[jaquarat]

i want to get a powerbook for some light final cut pro video editing. of course i'd rather have the 128 video card, but since that option is only available on the 1.67 model, would i be losing any fcp performance by getting the stock 1.5 model with the 64 video card and thereby saving myself $250-$350??? does the 128 video card contribute significantly to final cut pro???

thanks!

[R3z]

The price difference between the 1.5 and 1.67 is the superdrive, not the processor - add a superdrive to the 1.5 and the difference goes down to less than $150. Honestly though, you're not likely to see the difference between those processors, unless I'm missing something beyond clock speed. You're also not going to see the difference in the video cards, I'm reasonably sure FCP has minimal interaction with the video card. If you wanna game, get the 128mb card, otherwise don't bother.

Here's my recommendation for a solid editing machine:

• 1.5ghz processor - 1.5 will be plenty fast
• 100GB hd - video takes a LOT of space and this one is a pain to upgrade
• 1 gb of memory - 2x512 will do the trick, by the time you need to upgrade cost will have dropped anyway.
• Combo OR Superdrive - this one's your pick. If you want a complete, start to finish authoring machine, go with the superdrive. If you're poor, go with the combo. This, again, is a pain to upgrade if you decide to.
• 64mb graphics card - No need for anything better than this
• Applecare! - You're batsh*t crazy if you don't get it on the powerbook. 3 day turnaround if you do, $600+ parts if you don't.

Right now I've got a 1.25 w/512mb, combo drive, and a 60gb hd, as well as a 64mb radeon card. Never have a problem with the processor or the Vram, and rarely with the system memory - the two things I kick myself over is the HD and the lack of a superdrive. I got this system a year and a half ago now, and it's been a champ, but those two things I wish I'd taken care of earlier. I've done a reasonable amount of semi-professional editing, and the system performs as well as I could like. That configuration will run you $2,250 (not counting applecare or the superdrive) according to the Apple store, but it should last you a while before you need an upgrade.

[JKT]

Bzzzt - if you want the best performance out of all the video goodies that are going to be on offer in Tiger (and eventually in updates to apps like FCP and iMovie etc in the coming years), then definitely get the 128MB upgrade *if* you can.

Could you remove the Superdrive option from the 1.67GHz version to get the costs back down (if you don't need a DVD burner, that is)?

[R3z]

If Apple starts building an operating system that requires 128mb of vram "for best performance", it better not look like aqua. To *require* a radeon 9700 w/128mb to get the best performance would call for a fully 3d, texture mapped/bump mapped environment, and I'll grant you Aqua is nice, but if they don't give me something a lot better than that when they start requiring 128mb vram I might have to jump ship. This is the OS you're talking about here buddy, and even iMovie and FCP are editing programs, not 3d rendering systems. If they can't make either of those use less than 128mb vram, they're missing the point.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by R3z:
If Apple starts building an operating system that requires 128mb of vram "for best performance", it better not look like aqua. To *require* a radeon 9700 w/128mb to get the best performance would call for a fully 3d, texture mapped/bump mapped environment, and I'll grant you Aqua is nice, but if they don't give me something a lot better than that when they start requiring 128mb vram I might have to jump ship. This is the OS you're talking about here buddy, and even iMovie and FCP are editing programs, not 3d rendering systems. If they can't make either of those use less than 128mb vram, they're missing the point.

Of course, Tiger ships soon, and alot of FCP types like to run dual screen and/or Motion.

I'd go for the 128 MB 9700 if you plan on using Motion, or if you want to use an external screen.

[porieux]

Originally posted by R3z:
If Apple starts building an operating system that requires 128mb of vram "for best performance", it better not look like aqua. To *require* a radeon 9700 w/128mb to get the best performance would call for a fully 3d, texture mapped/bump mapped environment, and I'll grant you Aqua is nice, but if they don't give me something a lot better than that when they start requiring 128mb vram I might have to jump ship. This is the OS you're talking about here buddy, and even iMovie and FCP are editing programs, not 3d rendering systems. If they can't make either of those use less than 128mb vram, they're missing the point.

Nobody said anything about *requiring* it.

[R3z]

*shrug* You're gonna do what you're gonna do. FCP won't be an issue on either system. Motion is a bit more gpu intensive, true, but then again we're starting to enter a realm where if you need that kind of power, a G5 may serve your interests better. Remember, we're talking budget here as well, and I think on an editing machine the $300 for the faster processor and larger card would be better spent on the larger HD and more memory.

[jamil5454]

Since Tiger is going to be offloading ALL graphics processing to the GPU, I wouldn't skimp on VRAM. Expose uses a significant amount of VRAM to run smoothly and any type gaming or 3d modeling will be limited by a 64mb card. If you're going for dual monitors, which is helpful for FCP, I would definitely get the 128mb option. After all, if you get the 64mb option, you're stuck with that for the rest of the PowerBook's life. There's no upgrading the VRAM.

[R3z]

Originally posted by jamil5454:
Since Tiger is going to be offloading ALL graphics processing to the GPU, I wouldn't skimp on VRAM. Expose uses a significant amount of VRAM to run smoothly and any type gaming or 3d modeling will be limited by a 64mb card. If you're going for dual monitors, which is helpful for FCP, I would definitely get the 128mb option. After all, if you get the 64mb option, you're stuck with that for the rest of the PowerBook's life. There's no upgrading the VRAM.

Wow, just checked Apple's site, and you're right, that's pretty much what core graphics is. In that case, the 128mb vram does deserve consideration, and you're right, the rest can be upgraded later. The only other part i'd really suggest is the 100gb hd, because that's a huge pain/cost to upgrade, and if you've done video, you know it's necessary...

[jamil5454]

Thanks for boosting my confidence. You really didn't have to.

[JKT]

Originally posted by R3z:
If Apple starts building an operating system that requires 128mb of vram "for best performance", it better not look like aqua. To *require* a radeon 9700 w/128mb to get the best performance would call for a fully 3d, texture mapped/bump mapped environment, and I'll grant you Aqua is nice, but if they don't give me something a lot better than that when they start requiring 128mb vram I might have to jump ship. This is the OS you're talking about here buddy, and even iMovie and FCP are editing programs, not 3d rendering systems. If they can't make either of those use less than 128mb vram, they're missing the point.

My point was more to do with the Core Video real-time graphics effects that are going to be available to applications come Tiger - these will run best with more VRAM. The Aqua UI isn't going to need 128MB VRAM, but as the original poster mentioned running FCP, which will undoubtedly get the benefits of Core Video built into it in the future, then the 128MB VRAM option would be a worthwhile upgrade - not essential, but highly desirable.

FWIW, assuming you have a powerful enough Mac/Video card right now, you can get a preview of what I mean by downloading the free 30 day trial of Motion from the Apple web site and applying the various effects to video footage or stills - simply awesome is how I would describe what to expect in Tiger.