Rick Lang
Forum Replies Created
-
In Geoff’s post on Rendering Speed, the large improvements in rendering were on this modest configuration:
“All tests were made using the same machine: Mid-2010 iMac i7 @ 2.93GHz, 8GB 1333 MHz DDR3, ATI Radeon HD 5750 1024MB, running OSX 10.8.2”
It may be a combination of factors but I suspect the end result is the render tuning is related to the CPU architecture and GPU architecture and later architectures will fare better. That mid-2011 iMac with a Radeon 5750 may have been a poor performer that the FCPX changes have addressed but others on different configurations (older or newer) may not see a dramatic change. Still when you see worse performance on playback, it might imply the software is doing things differently, requiring an upgrade to components, but what? If your performance becomes worse while you have more recent gear than the configuration in this message, then “Houston, we have a problem.” Sorry I can’t be more helpful.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
I don’t see “some improvement” Geoff. I would call a 12x improvement a remarkable improvement!
-
Sandra, is there primarily only one person going to use your new machine? If it’s for a single operator, the new iMac should hold its own for what you described.
Not sure if you need external storage for anything other than archive/backup so the iMac with the 3TB internal drive may be fine. Prices for the Fusion drive haven’t been announced but if they are reasonable, go with 3TB+128GB Fusion drive. If you do want external storage for media and editing using FCPX, you’ll need a bigger budget. Maybe something that can be deferred until another year.
You may not require the fastest graphics as the GTX 675MX with 1GB graphics memory may suit you but if you can try for the GTX 680MX with 2GB graphics memory. And for the main system memory, recommend 16GB as I doubt you’ll need the maximum 32GB. Will be interesting to see what you can get for your $4,000 budget but we have to wait several weeks to see prices and availability. Good luck.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
Thanks, Bret. No shortage of good ideas.
When you mention integration of Motion, I wonder if they will alter their approach to how various functionality is provided within or external to FCPX. For example, the Color application from FCP7, you can argue, has been integrated in the sense of replaced by colour capabilities in FCPX. Motion and Compressor are separate apps that can tightly interface with FCPX. And other functionality like creating DVDs has been abandoned entirely by Apple. Would Apple take FCPX in a new dimension if they began to absorb functions currently done elsewhere? For example, now that chapter markers are supported (at least for QuickTime playback), why not add a few templates (and support a custom layout) in FCPX that could assemble a DVD right there or at least to pass to Compressor to finish the task?
I’ve never used Smoke, but I understand it is trying to be a one-stop shopping experience including more and more functionality besides its original core strengths. DaVinci Resolve 9 has added more functionality to be able to work as a NLE or perform a first edit pass perhaps before handing off to FCPX. Perhaps 10.1.0 will see FCPX further enhancing the breadth of its capabilities beyond its core NLE strength.
I tend to think DVDs are an oversight that should be corrected. Like Blu-Ray. But maybe there’s the next great thing coming that will replace both those distribution icons and I certainly don’t think it’s YouTube or Facebook or Twitter integration that seems to be Apple’s short-term focus. Or am I looking in the rear-view mirror? Perhaps a Vimeo with very good quality video (less compression) is the future and no computer or HDTV will ever ship with an optical drive/player in a few more years.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
[Margus Voll] “so we could speculate at least quadro 4000 performance for home users?”
Difficult to know until we see what it includes (still doesn’t exist on NVIDIA’s public web pages). Assuming the 608MX is better than the 680M, then we are comparing devices with at least 1344 CUDA cores tp 256 cores on the Quadro 4000. 680M bandwidth is 115 GB/s versus 4000’s 90 GB/s. 680M OpenGL version is 4.1; 4000 supports 4.3! No idea what Shader Model is on the 680M.
NVIDIA’s web site is very strange, constant apples to oranges hyperbole so you supposedly get caught up in the enthusiastic claims for each product but impossible to compare between product families. And then there’s the reality of what Apple does to get the GPU into their iMac which may not reflect 100% of what NVIDI offers for a given product.
Best to wait a couple of months and Bare Feats will likely have it benchmarked!
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
[Craig Seeman] “[craig slattery] “I decided to cut this special in fcp7. Mainly because I was quite ill at the beginning of the edit and I feared I would have to hand the edit over to another editor. ”
You probably just made a wannabe FCPX freelancer cry.”
Craig, he said he was very sick; when that happens, you feel like you’re gonna die, so on his deathbed, in his weakened state, he fell back to where he felt safe. Just illustrates how bad it was for him then, not a rational move but you have to forgive him this one lapse in judgment because he really wasn’t himself.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
[Juan Salvo] “The 680MX will undoubtedly be a better performer than the 650M, but I wouldn’t be so sure it would be THAT much better.”
Agreed! I think Apple claims up to 60% faster but they’re not referencing what exactly is faster. The web site shows graphics performance improvements for games but does not illustrate productivity or ‘pro’ applications. We’ll just have to wait until December I suppose when the machines will be put to the test here. I’m still unable to find exactly what constitutes a GTX 680MX and somewhat surprised no third-party ‘news’ site has even picked up on the fact that the product doesn’t really exist i.e. it’s not described and published anywhere on a publicly accessible web site other than Apple’s mention of it.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
[Margus Voll] “So in some sense makes it all really exiting. Of course it will not replace big systems but
gives probably better performance compared to MBP.”The GT 650M in the Macbook Pro uses 384 CUDA cores which is less than 30% of the 1344 cores in the GTX 680M. And only 1 GB of graphics memory, so it would appear the new iMac can be very useful.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
The NVIDIA GTX 680M has 1344 CUDA cores I believe. Was not able to find any reference to the 680MX even on NVIDIA’s web site. Looks like either an Apple exclusive for some time or just Apple was allowed to announce the product before it actually ships presumably in December 2012. The “X” in the name means it’s designed for gamers. That could be good as it may mean either even more CUDA cores and/or faster clock speeds. It should be very respectable in its performance in Resolve for example with 2GB of graphics memory. Nothing close to the performance of the Mac Pro (late 2013), a mythical beast, but the best you can find in terms of a mobile GPU. I’ll post again if I learn of the specs for the 680MX.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
[Nate Weaver] “If they playback at 16fps and record out a 23.98 or 29.97 file for you, there won’t be a 1:1 relationship between frames from the film and frames in the file. This would be bad if you later realize later when you get the file back that it wasn’t 16fps after all. Just ask for “one film frame to each QT frame”. That will get you what you need.
Also request a flat pass, so the colorist does not clip any backs or whites. With a 10bit ProResHQ file, you’ll be able to correct it yourself without inducing any bad looking artifacts.”
This makes sense; I just didn’t know what to say to them but one film frame to each ProRes HQ frame does the trick and thanks for the hint about using a flat film log LUT rather than having them default to Rec.709 etc. I hope it’s appropriate for me to want to use 10-bit ProRes 4:2:2 HQ even though the film is black & white since I want to get a filmic look to the final video.
Should be fun to play with it. Might even try to colour some portions but don’t know how to go about adding colour where none exists. Nate (or anyone) care to point me in the right direction for colouring a b&w video? Thanks for all your help.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB