Just the Messinger…Vincent LaForets Blog today – FWIW.

[Shane Ross]

Long story short…The iMac Pro is only worth it if you use FCX. So the very expensive Mac really is only good for FCX.

With Resolve, exports can take LONGER than with a 5K iMac. Adobe Premiere Pro…doesn’t take advantage of what it has to offer. Avid wasn’t mentioned, but it was on other tests, so I know that the advantages to the iMac Pro for it are very minimal.

SO…the iMac Pro really is only good for FCX. For everyone who uses other NLEs and grading software…save your money and get an iMac 5K or a PC that offers much more expandability, but a crappier OS (IMHO)

Good to know.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Steve Connor]

[Shane Ross] “With Resolve, exports can take LONGER than with a 5K iMac. “

I expect BMD will have this sorted out soon.

\”Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines\” W.Soyka

[Scott Witthaus]

[Shane Ross] “Long story short…The iMac Pro is only worth it if you use FCX. So the very expensive Mac really is only good for FCX.”

That’s a bit of a simplification and not quite accurate. I think he used the word “currently” best for FCPX and expects his “go-to” NLE, Resolve (go figure), to catch up soon. Adobe trails far behind in terms of performance. He also feels the 10-core system will be more than adequate for most users.

What I found more interesting (because after all, the results for his “testing” were certainly expected at this point in time) was that he left Avid out of his list of NLE’s that he suggest we all be proficient at.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Visual Storyteller
https://vimeo.com/channels/1322525
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter

[Oliver Peters]

[Shane Ross] “Long story short…The iMac Pro is only worth it if you use FCX. So the very expensive Mac really is only good for FCX.”

We have 3 of the 10-core iMac Pros (the sweet spot) running mainly the Adobe CC suite. In our experience, there are definite performance improvements over the Retina iMacs and 2013 Mac Pro. Specifically, faster AE renders and the ability to play RED files at full resolution in Premiere Pro. But it would seem that the fully loaded 18-core iMac Pro, given its price, is overkill for most users.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com

[Erik Lindahl]

I’d also add a lot of the reviews so far don’t test multitasking performance. I frequently will have multiple apps up at the same time doing rendering / transcodes / professing. Here and 8- or 10-core machine will have a huge up vs a 4-core machine. I would imagine as you go higher up the core-scale and lessen the per core performance things don’t always keep scaling.

[Greg Janza]

[Scott Witthaus] “That’s a bit of a simplification and not quite accurate.”

The differentiating factor of the imac pro is it’s ability to run FCPX (and run it very fast.) If you use Adobe cloud, Resolve and other cross platform software, there’s a variety of other less expensive options for maximizing power and speed.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
– Orson Welles

[Craig Seeman]

[greg janza] “If you use Adobe cloud, Resolve and other cross platform software, there’s a variety of other less expensive options for maximizing power and speed.
“

But does that maximized speed match FCPX?

Of course there may be no point in buying an iMac Pro if one’s NLE of choice doesn’t currently take advantage of it’s resources but that does not mean one’s NLE of choice on a more efficiently matched PC will match the speed of FCPX when it comes to playback or rendering. In addition, if one goes the custom PC route there’s another set of issues if troubleshooting OS/NLE issues also can slow one down.

[Shane Ross]

[Scott Witthaus] “That’s a bit of a simplification and not quite accurate. I think he used the word “currently” best for FCPX and expects his “go-to” NLE, Resolve (go figure), to catch up soon.”

OK…CURRENTLY the iMac Pro is really only beneficial if you use FCX…or render out of After Effects like Oliver noted.

Hopefully Resolve and Premiere pro will catch up by the time the new MacPro comes out. But really, I’m not holding my breath for that one. Apple’s priorities no longer seem to be with some of the high end video professional…only with their niche (a sizeable one, I’ll admit)

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Shane Ross] “Apple’s priorities no longer seem to be with some of the high end video professional…only with their niche (a sizeable one, I’ll admit)”

Is the glass half empty or half full?

FCPX goes faster on the most modern Mac while most everything else can’t even register the capability the iMac Pro offers.

Which is more high end? The one that can take advantage of all the power, or the type of high end that can’t even see the power that’s available?

[Steve Connor]

[Shane Ross] “Hopefully Resolve and Premiere pro will catch up by the time the new MacPro comes out. But really, I’m not holding my breath for that one. Apple’s priorities no longer seem to be with some of the high end video professional…only with their niche (a sizeable one, I’ll admit)
“

Rubbish, it’s Adobe and BMD software that’s NOT supporting the new iMac Pro, they’re the ones causing the problem NOT Apple.

The iMac Pro is very clear intent that they are still interested in the “high end video professional”

\”Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines\” W.Soyka