Macs vs. PC for video editing, which is better?

Stoic · Post by **Stoic** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 11:21 pm

RadicalEd0 wrote:puh-lease
alienware is so horribly overpriced it's not funny. Their $2200 systems could be built for $1000, its ridiculous.

Yeah but you'll be hard pressed to find a mother board that can handle RDRam let alone a computer with RDRam in it.

And as we all know RDRam is way better than DDR or we all should know that... ::glares::

NicholasDWolfwood · Post by **NicholasDWolfwood** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 11:25 pm

...it's not hard to find a mobo that supports RDRam.

Plus DDR is better than RDRam, but RD was designed to support only the PIVs.

Stoic · Post by **Stoic** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 11:30 pm

NicholasDWolfwood wrote:...it's not hard to find a mobo that supports RDRam.

Plus DDR is better than RDRam, but RD was designed to support only the PIVs.

No DDR is CHEAPER than RD. Not to meantion that you still need 2 channels for RD unlike DDR.

The only reason it only Supports P4s is it would be a crime to waste their speed on any thing slower. Look into it, DDR benchmarked worst than RD on all the tests.

hell RD chips can run up to 800 MHZ which is more than the P4's 533 can handle. We need something faster or we're out of luck.

jonmartensen · Post by **jonmartensen** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 1:46 am

*sigh* RDRam having a higher clock speed than DDR is like PC's having a higher clock speed than MAC's

CaTaClYsM · Post by **CaTaClYsM** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 8:42 pm

I know, RDRAM is exclusive to the P4's and runs at 800 MHz while hte best that DDR can do is 433 ( and the 333 RAM beats the 400 in most benchmarks o_0.) And Final Cut Pro, I need to know if the PC is going to get software like this, the only things that I can tell from what I have seen is that it has a UBER STREAMLINED GUI, But seriously, what can be done with that that you can't do with the software that we use to make AMV's? And the one thing that bugs me is that the people at gamefaqs put so much stress on the fact that 'profesionals' use the Mac and Final Cut Pro, But seriously, I have seen the kind of stuff that the AMV cammunity has done, and if I had to choose between the advice of these 'profesionals' and the AMV creators, I'd choose the latter.

Zarxrax · Post by **Zarxrax** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 9:41 pm

I doubt many professionals would use Premiere on a PC just because it's so fooking unstable... If Adobe could make a solid piece of software, then they might have something...

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 11:59 pm

The thing the Mac has to it's advantage right now is FCP ;O.

The Mac is still slower then a PC. The G4 doesn't have automagical properties that make it so much l33ter then the PC. There isn't like the "super video processor" section. >_> <_<. If apple released FCP for the PC. I think we'd see the PC take over what with it's cheapness and speed.

But that's not going to happen. I'll give the Mac the nod for high-level multimedia king with FCP. But Adobe apps on the PC are much faster then those on the Mac. PC = Adobe media king.

People who talk about the Mac hardware being better then the PC, it's just not true. What you can do on a Mac, you can do on a PC. Probably cheaper and faster. Easier >_>. Well that's up to debate. I've not used a Mac much. The PC is not that hard to use >_> <_<. So long as you get good hardware.

That is one of the main reasons Macs have been good at certain tasks, since they're "closed boxed systems". Apple only makes them, there is a select few parts and add-ons for them. But really there isn't a whole lot you can upgrade your Mac with. >_> <_<. There are those exspensive PCI add-in cards or whatever to convert your G3 to a G4 :p

Anyways...

Macs just aren't as exciting as PCs. :p

~klinky

Zarxrax · Post by **Zarxrax** » Sun Feb 23, 2003 12:20 am

Something interesting to note, if you ever watch the premiere tutorial videos on adobe's site, they are always from the MAC version

Nightowl · Post by **Nightowl** » Tue Feb 25, 2003 5:07 pm

And here I JUST NOW found this thread.

Macs dominate the editing world, simple as that. The processing cards for broadcast quality video and film editing are better in every which way - just take a look at the Aurora card. This is a card that costs $8000 at MOST with ALL the features, and can capture at a TRUE 24fps - not some 23.xxx aproximation. There's another NLE that started out and is still currently more popular on a Mac - AVID.

The whole "PCs are faster" thing is relative. I've run a few speed tests using Premiere, After Effects, and Final Cut Pro, all compressing the same bunny action movie data. The Mac software was consitantly faster. In some cases, such as Premiere-related output, the tests were a lot closer. And in FCP 2.1, it was actually slower. But a dual 1ghz Aurora based Mac NLE with a scsi RAID array will rip the SHIT out of a 2.1 ghz Athlon with an ATA RAID array.

There is a very good difference between Final Cut Pro and Premiere, and it's the same difference between PCs and Macs - one is prosumer level at best, the other is Professional. It's true that video editing professionals use Macs. I'm sorry, but it's a well known fact. If you want examples of professional editors in the industry using Macs today, I'd be happy to name some well known offenders. If you want some professionals using PCs, that'll be a little tougher... most of the editors that use PCs are working in news stations and get fired once a month. It's a bizarre world, this editing business.

All in all, not a single argument on this entire thread has been all that good. Macs are better video editors - this can be proven through use in the professional world and application of use - i.e. 24fps realtime editing structure. If you go into the professional world claiming you understand Premiere and work on a PC, well... good luck getting work. You MAY be able to find some wedding video stuff, at best.

Regardless, PCs are cheaper. Significantly cheaper. They're great to start out on for someone who doesn't care or has little in the means of funding. And they're fine for AMVs. But don't you believe for a second that anyone can take their PC AMV knowledge and apply it to the real professional world of editing. In the professional world we use Macs, we don't use 99% of the effects provided with a software package, and we almost NEVER cut to the beat.

And 24fps is the reality. Aproximations are pointless.

-N

jonmartensen · Post by **jonmartensen** » Tue Feb 25, 2003 5:48 pm

I personally don't care that "pros" use macs, that is not the kind of argument that persuades me to think macs are better for video editing.

Other arguments do, though. PC's get much more power for the money, from what I can see. But when you go beyond the basic hardware from "popular/common" manufacturers and look at the high end products, Macs win out on processing video in a high quallity format. I don't know about 3d rendering in a networked setup. I think PC's do rather well nowdays.

I just wanted to say that, "The big dogs do it" or "MAc is just generally accepted bythe Professional community as better" is not a good argument. So it's true, that doesn't make it a good argument.