expected speeds with newer macpro

I'm considering replacing my 2.66 GHz 4-core MacPro with a 2.4 GHz 12-core MacPro, and wondering how much faster FCP7 rendering and Compressor transcoding operations will go. Do these applications make good use of 12 cores? If so I'd expect the speed increases to be approximately 2.7×. What's the reality?

I'm also wondering whether a Radeon HD5870 offers any display advantage over a Radeon HD5770 when driving a single 2560x1600 60Hz monitor.

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany

>Do these applications make good use of 12 cores?

Compressor, yes. FCP7, no.

I suggest you wait on the MacPro purchase as rumors are that Apple is on the verge of releasing something. I doubt you can get one right now anyway, since Apple stopped Mac Pro sales in the EU.



www.strypesinpost.com

FCP7 makes full use of the 4 cores of my old MacPro. Is 4 its limit?
I suspect that whatever workstation Apple releases will be less useful to me than a MacPro 5,1. If the new ones hardware requires the latest Mac OSX then FCP7 won't even work smoothly on it.
There still seem to be MacPro's available in stores in Germany.

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany

I believe the thing that uses all 4 cores is Quicktime. That will happen on the back end. And that's for encoding/decoding, not for processing of effects.



www.strypesinpost.com

Activity Monitor shows FCP7 doing a render on a high resolution clip using all 4 cores to about 90% each. Since my MacPro has just 4 cores I can't tell if this is a limit.

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany

strypes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >Do these applications make good use of 12 cores?
>
>
> Compressor, yes. FCP7, no.
>
> I suggest you wait on the MacPro purchase as
> rumors are that Apple is on the verge of releasing
> something. I doubt you can get one right now
> anyway, since Apple stopped Mac Pro sales in the
> EU.


Who knows if FCP 7 will work with whatever MacPro replacement Apple releases.

>Activity Monitor shows FCP7 doing a render on a high resolution clip using all 4 cores to about 90% each.

I've not seen FCP7 use the cores the way Compressor does.


>Who knows if FCP 7 will work with whatever MacPro replacement Apple releases.

I think that largely depends on the OS. But FCP7 is dead and Carbon (the code on which it runs on) has been deprecated in Mountain Lion.



www.strypesinpost.com

Here Activity Monitor is showing all 4 cores being used at 80% for FCP7 rendering.

Can any Forum member who has FCP7 installed on an 8- or 12-core MacPro check how many cores FCP7 uses in a big rendering job?
Thanks.

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany

One of my clients has several 12 core workstations with FCP 7. We were having rendering issues the other day, so looked at the activity monitor. All 12 cores were each running a single thread. However the total CPU was just over 400%. Something like 415 to 418, so even with 12 cores FCP was only running the machine at about 1/3 power. This could, of course, be due to a lot of factors, like codec, plugins etc. Your milage will very.

-V

VPiccin: thanks for that news. 1/3 power doesn't cut it. The one FCP7 function where I need more than 4 core performance is rendering in ProRes codecs, both the plain 422 and the HQ versions. Maybe with these FCP-happy codecs FCP7 can do it, maybe not. That's the critical question for me.

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany

VPiccin's 415% figure shows that FCP is using more than 4 cores, maybe even all 12. So the limit, if that's what it is, is more complex than I thought.

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany

It's surprising how little is known about FCP7 core utilization. I found this one informative post in Apple Support Communities. It looks like Mr. Sheffield's 8 cores are working at about CPU 450, which is similar to what VPiccin reports for 12 cores.
Today in Germany the 2.4GHz 12-core MacPro and also the 3.33GHz 6-core MacPro Server can still be bought from stores. I wonder if they'd both give the same CPU 400-450 with FCP7, in which case the second one would render quite a bit faster.
Is there any hardware difference between a MacPro and a MacPro Server?

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany

FCP7 is a very old architected software : only 32bits, and about 6cores maximum usage in best case. we do have 12, 6 and 4 cores machines at work, can not see render speed diffrence between them.

also, compressor is complex, and do bad jobs.... so we use carbon rhozet on a PC, much better

and as everybody does , make a smart move : buy a radeon card with 1GB, put on your mac, and install Premiere CS6... all render times solved and better quality when used


fred

fred: if either your 6- or 12-core machines are showing "6 cores maximum usage", and your 4-core machine is obviously showing no more than 4 cores maximum usage, then unless the machines have unequal processors you should be seeing speed differences among them. A 20 minute render instead of a 30 minute render matters, although it isn't life-changing.

I just ordered a 6-core 3.33GHz MacPro, based on the incomplete information in this strand.

We all know FCP7 is old software, but some of us like the feel of it. I plan to use FCP7 until there's something I need which it just can't do. Then I'll take a hard look at Premiere and Avid, as well as at new Macs and PCs.

Since FCS was my primer for video, I naturally see video technology with Apple-tinted eyes. From skimming "Using ProMedia Carbon" in the manual, that software looks no-nonsense and get-the-job-done, but less close to the iron than Compressor. Your views on Carbon vs. Compressor would start a good strand in the Compressor - Media Compression and Conversion forum.

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany

There's always a chance FCPX.x will add 99 tracks of discrete A/V!!

Hey, they added a clip viewer so we needn't disturb where we're parked in the program.
That was never supposed to happen, it would violate the 'Imovie Pro" look and feel... but the team did it.

I would love to see all my magnetic timeline Role-assigned work be able to cascade into traditional tracks for any of a dozen reasons, like revision editing, sound design, etc.

Maybe Hodgetts and Clarke (I prefer them to Callard and Bowser) can build a tasty integrated XML add-on? Something seamless and invisible? I would give FCPX another look.

Mountain Lion kills FCP7, does it not? Am I safe updating Lion to 10.7.5?

- Loren

Today's FCP keytip:
Set a motion effect keyframe instantly with Control-K!

Your Final Cut Studio KeyGuide™ Power Pack.
Now available at KeyGuide Central.
www.neotrondesign.com

FCP7 render time with my new 3.33 GHz 6-core MacPro 5,1 is just 27% of what it was with the 2.66 GHz 4-core MacPro 1,1. Core usage experiments are continuing.

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany

Loren Miller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> I would love to see all my magnetic timeline
> Role-assigned work be able to cascade into
> traditional tracks for any of a dozen reasons,
> like revision editing, sound design, etc.
>

we should petition for that !

I heartily agree.

- Loren

Today's FCP 7 keytip:
To reposition a Marker press Command and drag it!

Your Final Cut Studio KeyGuide™ Power Pack
with FCP7 KeyGuide --
now available at KeyGuide Central.
www.neotrondesign.com

After the failure of the first Apple Tv (because of the ecosystem build around) Steve Jobs came back one year later and said during keynote: " ... This time we done it right..."

Come on Randy !

Seems like desktop sales have plummeted, laptops and iPad devices selling well.
Perhaps there will not be a new Mac Pro????