Eddie Adams
Forum Replies Created
-
Wanted to follow up on this with my results. I dropped in the Nvidia GTX 650, a 1GB GPU, and didn’t see any real results. Returned the card for the GTX 660, a 2GB GPU, and saw some results, but still very disappointed at the lack of any significant improvement in performance within FCPX. I did a fresh install on my machine (remember that its a Hackintosh, running ML 10.8.3), and STILL didn’t see any improvement. I was stumped…
UNTIL
I switched my System Profile (through Multibeast) from Mac Mini to MacPro3,1 — and VIOLA! FCPX now runs SMOOTH LIKE BUTTA’!
So, if you’re experiencing similar issues on your hackintosh, try switching your system profile. Hope this helps.
-
I’m having this same problem in 10.0.7 on OS X 10.8.3 – extremely annoying. I’m not using any effects, just moving clips from viewer to storyline. Seems to be an issue in rendering because my source clip is 640×480, 6.98fps, being dropped into a 1080p project at 30fps – I’m guessing something in the frame rate conversion is causing the issue – but this still seems to be a bug rather than an effect of mixed frame rates.
-
[Michael Garber] “You don’t want to edit from a mirrored drive set. That will slow you down. Best to edit from either a RAID 0 or a RAID 5.
“That’s what they say – but I see no difference in speed tests between a RAID 1 and a non-RAID set-up. Perhaps a RAID 0 would increase speed, but at 120 MB/s that doesn’t seem to be what’s causing my performance issues.
-
yeah, it would.. but im cutting interviews and rely heavily on the waveforms, so im SOL there.
-
I have two main drives that I use in the system:
The first drive (my Edit Drive) is a RAID 1 mirror from two WD Black 1TB drives.
The second drive is a 7200rpm Toshiba.Speed tests show (copying a 8GB file across the two drives):
Write speeds to both WD Black drive(s) were around 115-120 MB/s (same read speeds from Toshiba)
Read speeds from the WD Black drive(s) were around 60 MB/s each drive (120 MB/s write to Toshiba)What’s interesting is that while the RAID 1 drives seem to be WRITING as a mirrored pair (both at the same speeds of 120 MB/s), they seem to be READING from the drives as a striped pair, splitting the workload between the two drives. Am I correct in seeing it this way?
If this is all correct, shouldn’t FCP be reading from the drives as if they were a RAID striped pair, thus allowing maximum read speeds?
I’d be interested to learn if FCP X is in fact using the CPU to redraw waveforms and thumbnails…
-
So I dropped in the EVGA GTX 660 GPU. Although I do see a small speed increase in how fast FCP X refreshes Waveforms in clips, it is still slow to load thumbnails – there was absolutely no increase in speed there. This leads me to believe that the issues is not in fact related to the GPU – that perhaps FCP X has issues with thumbnails and load times? Has anybody else experienced this? I’m running all footage off a 1 TB WD Black drive, so it’s a fast as it gets in that regard. Clips are 1080i 29.97 ProRes 422 – so I really dont see where all this lag could be coming from. Any ideas? Thanks.
-
It was about $900 for the whole tower. I already had the monitors and reference speakers. Thats without an added GPU. I can list the specs in more detail later on. What I don’t like about the imacs is anything you want to add is external. Hackintosh allows me the flexibility to add drives, DVD burner, coolers and fans, etc.
-
Sure you’re not getting much resale value, but you’re also spending 1/3 to more or less build the same machine. No resale value can compensate for that.
-
Would you attribute this more to the GPU or the fact you’re running i7 over i5? In other words, if you could only put your money in one place, I’m assuming you’d advise a new GPU over a processor upgrade?
-
I haven’t bought one yet because of financial reasons, didn’t have the extra $250 to drop on a good GPU so was waiting. Would a good budget option be something like the EVGA GTX 650 1GB, which can be purchased at newegg for $80 right now?