I’ve got a system that’s similar to yours, with key differences.
Similar: Same CPUs, 6GB RAM.
Different: G-SPEED ES RAID 5 (as media drive), 2x500GB RAID 0 (as boot drive [yes, I live dangerously]), Nvidia 8800 GT (way slower than your video card).
In short, you’ve got more RAM, and a faster video card, but I’ve got a substantially faster storage system. I wouldn’t call my FCPX experience as “silky smooth,” but it’s consistently smoother than what you describe. Are these issues while anything’s being rendered in the background?
And if anyone reading this has some insight (perhaps best for a new thread), would a change to a faster video card, such as a flashed GTX 285, be a significant change for me?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up