My personal opinion (not speaking as an Adobe employee) is that I like Mac laptops but I prefer non-Mac desktops for serious work. The main reason that I prefer my HP tower at home to my Mac tower at work is because I'm able to cram a lot more RAM into the HP tower.
We've got an HP tower with 96GB of RAM. RAM previews are quite long with that machine.
My laptop is a Mac running Bootcamp so that I can switch between Windows and Mac OS; I just use this for simple video work.
For After Effects, the priorities are RAM, multiple fast CPUs, and multiple fast local disk drives, in that order. The graphics card doesn't matter so much. For Premiere Pro, the priorities are a bit different, with the video card choices being both more limited and more important for optimum performance. I'll leave it to others on this forum to dive into the Premiere Pro details.
and leaving out the most important part
Apple= NO MPE
> and leaving out the most important part
Apple= NO MPE
Why do you say that?
First, a terminology clarification: The term 'Mercury playback engine' refers to the whole set of performance improvements for playback and rendering in Premeire Pro CS5. This includes mutlithreading, the 64-bit address space, and the CUDA acceleration of effects.
So, are you just referring to the last component? Even if so, there are video cards for Mac computers that provide the CUDA acceleration.
to me MPE= cuda acceleration/faster renders
but yes thats what i meant..
the only available card for Apple is now the 4800 (and a complete waste of $)
add to that Apples in ablity to corerctly multi-thread and i can NOT recoomend Apple for anyone using Adobe.
i wish i could because my Apple sales are suffering from it.
My 17" MacBookPro has a discrete 512mb nvidia, so I would assume this supports CUDA.
(Actually, it does puzzle me why Apple chose Radion for their recent refresh of the iMac desktops, given that CUDA is an nvidia concept, well as I understand it.)
Are your concerns about the Mac's effective use of several cores and CUDA due to MacOS or the Mac hardware itself. If it is MacOS then one would hope for upgrades to improve this, including for Grand Central Dispatch thread handling blocks being available to developers of multithreaded apps.
In the meantime, while we wait for those, could I assume that bootcamp Windows might make better use of these resources, assuming that Windows is ahead of MacOS in these respects? Could I therefore assume that bootcamp Windows on a Mac is effectively a PC (assuming that the Windows drivers for Mac hardware are capable of utilising multi-core threading optimally and CUDA?)
If so then I would be swaying to the Windows platform for Adobe - also given that I could run it on custom-built desktop at some point in the future -with optimal hardware of my choosing, taking advantage of the 2 installs for one user allowance on the license.
>512mb nvidia, so I would assume
Based on other messages, that is a wrong assumption... CUDA/MPE on nVidia requires more memory than that... I don't remember if it is minimum 1Gig or 768M... but for sure more than 512M
> CUDA/MPE on nVidia requires more memory than that... I don't remember if it is minimum 1Gig or 768M... but for sure more than 512M
The minimum is 768MB. And more is better. See the end of this post for a concrete example of what more memory means.
@John T Smith: Are you sure? I doubt that statement for CUDA (can't speak for MPE yet)...
My MacBookPro has the following graphics card which DOES have CUDA according to NVidia themselves: http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gt_330m_us.html
The link you stated mentions a camera with a very high resolution beyond full true HD.
"For example, one image size from a Canon T2i is 5184×3456. Doing the math, this requires 1,094MB, which just exceeds the 1GB available on the Quadro FX 3800, but is still within the 1.5GB of the Quadro FX 4800."
Assuming I only wish to work with full true HD of 1920x1080p, then number of pixels that this takes up is just under 12% of the quoted camera above and therefore perhaps I could assume it would fit inside my graphics card memory? And if so then CUDA is possible - and possibly MPE - but someone with more knowledge about MPE would have to confirm that.
1920x1080 = 2073600
5184 * 3456 = 17915904
2073600 / 17915904 = 0.12 (2d.p) = 12% of the size.
> @John T Smith: Are you sure? I doubt that statement for CUDA (can't speak for MPE yet)...
There's a difference between a card having CUDA technology and a card being supported by Premiere Pro CS5 (5.0.1) for CUDA acceleration of effects. The 330M is in the former category but not the latter.
We are being very careful about fully testing cards before we declare them as "supported". We have also publicly announced that we are doing perodic updates that will support more cards. We even stated that among the cards supported by the next update will be some Fermi cards.
I won't now comment about whether the 330M will be supported in a future release. But I can say that it isn't supported in the current version.
Regarding the size of images being larger than HD frames: It's common to use images larger than your final frame size---e.g., for panning across the image. A still image that is 4 or 5 thousand pixels across is not large in terms of common back plates, etc.
Thanks for enlighting me about the resolutions.
Given these facts, at the moment I would say that a PC platform is the choice for running heavy duty Adobe Applications on a desktop. With desktop PC hardware, the user has complete control over specification and can choose Adobe supported hardware such as certain graphics cards.
Without this currently supported graphics hardware, would I be correct in saying that the Adobe Production Premium will still fully run, with all features available but not as fast?
If that's the case then running the Adobe Production Premium on a MacBookPro via vmware/parallels or bootcamp, the latter being the more optimal, would still be possible and with all features available? (This would be my second workstation for this Production Suite, with the desktop being the primary, as the Adobe license allows 2 installs for 1 user running only 1 install at a time).
Also, the Adobe representative on the telephone said that I could pay the (lower) upgrade cost to upgrade from Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 to Production Premium. i.e. the upgrade cost from Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 also applies to 1.5? Please confirm. On the Adobe website it is not completely clear about the versioning, if I remember, the US site lists 1.5 as starting point for upgrade whereas in the UK it does not.
One more question, presumably Adobe Production Premium requires 64bit Windows? Is Windows7 64bit home sufficient?
Thanks for all your advice.
Software MPE works without a supported (or hacked) nVidia card... Hardware MPE is faster
We are mostly users here, so I don't know if anyone can confirm upgrade pricing
I have Win7 64bit Pro for CS5, you might check the Adobe system requirements page to see if it mentions the Home version
yes home is supported must be 64bit but i recommend Pro, as Home is limited to 16gig ram.
as i understand it you can upgrade from any version of premier as well as many other products.
better to buy from an Adobe reseller (at least in the US) its less$
> We are mostly users here, so I don't know if anyone can confirm upgrade pricing
Even the Adobe employees on this forum will avoid commenting on pricing. You have to talk with sales folks and rely on the information on the Adobe Store website for that information.