[samsontan]

Contemplating to buy a mb2.4ghz or a mb pro 2.4ghz?[

My Usage:
1. photo editing - photoshop
2. bit of games,
3. standard usage
and.. my main query is whether the 2.4ghz mb can support final cut pro video editing.

Other than the screen size, wrist rest space difference and no firewire..
Please comment. Difference in price is about US$ 500.

[redhot_nyc]

Neither. Refurbished MB Pro....

....or a refurbished MacBook and a gaming PC

Your money.

[OreoCookie]

If you need to use Motion, you need to buy a MacBook Pro. If you only want to use Final Cut, then a new MacBook will work. The old white MacBook will not work. However, the lack of FireWire might be a show stopper since you probably need it to import video. FWIW Apple offers Final Cut Express 4 (a cut-down version of FC Pro) as an add-on when you buy a MacBook.

Photoshop does not benefit from a faster graphics card. If you don't play graphics intensive games, that should be fine, too. Note that the MacBook Pro uses the same graphics chipset as the MacBook in energy saver mode. If you compare the performance in a store, make sure to switch to the more powerful graphics chip, otherwise all of the perceived performance difference is just a placebo

In any case, you should upgrade the RAM to 4 GB (doesn't have to be Apple RAM, the usual retailers have cheap RAM kits).

[samsontan]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

If you need to use Motion, you need to buy a MacBook Pro. If you only want to use Final Cut, then a new MacBook will work. The old white MacBook will not work. However, the lack of FireWire might be a show stopper since you probably need it to import video. FWIW Apple offers Final Cut Express 4 (a cut-down version of FC Pro) as an add-on when you buy a MacBook.

Photoshop does not benefit from a faster graphics card. If you don't play graphics intensive games, that should be fine, too. Note that the MacBook Pro uses the same graphics chipset as the MacBook in energy saver mode. If you compare the performance in a store, make sure to switch to the more powerful graphics chip, otherwise all of the perceived performance difference is just a placebo

In any case, you should upgrade the RAM to 4 GB (doesn't have to be Apple RAM, the usual retailers have cheap RAM kits).

It's a bit of a juggle for me. Since I'm considering which mac to buy to support my on and off interest in video editing.. But I still can do my video-editing coursework in my college though which is not much of a 'need' to do it at home. Yet having a machine at home that can do any random personal video is pretty cool as well.. hmm

I would like to save as much as I can though, but I'll definitely go for alternative of 4GB memory.

[OreoCookie]

Well, if you are starved for money, you can always check the refurb section of the Apple store. Now is a good time to get an old-style MacBook Pro for about the same price as a new high-end MacBook.

If you are not into video editing professionally and you're sure you don't need FireWire to import video, you will do fine with a MacBook. The other big advantage is that it's very light (lighter than the 12" PowerBook).

[samsontan]

I would love to get one macbook pro but the price difference is 500 man... I'm still contemplating.

I still can import videos without a firewire port right? Just the conventional USB.. well maybe it takes more time waiting for HD footage

[kylef]

Yep, conventional USB or even network can transfer all your files. Define "bit of games" please!

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by samsontan 

I would love to get one macbook pro but the price difference is 500 man... I'm still contemplating.

No, refurb MacBook Pros cost as much as the high-end MacBook.

Originally Posted by samsontan 

I still can import videos without a firewire port right? Just the conventional USB.. well maybe it takes more time waiting for HD footage

On most `better' camcorders, you cannot import videos via USB, only via FireWire directly from the camera. So it may be necessity. Check the video equipment you'd want to use first. Otherwise you have to use another computer to put the videos onto your harddrive.

[samsontan]

Originally Posted by kylef 

Yep, conventional USB or even network can transfer all your files. Define "bit of games" please!

How about the latest NFS. Can the new highest-spec macbook play it, or at least do good enough graphics to satisfy a nominal gamer like myself?

[samsontan]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

If you need to use Motion, you need to buy a MacBook Pro. If you only want to use Final Cut, then a new MacBook will work. The old white MacBook will not work. However, the lack of FireWire might be a show stopper since you probably need it to import video. FWIW Apple offers Final Cut Express 4 (a cut-down version of FC Pro) as an add-on when you buy a MacBook.

In any case, are you saying that it is not advisable to use the final cut pro on a macbook even being high-end?

I guess i don't mind the hassle of having to transfer to a another intermediary and then to my hard drive. I'm just want to know whether it lags to an extent that it is being a nuisance or "hangs" while using such an app like FCP.

[samsontan]

i'm not in the US can't buy refurbished.. either way, I try to avoid it because of fear of a bad experience.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by samsontan 

In any case, are you saying that it is not advisable to use the final cut pro on a macbook even being high-end?

That has nothing to do with Final Cut or cpu power, it's just a question of whether you need a certain interface to transfer your files directly. Final Cut doesn't care how you got your files, as long as they are in a format it can work with.

[samsontan]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

That has nothing to do with Final Cut or cpu power, it's just a question of whether you need a certain interface to transfer your files directly. Final Cut doesn't care how you got your files, as long as they are in a format it can work with.

I've had the experience of using Sony mini-camcoder. Its one of the latest.. Well that was middle of this year and it was so troublesome. I had to install the software in order to just upload the videos.. well it was on usb so its still ok.

Yes I understand your point that without a firewire port is a show stopper. Yeah, like i said. I'm not too concern on transferring and the whole issue of transferring.. Since it can be done by importing to a machine and later transfer it to my mB. Slightly more tedious manner though..

Oh. Thank you for the comments, keep 'em coming! appreciate it

[kylef]

Originally Posted by samsontan 

How about the latest NFS. Can the new highest-spec macbook play it, or at least do good enough graphics to satisfy a nominal gamer like myself?

I think that the chart Apple showed in the notebook expo confirmed that the 9400m was 55% as powerful as the 8600m GT. Based on that, I'd question its true performance. However, Apple's MacBook 'Graphics' Page does show screenshots of Carbon at beyond-respectable playing levels. I'm afraid I can't give any you personal comments as I've given up gaming altogether (hence the MacBook!) But Minesweeper? All high settings.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Photoshop does not benefit from a faster graphics card.

Does now.

[Cloud]

I just picked up the new MBP with the upgraded 2.8 processor, 4GB of RAM and 320 hd. If there was a 17" new design I would have gotten that, but because my needs for school can't really wait I decided to just get the 15" now and maybe consider getting an external monitor in the future.

All in all I'm happy, however, once I start using my graphic programs on it once they are all installed I will surely feel the need for more visual space for my palettes, thus looking into an external monitor.

I think that if you really need the processing power and the graphic intensive programs then go for the MBP. Otherwise for music, internet, little photoshop, size, MS Office and so forth, get the MB.

[samsontan]

Originally Posted by Cloud 

I think that if you really need the processing power and the graphic intensive programs then go for the MBP. Otherwise for music, internet, little photoshop, size, MS Office and so forth, get the MB.

Well, if i do get the mbp i will only be going for the basic specs of mbp with an upgrade of 4gb ram (at most). That's as far as I go. Comparing the specs with the high-end mb.. would still turn out to be the same thing. Discounting the luxury of having a larger screen size..

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Does now.

Photoshop CS4 utilizes the gpu for a few select things (moving, zooming and panning, rotating for the most part) and I have yet to see benchmarks showing that the performance is better with gpu than without gpu (i. e. calculated on the cpu just like in CS3).

[issa]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Photoshop CS4 utilizes the gpu for a few select things (moving, zooming and panning, rotating for the most part) and I have yet to see benchmarks showing that the performance is better with gpu than without gpu (i. e. calculated on the cpu just like in CS3).

This relates to a conversation that began in a different thread after I opened my big mouth and praised the implementation of GPU acceleration in Photoshop CS4. The new OpenGL/GPU features, which are only available when GPU acceleration is turned on, impacted and streamlined working with images enough in my estimate that I gained the perception that the whole program was performing better. That's when OreoCookie stepped up to become the voice of reason and suggest that GPU acceleration only affects a limited set of tools that are related to image navigation. Intrigued, I offered to run a few quick benchmark tests to see how this panned out. And I did, even though work became so busy that I never did start the separate thread about PS CS4 as intended.

Basically, I ran the same set of tests (1) in PS CS4 with the accelerated features turned ON, (2) in PS CS4 with the accelerated features turned OFF, and (3) in PS CS3. These tests included applying filters -- including the rendering of lighting effects and lens flare, as well as various blur effects -- opening, resizing and more. I first used a 139 MB file and then repeated it all again with a 559 MB file just to push things harder.

Well, without going into details, the results on typical tasks in PS CS4 were almost exactly the same with or without the accelerated features turned on. And, the results were almost exactly the same in PS CS3. So, with the exception of the features that OreoCookie notes, (moving, zooming and panning, rotating for the most part), there was no perceptible difference.

That's not to say that the GPU accelerated features of PS CS4 don't impact and improve my work efficiency. The animated zoom, panning and other interface features alone make for a better experience, as does the rotate by hand feature. For example, in my limited tests, I found that I can pan from one end of a large object I was working on, (one that is much larger than the screen), to the other in less than half the time it takes with the acceleration turned off or in CS3. But, for the same tasks as we had in CS3, CS4 is no faster -- or, thankfully, slower.

Sorry to derail the thread momentarily. Closer to being on topic, I would venture that PS CS3 or CS4 would benefit from the dedicated GPU in the MBP. And you'll definitely want 4GB of RAM for the video and image work that you want to do.

[samsontan]

Thanks issa. Yep definitely going for a 4gb memory.
I'm beginning to have a clearer understanding of what I want, thanks to you all as well.

I heard that while importing videos into the machine any less than a firewire, may incur frame dropping (a condition by which audio and video doesn't go consistent).. Is this true? But if i import it to a machine with firewire then later USB to my Hardrive and later to my mb.. Will the same problem (dropped frames) occur?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by issa 

This relates to a conversation that began in a different thread after I opened my big mouth and praised the implementation of GPU acceleration in Photoshop CS4. The new OpenGL/GPU features, which are only available when GPU acceleration is turned on, impacted and streamlined working with images enough in my estimate that I gained the perception that the whole program was performing better. That's when OreoCookie stepped up to become the voice of reason and suggest that GPU acceleration only affects a limited set of tools that are related to image navigation. Intrigued, I offered to run a few quick benchmark tests to see how this panned out. And I did, even though work became so busy that I never did start the separate thread about PS CS4 as intended. [whole bunch of tests]

I'm gonna quote you with that
Thanks for trying it out.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by samsontan 

I heard that while importing videos into the machine any less than a firewire, may incur frame dropping (a condition by which audio and video doesn't go consistent).. Is this true? But if i import it to a machine with firewire then later USB to my Hardrive and later to my mb.. Will the same problem (dropped frames) occur?

Nonsense. Frames will only be dropped during playback if the connection is so slow that bitrate of the videos is larger than the throughput. This doesn't matter at all when you copy files. You could do that with USB 1.1 (~ 1 MB/s) or carrier pigeon for that matter, as soon as the files are on your harddrive, you won't be able to see a difference.

[samsontan]

So since I don't have much to worry about importing videos, let's move on to performance while editing still matters to me that it can support the files that i import.. in terms of speed for rendering and other time consuming processes in video editing, comparatively, the lowest macbook and the macbook pro will still go hand in hand with both having the same spec?

Both the highest end macbook and basic mb pro has:
2.4GHz, 250GB, NVIDIA GeForce 9400M or does the mpb has an extra 9600M GT with 256MB?

[tooki]

Pretty much. Only Motion, which is extremely, astonishingly demanding of your graphics card, really calls for the MBP. So if you're not going to use Motion, go for the regular MB, provided that you have a USB-connected camera.

[Maflynn]

My recommendation is to first look at both side by side at apple store. While I think the advice of the MB is solid, you need to be sure the screen quality of the MB is satisfactory. Some people have complained about it being more washed out then the MBP. I own a new MBP and feel its an awesome computer, seeing how the performance is, I probably could have gotten an MB (that is the 9400 GPU is very good for my needs).

[issa]

Originally Posted by Maflynn 

My recommendation is to first look at both side by side at apple store. While I think the advice of the MB is solid, you need to be sure the screen quality of the MB is satisfactory.

I think that's good advice.

Depending on how much you plan to do with Final Cut Pro, it might also be a good idea to compare the screen real estate while you're at it. FCP is bound to feel pretty cramped on either of these 'Books, and you might just find the difference between 1280 x 800 (MB) and 1440 x 900 (MBP) significant.

[issa]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Thanks for trying it out.

My pleasure. Sorry it took me so long to report on my findings.

Actually, it was quite interesting to consciously observe how well a recent-generation MBP handles reasonably large files in either PS CS3 or CS4. (Of course, I was only testing with one file open at a time.) Brings back memories of how applying some of the same filters on smaller files using expensive desktop hardware such as a tricked-out IIfx or Quadra 950 used to try one's patience.

[Jerome]

Screen real estate can be an issue. It is for me and since I'm a broadcast designer, the better graphics and slightly faster available CPU, the MacBook Pro was the obvious choice in my case, I'm axiously waiting for it, 2.8GHz with 320G-7200rpm hd...

[samsontan]

Screen real estate.. interesting point. Depending on how much one will be using all the palette fitting in and in the end bringing a new experience for the user.

USD 400 extra!

[OreoCookie]

Screen estate is not that much of an issue, all you need to do is get an external screen. If you are like me, you have already become addicted to having two screens. Thank you, screen spanning doctor

[samsontan]

How much of a necessity is it purchasing a 4gb RAM setting?

[samsontan]

I think the wider screen and the GPU 9600 GT option is definitely a plus point for me..

250GB Serial ATA @ 5400 - this good enough? I don't plan to expand on size but juggling between 7200 ones..

Don't think I'll be getting anything extra like another display; c'mon, im just a student studying abroad. Don't graduate till 2 years time.
Have to be more considerate to paying guardians Thanks though, OreoCookie.

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Screen estate is not that much of an issue, all you need to do is get an external screen. If you are like me, you have already become addicted to having two screens. Thank you, screen spanning doctor

At home I will be able to hook it to another, bigger screen which will be nice but on the road, I'll appreciate the additional pixels. After Effects is a pain to work with on too small screens.

[samsontan]

Originally Posted by Jerome 

At home I will be able to hook it to another, bigger screen which will be nice but on the road, I'll appreciate the additional pixels. After Effects is a pain to work with on too small screens.

13" and 15" significant?

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by samsontan 

13" and 15" significant?

Well, it's not that much but I think it makes a difference. Note that I have a 30" at work, I'm used to a lot of space, I can't use my girlfriend's 12" Powerbook, and the 13" MacBooks feel a bit on the limit for me, fine for many things but not doing actual work. The best thing would be to go take a look in a store to feel it for yourself. We all have our own opinions on that.

[shrugs*]

Originally Posted by samsontan 

13" and 15" significant?

I went from a 13" MB to a 15" MBP and it was a significant change for me. If it were just display size OR display resolution I don't think it would matter.. but with both I actually find myself not bothering to plug into my 1680x1050 20" in the home office unless I'm doing extensive photo editing.

I haven't used a unibody MB yet, but I vouch for the early 2008 MBP screen demolishing the white MB.

[amazing]

Ars Technica now has a pretty good comparison of the new MB and MBP:

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardw...8-review.ars/1

[Carla V.]

If you are SUPER needy on the pro video editing affair than get the MBP, but I think MB would perform just fine, with a tiny difference on the speed for video editing on the pro level...

[rambo47]

The differences between the MacBook and MacBook Pro used to be much more pronounced. Back in the days of the iBook/PowerBook you couldn't do much more than the basic stuff with an iBook. Any video editing or Photoshop work really made the PowerBook a necessity. But the current MacBook is a very capable machine, great for all but the most extreme graphic-intensive work.