[tears2040]

My current Mac is a
2007 MBP
Intel Core Duo 2.2ghz
4gb Ram
Nvidia 8600 128mb
7200 rpm HD

My computer runs flawless and has never had any problems but it's time for an upgrade. My profession is Recording HD Video and editing on Final Cut Pro. I would like a faster computer to help with rendering times, effects and just overall better performance. Ideally I would love to get the new MBP 17" but that is out of my price range. I have a budget of $1500-$1600 Max and that is with me selling some blood and half of my kidney ( )

So in actuality I would like to keep it around Max $1300-1450. Now with all of that out of the way, which would be a better computer than the one I have now and worth the $$


Looking at the Apple Refurbished Store here are my thoughts

$1529 + tax
iMac 27" Quad Core i5 2.66ghz
Refurbished iMac 27-inch 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5 - Apple Store (U.S.)


$1529 + tax
MacBook Pro 15.4" i5 2.4ghz
Refurbished MacBook Pro 2.4GHz Intel Core i5 - Apple Store (U.S.)




Or should I just go with the new released iMacs ( Base Model )
$1399
imac 21.5" 3.06ghz i3 with 8gbs of ram
Configure - Apple Store (U.S.)




So yeah these are my thoughts so please help me out anyone. Is the new i3 iMac worth it or should I just get the older imac which has a quad core i5 for like $200 more even though it's refurbished? At the end of the day any of these computers will be faster than my Core 2 duo 2.2ghz MBP. What I will miss from my MBP is the pcmi slot which I use for memory cards, esata, more firewire etc.

THANKS

[P]

The Core i5 iMac is the fastest machine by far. It's certainly twice the raw performance of the MBP, and significantly faster than the dualcore i3 model for what you are doing with it. Even with the higher price, I would opt for that model.

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by P 

The Core i5 iMac is the fastest machine by far. It's certainly twice the raw performance of the MBP, and significantly faster than the dualcore i3 model for what you are doing with it. Even with the higher price, I would opt for that model.

Thank You for the reply. I have another question though, what is the main difference between this older i5 quad core and the newer iMac quad cores? The only difference I see is the graphics card, is this correct?


Thanks for the future help

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by P 

The Core i5 iMac is the fastest machine by far. It's certainly twice the raw performance of the MBP, and significantly faster than the dualcore i3 model for what you are doing with it. Even with the higher price, I would opt for that model.

It may technically have twice the raw performance due to having twice the cores, but it's important to keep in mind that quad cores will only speed up multitasking and multithreaded operations. Single tasks will not see nearly as much of a speed increase over the MBP.

I'd go with the MBP myself. It may not be quite as powerful, but portability is extremely handy and something which should not be underestimated. Also, the MBP is a lot easier to open up and swap out components such as the hard drive. SSDs have been slowly, but steadily decreasing in price, and in a couple of years they will probably enter into the realm where most people will be able to consider them affordable. An SSD will provide far more noticeable a speed boost than a faster processor will.

Just my two cents.

[Veltliner]

A 27" screen will give a much better work environment for the rather extensive use of screen real estate by Final Cut Pro.

The OP didn't mention that portability was of major importance.

[Veltliner]

I would consider a refurb Mac Pro. Definitely the best choice for video editing.

Sometimes it's better to go over budget but to get what your really need. A compromise will send you back to the store much sooner.

[tears2040]

Apologize for not stating whether portability was important or not. With that said what are the thought on me upgrading my current MBP to 6gbs of ram instead of my 4 and upgrading my internal 7200 rpm hard drive to an SSL one?


My computer is used for 50% internet, itunes, email, etc. And the other half for video editing Hd footage. My 2.2ghz MBP is a good computer so will upgrading the HD be better? When bouncing down 5 minute projects or converting files I see my cpu limit is like around 85%, so that was my reasoning for assuming that I needed a computer with a faster/better processor to ease the load on my poor laptop.


Thank you everyone for replying to this thread and hopefully the contributions can continue

peace

[shabbasuraj]

HD video crunching, with your budget? Go iMac.

[P]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

It may technically have twice the raw performance due to having twice the cores, but it's important to keep in mind that quad cores will only speed up multitasking and multithreaded operations. Single tasks will not see nearly as much of a speed increase over the MBP.

The MBP doesn't have an integrated memory controller. That makes a huge difference on some code, and the fact that the iMac cache is twice as big means that the boost on single-threaded code will be quite significant as well. Looking at what the OP does and benches like this, the quadcore iMac is simply the standout choice.

Also check out some of the comparisons of the quadocre iMacs with old MPs (before Nehalem) to see how big that gain is.

[tears2040]

Revisiting this thread, I just came back from the store today to further along my purchasing process and noticed that I did not like the 27" monitor at all. It is simply to big for my needs. I edit all of my Hd Videos on a 15.4" laptop and the 27" is just too big. I also have a personal 24" monitor on my desk which I can connect to my MBP for dual screen hd editing, but like I said I really don't like big sceen monitors.

I had a Mac Book 13" for many years and just got use to that size. When I bought a 15.4" it took some time to get used too. So after all of this I am now thinking about buying the imac 21.5", not because it's as powerful as an i5 ( I know it isn't ) but because of the screen size & price.

I can get an Imac i3 3.06 with 8gbs of ram and 3 year apple warranty for like $1350 after taxes, that to me is a great deal. I would just use external firewire 800 drives for editing.

Thoughts?

[P]

You get used to the bigger screen quite quickly, though, but sure, you save a lot of money by going with the 21.5".

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by tears2040 

...half for video editing Hd footage. My 2.2ghz MBP is a good computer so will upgrading the HD be better? When boncing down 5 minute ...
peace

note that video editing will take advantage of multiple cores during the life of a new box.

IMO one goes to the expense and hassle of major upgrading only when it becomes absolutely cost effective - - and one then makes a very substantial upgrade. In your current example HD video that IMO would be i7, which in an iMac exceeds your budget and forces you into a non-upgradable 27" glossy display (which many image pros including me find unacceptable) when you already own a 24" display.

I suggest staying with your MBP. Seriously consider an OWC SSD upgrade into the opticald drive slot as well as a 7200 rpm HD. Then keep an eye out for the rare Mac Pro bargain or hope that Minis evolve to
offer i-series processors. Or wait to look at next generation MBPs.

[tears2040]

I do not like the Glossy screen of the Imac, but the truth is my Computer when rendering, burning dvds, etc. Is just taking too long. Looking at Activity Monitor my CPU even gets all the way to 89% usage. Even though I probably won't like the Imacs screen I might have to buy it anyways to speed up my work process because my slow MBP is costing me Time which = $$


Maybe when I get some more money I can sell the Imac and Buy a MP like I really want in the first place

[P]

If you really feel that you need a faster computer now for your work, then buy the i5 quadcore iMac, or even an i7. An i3 is too small of an update on your current machine, but Sandy Bridge (the next gen Intel CPU) will prove to be a nice update for what you do. If you can't afford the quad now, wait six months.

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by P 

If you really feel that you need a faster computer now for your work, then buy the i5 quadcore iMac, or even an i7. An i3 is too small of an update on your current machine, but Sandy Bridge (the next gen Intel CPU) will prove to be a nice update for what you do. If you can't afford the quad now, wait six months.

Sandy Bridge?


I tested my MBP through Geekbench and got a 3009 overall score. I tested Geekbench on a iMac i3 at Best Buy and it got like 5800-5900 range. Based on that score alone it seems like it is twice as fast?

I currently shoot Hd Video on a HDSLR and convert all files to Pro Res. So when working with cuts, fades etc. there are no render times on my clips but as soon as I start adding heavy color correction ( Magic Bullet) that's when I have to render and sometimes it becomes a mission.

My final projects on average are 4-6 minutes and it takes about 50-60 minutes to render in 1080p H.264 Files. I need to find a way to shorten that, heck even if I get it at 30-35 mins I would be happy. I need basically a GURU to tell me what computer would achieve this for me even if I have to spend more money. My business started very small and it's growing and I want to be prepared


* I cannot wait 6 months I need a new computer like Yesterday and I will be buying one very soon ( as soon as I get my next pay check ; 2 weeks )

Thanks

[hyteckit]

Get the iMac i5 if you can afford it.

The 27" is huge and does take time to get use to.

I got a new 21.5" iMac i3 and I'm loving it. It's going to be much faster than a MBP or Mac Mini.


Honestly, I would suggest an iMac i3 and attach your 24" LCD to it. I personally prefer 2 screens, but maybe you might want 1 big screen.


You might also want to check out the Elgato Turbo H.264 if you plan on encoding lots of things to H.264 files.

[P]

Sandy Bridge is the next generation of Intel's CPUs. The current generation is a bit split - the biggest improvement with the current design over the Core 2 design was the integrated memory controller. That is the reason for the big speed jump on certain tasks, such as video encoding. Unfortunately, the dualcore Intel models of this generation do not have the integrated memory controller - only the quads and up do have it. This is the reason that a quadcore model can be more than twice as fast as a dual on certain tasks. Given your workload, that integrated memory controller would really help a lot. Sandy Bridge will bring the integrated memory controller to the duals (as well as some other candy) so lowers the price of entry for getting that IMC, which I why I suggested maybe waiting.

You can search geekbench results in their online database. The i7 iMac is much faster than the i3, and the i5 quadcore is also a quite big step up from the dualcores. Your MBP is likely hobbled by the memory size and speed in this test. For fun, compare these test results with MPs - current, but especially from a few years back.

Caveat emptor that geekbench only tests CPU and memory subsystem, but the iMacs all have the same HD (WD Black, which is rather nice) and this test is quite relevant to what you're doing anyway.

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by P 

Sandy Bridge is the next generation of Intel's CPUs. The current generation is a bit split - the biggest improvement with the current design over the Core 2 design was the integrated memory controller. That is the reason for the big speed jump on certain tasks, such as video encoding. Unfortunately, the dualcore Intel models of this generation do not have the integrated memory controller - only the quads and up do have it. This is the reason that a quadcore model can be more than twice as fast as a dual on certain tasks. Given your workload, that integrated memory controller would really help a lot. Sandy Bridge will bring the integrated memory controller to the duals (as well as some other candy) so lowers the price of entry for getting that IMC, which I why I suggested maybe waiting.

You can search geekbench results in their online database. The i7 iMac is much faster than the i3, and the i5 quadcore is also a quite big step up from the dualcores. Your MBP is likely hobbled by the memory size and speed in this test. For fun, compare these test results with MPs - current, but especially from a few years back.

Caveat emptor that geekbench only tests CPU and memory subsystem, but the iMacs all have the same HD (WD Black, which is rather nice) and this test is quite relevant to what you're doing anyway.

Thank you for the info.

Yeah the i7 is ferocious in that geekbench score, 3x faster than my MBP and 1.5X faster than the Imac i3.

The i3 averages close to 6000 while this i7 close to 10,000 and my MBP 2700-3000

i3 = 1200+ tax
i7 = 1999+ tax

While the i7 is better IMO it's not worth the $800 more over the imac i3. I can find last years i7 for like 1699+ tax but even still for even at $500 more than a Imac i3 it still not worth it to me. The most I would have paid was $300-$400 more.

What I will do with that extra $300-$400.......I can buy Ram, an Hd and possibly even have some money left over for an external Blu Ray Drive.

I don't know man I would love to buy an i7 but I simply cannot afford it... Heck even the $1200 price tag of the imac i3 is very expensive. I am just starting my business but hopefully I can grom and in the future buy something better, but as of now I think I will get the i3 and down the road get something better

thank you everyone

[Waragainstsleep]

If you go iMac, I would spend the extra $150 and get the bigger screen and the i5 with its extra cores. Don't forget the i5 has Turbo Boost where the i3 doesn't so even on single threaded apps the i5 is going to clock up to almost the same as the i3.

Go for the refurb i5 27", then swap in an SSD in a year or two when they are cheaper, bigger and faster.

[hyteckit]

Go with this:

iMac 3.06GHz i3 21.5"
4 GB upgrade module for 8GB total - about $100
Elgato Turbo H.264 hardware for H.264 encoding - about $100

Use your existing 24" LCD for dual display.

Pretty much my setup right now.


Elgato Turbo.264 HD

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Go with this:

iMac 3.06GHz i3 21.5"
4 GB upgrade module for 8GB total - about $100
Elgato Turbo H.264 hardware for H.264 encoding - about $100

Use your existing 24" LCD for dual display.

Pretty much my setup right now.


Elgato Turbo.264 HD

+1 This is EXACTLY what I am going to buy.

Also I repeat once again that I do not like the 27" screen, to big to sit in front of for long hours of editing. Also I don't care about turbo boost with the i5. The imac i3 is insanely fast at 3.06ghz. Let me mention as well that the imac has hyper threading which acts like two more additional virtual cores mimicking a quad core.


So yeah once again thanks everyone for the replies I'm 99% sure I'm going with the 3.06 Imac i3

[tears2040]

I have a question regarding the Elgato Turbo.

How is it that you can use it with Final Cut Pro?

Thanks

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by tears2040 

I have a question regarding the Elgato Turbo.

How is it that you can use it with Final Cut Pro?

Thanks

You might want to ask that question on the elgato forums or search for reviews.

EyeTV Lounge • Index page

Just letting you know there are complaints about audio sync issues with the hardware encoding.


The hardware accelerator can accelerate any software that uses quicktime to export to H.264.

Elgato Turbo.264 HD Input Device Review | Macworld

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

You might want to ask that question on the elgato forums or search for reviews.

EyeTV Lounge • Index page

Just letting you know there are complaints about audio sync issues with the hardware encoding.


The hardware accelerator can accelerate any software that uses quicktime to export to H.264.

Elgato Turbo.264 HD Input Device Review | Macworld

Thanks, don;t mean to keep bumping this thread but just trying to get all of the information I need. Since I do a lot of narrative work the audio synch issue would be a problem, a HUGE problem. Regardless thank you everyone for posting in this thread and helping me form a decision


peace