DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Final Cut Suite (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/final-cut-suite/)
-   -   What are the advantages of the Dual 2.5 GHz (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/final-cut-suite/40732-what-advantages-dual-2-5-ghz.html)

Cleveland Brown March 8th, 2005 07:51 PM

What are the advantages of the Dual 2.5 GHz
Does FCP actually use both processors simultaniously? I am trying to figure out what to get. I want something that is fast. That I can do multiple layers of video and audio with no delay in seeing what the fianal product will look like. The best analogy I have heard talks about manipulation of video clips like words in a wordprocessor. Needs to handle XL2's 16:9 and 24p without any delays. Am I dreaming yet? But that's what I need. Estemated cost right now is around 5k for the G5 w/ dual 2.5 GHz and FCP Production Suite. That is however w/o monitors, speakers and any other cool stuff. Oppinions please and thankyou.

Rhett Allen March 8th, 2005 08:18 PM

If it's within your budget, definitely get the Dual processor! You can never go wrong with that choice. You would be best served by installing an internal RAID as well. That will speed things up a great deal. And get as much RAM as you can afford.

Yes FCP uses both processors, as do a number of other programs, as well as the OS.

Bryan Roberts March 8th, 2005 08:33 PM

I've heard concerns raised regarding the stability of the dual 2.5's over the dual 2.0's because the cooling process. Is there going to be a noticeable difference in running dual 2.5's to dual 2.0's? It seems like the dual 2.0's are the way to go but I'd be interested to hear otherwise and why.

Rhett Allen March 8th, 2005 08:54 PM

The benchmarks I've seen comparing the Dual 2.5 vs Dual 2.0 show the Dual 2.5 around 25% faster so if you think 25% is a decent amount then that answers your question.
I haven't heard of the problems with heat in the Dual 2.5's causing stability issues so I can't comment on that. I like to buy the best I can afford (or maybe just a little higher) so that it has a longer productive life. If you buy the Dual 2.0Ghz, you are already starting off 1 generation behind. Of course having said that, the Dual 2.0Ghz is by no means a slouch itself.

Cleveland Brown March 8th, 2005 10:30 PM

How much will the Ram Cost?

What about the monitors I will need?

I am thinking about the produciton suite. http://www.apple.com/productionsuite/

How difficult is it to do chroma key effects, composits and layering?

For instance. A shot of a building that's backlit by the late stages of the setting sun. The building is totally black but outlined with a dark red and orange glow. You can see a window or two with lights on but for the most part, the whole bottom of the screen is black. Then if you were to take a shot of a face lit ever so slightly, almost ghost like. Could you put it over the dark area and make it look like that person is standing outside of the building? Lurking in the shadows.


Dean Sensui March 9th, 2005 03:49 AM

Regarding speed, Rob Morgan at barefeats.com said that you pay for the additonal speed just once. The time reduction is a perpetual savings. You'll also notice that a faster machine is generally more responsive and easier to work with.

I have a dual 2.5 GHz and haven't regretted the purchase yet. The 23" Cinema Display had a rebate at the time so that's part of the package, too. The system is stable and reliable enough to help produce a one-hour fishing show almost every week.

As for heat, that's the reason for the liquid cooling. And, yes, it does generate a considerable amount of heat. The vents in the back put out air that's quite warm.

Regarding RAM, check out Other World Computing. Haven't had any problems with RAM bought from there. There's also matched pairs available at a good price.

The production suite is a great deal. If you don't already have Final Cut pro, then get it. If you bought each program seperately the cost would be a heck of a lot higher.

Bryan Roberts March 9th, 2005 09:31 AM

Dean - the reasoning I've heard against the dual 2.5 is that since it does create a substantial amount of heat over the dual 2.0 that the processors will have a shorter production life as a greater heat level will break down parts faster. Now, if this means dying after 4 years compared to 6 years, then that's negligeable but if it's ~2 years compared to 6 years, that'd be something else (applecare worth it?).

Also, I was considering when the current g5's might go "out of date" and the only reason why they'd show age would be our next hump for video standards which is uncompressed HD and HDV. Can anyone share experiences with uncompressed HDV or HD (or even 24p uncompressed SD) editing on the dual 2.5? Does it handle the demand with grace or is there more to be desired? Is this going to be more of an issue in upgrading harddrive speeds over processor? Other than that, I guess a boost in performance on the future g5's would be more geared for motion graphics, rendering etc.

Mark Sloan March 9th, 2005 12:59 PM

The heat is significant, but the wattage of the G5s are still less than top of the line Pentiums. The water cooling was added to keep the machine quiet... You shouldn't see anything breaking down in 2 years. But even so, I would get the extended apple care to cover you for 3 years instead of 1. I would second the idea of a RAID to back up your data, or at least some system to backup your data overnight.

Rhett Allen March 9th, 2005 03:23 PM

There are people out there right now editing uncompressed HD on computers much less powerful than a Dual 2.5Ghz G5 so I am doubting HDV would be a problem.

Bryan Roberts March 9th, 2005 04:28 PM

So then future bumps in processor will be more for heavy rendering meaning motion graphics or encoding vid files, but otherwise shouldn't be a huge "upgrade" to wait for.

Boyd Ostroff March 12th, 2005 06:01 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Rhett Allen : The benchmarks I've seen comparing the Dual 2.5 vs Dual 2.0 show the Dual 2.5 around 25% faster -->>>

Just reading the MacWorld review from December 2004. Going by the speedmark tests, the dual 1.8 gets a 194, the dual 2.0 gets a 212 and the dual 2.5 clocks in at 237. Results of the other tests vary somewhat, as they always do.

According to these numbers the 2.5 is only 12% faster than the 2.0, and it's 22% faster than the dual 1.8. So as usual, you pay a pretty big premium to get that last ounce of performance. Of course there are other advantages to the 2.5, like a faster graphics card. The 1.8 has slower PCI slots and only 4 RAM slots too.


Also, if you buy RAM from Apple, I just called their local store. 2GB RAM using 4-512MB chips is $525. 2GB using 2-1GB chips is $725.

Rhett Allen March 12th, 2005 07:22 PM

I guess it depends what review you look at. I was going by a barefeats benchmark using After Effects. It was a difference of like 293 seconds for the 2.5 .vs 386 seconds for the 2.0 BUT... there are a few different comparisons over there and some of them lists the results differently. They claim 14%-24% difference in one test but in another, the figures show a much bigger gap. I guess the real question is, are you willing to pay for the privilege of going marginally faster? It's true, the extra speed costs more and not always proportionally.

I think Apple RAM is the worst deal going. You can buy Crucial RAM for less money and get a LIFETIME warranty whereas Apple RAM only carries a one year warranty and costs almost twice as much in some cases.

Here are the related benchmarks I referred to, the second one includes Opteron and Xeons as well.
benchmark 1
benchmark 2

Cleveland Brown March 12th, 2005 11:20 PM

Will Crucial RAM work as well on the Mac?

Joe Collins March 13th, 2005 06:40 AM

I have a dual 2.0 Ghz and the Crucial RAM was recomended to me as being very reliable. I have 2Gb of Crucial memory and haven't had any problems in over a year. YMMV...

Bryan Roberts March 13th, 2005 10:13 AM

can you mix pairs of 512 megs RAM with 1 gig stick pairs in one tower G5 or do they all need to be the same amount?

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:16 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2020 The Digital Video Information Network