I bought a new 27″ iMac when they went on sale Friday, specifically for video editing. And, because I’ve had a lot of requests recently, I wanted to tell you what I bought and why.
WHAT SIZE IMAC?
I bought: 27″ iMac
All versions of Final Cut Pro and Adobe Premiere like large screen sizes. It allows us to see more of the image with more detail. In my case, because this system is exclusively for video and audio editing, the bigger screen was an easy decision.
I also have a second 27″ Apple monitor sitting unused on a shelf that I want to experiment with. I’ve generally found dual monitor displays at client sites to be more trouble than they are worth. But, I’ve never worked with one for a long period of time, so I’m looking forward to seeing how this new setup works.
However, for my webinars, I use a smaller 21″ Mac, because I find software easier to learn when the screen sizes are kept smaller.
CPU SPEED
I bought: 3.4 GHz, Quad-Core Intel Core i7
CPU speed is important, but it isn’t everything. The speed and connection of your storage play a much bigger role in overall system performance than the CPU. So does the speed of the graphics card.
In the old days, the CPU did all the work. Today, that load is shared between a variety of components. For this reason, I decided to get a fast CPU, but use the money I saved in not buying the fastest CPU to getting faster storage. Especially for multicam work, faster storage provides more benefits than a faster CPU.
Given the speed of today’s processors, just about any CPU is more than fast enough to edit any flavor of HD video.
FUSION DRIVE
I bought: 1 TB Fusion drive
I upgraded to the 1 TB Fusion drive. This new technology from Apple combines the speed of SSD (Solid State Drive) with the storage capacity of standard spinning hard disks.
However, the Fusion drive delivers the fastest speeds when it is accessing the same material over and over. This means that it is optimized for the operating system and applications. Since we are constantly changing media, a Fusion drive won’t delvier the same level of performance with our media.
I have long been a fan of storing media to a separate drive, rather than on the boot drive. In the past, this was primarily for performance reasons. Now, the internal drive is faster, but an external drive allows far more storage and flexibility.
I strongly recommend using an external RAID system, connected via USB 3, or Thunderbolt (more on that in a bit), because it will store more than any single internal drive, provided more than enough speed, protect your data using the data redundancy in the RAID, and allow easy upgrading by simply swapping out devices.
For me, the ideal situation is the Fusion drive for the OS, and an external RAID 5 for all media.
RAM
I bought: 16 GB RAM
I upgraded to 16 GB of RAM. Both Premiere and FCP will use all the RAM you have available. So will video compression software. 16 GB is a nice balance between performance and price. And, unless you are creating some truly massive edits, you won’t notice enough difference between 16 and 32 GB of RAM to justify the additional cost.
GRAPHICS CARD (GPU)
I bought: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX
This was a harder decision. Both Premiere CS6 and Final Cut X take advantage of the graphics card. However, in the CS6 release, Adobe only initially supported the graphics cards in the MacBook Pro. (Traditionally, Adobe only supports nVidia cards and all the Apple gear uses ATI.)
Now that the new iMacs include nVidia, I’m hoping (but do NOT know for sure) that Adobe will quickly support the graphics cards in these new Macs. I’ve sent a note off to my friends at Adobe to see what I can learn and will let you know what I find out.
NOTE: Even if Adobe doesn’t support the graphics cards, Premiere Pro CS6 will run perfectly OK using just the CPU. It won’t do as much, or work as fast as when the graphics card is involved, but you can still use Premiere on these new systems.
This isn’t the fastest GPU that’s available, but it is the second fastest. Again, for me, this was a balance between performance and price. Video editing requires a fast overall system, balanced amongst all the major components.
GPU RAM
I bought: 1 GB GDDRS
The RAM in a graphics card determines how many elements, for example frames of video, it can store for processing.
3D software and Motion makes extensive use of GPU RAM. However, video editors are using it principally for pixel painting. Since I am an editor more than a motion graphics designer, I don’t need the extra GPU RAM. So, I stayed with the base level of 1 GB.
KEYBOARD AND MOUSE
I bought: Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (wired) and mouse (wired)
Wireless gear is great, until your system starts acting up. At which point, you need a wired keyboard for maintenance. Also, there are a number of very useful keyboard shortcuts in all my applications that take advantage of the keypad.
If I were shooting a television commercial, I’d use a wireless keyboard and mouse because it looks cool on camera. Because I am editing television commercials, I’m using a wired keyboard and mouse because they work great, decrease my stress, allows me to easily do maintenance on my system, and don’t require batteries.
EXTERNAL STORAGE
I bought: (um, nothing yet)
Since ProRes 422 is the default video codec of Final Cut Pro X, and a great codec to use for Adobe Premiere, I need storage that is big enough and fast enough to handle this format.
Prores 422 requires about 18 MB/second of data transfer between the computer and storage. Because much of what I shoot is 3-5 camera multicam projects, this means I need to move about 100 MB/second of data.
The problem is that FireWire 800 tops out around 80-85 MB/second. Gigabit Ethernet tops out around 100 MB/second, assuming your switch and server can handle the speeds, and most data switches that cost less than $200 can’t handle that much data over a long period of time.
NOTE: A “switch” is a device that allows multiple computers to connect to the internet or a server by switching data from one device to another. These are made by NetGear, LinkSys, Cisco, and others. A “server” is a computer with a large hard disk or RAID that allows multiple computers to share the same files. Servers can be a simple as a Mac Mini, or as complex as an Avid Isis system.
Larry
This means that I need storage that connects via either USB 3, or Thunderbolt. (This is an iMac, which means that plug-in cards are not an option.) Yes, I could buy converter boxes – for example, from Thunderbolt to eSATA, or mini-SAS, but these boxes cost several hundred dollars apiece. If I were integrating existing hardware, this would be an inexpensive way to go. However, I’m buying all new gear.
It is at this point that I’m puzzled about why storage vendors are having such a hard time shipping RAID 5 Thunderbolt-based storage devices. Yes, Promise Technologies is out there, and they recently dropped their prices. But where are the traditional storage vendors? G-Technology and LaCie both offer RAID 0 (which is fast, but provides no data safety in the event one of the hard drives in the unit dies), but no RAID 5. Drobo was way late in shipping their Thunderbolt storage and I haven’t had a chance to look at the shipping product. And, as far as I know, traditional RAID vendors haven’t even announced RAID 5 storage with Thunderbolt connectivity.
It is troubling to me that this new format is taking so long to take shape and appear in quantity in the market. Is this a licensing issue? Technical or integration issues? Are there hidden problems inherent with the Thunderbolt format that are holding things up? I have been inquiring about this for months and have not gotten a clear answer from any vendor.
So, I decided to hold off buying storage until I could do more research. My iMac is still a month away from shipping, so I have some time to figure this out.
ARCHIVING
I bought: (also, nothing yet)
Long-term data storage, today, means LTO tape. The problem is that all the tape vendors – Cache-A, The Tolis Group, XENDATA – provide solutions much closer to $10,000 than to $2,000.
This is the other big issue in our industry: how do we protect the assets that we shot for 5, 10, 20 years into the future? If you are a major studio, money is no object and there are many solutions. However, if you are an independent producer, or small production company, dollars are hard to come by. There are no good archiving solutions that are reasonably priced.
I spoke with the three founders of Ultrium, the consortium of HP, IBM, and Quantum that invented LTO, about when they expect to provide Thunderbolt-based LTO storage? All three said that they had nothing to announce and the consortium did not have a position on how devices connect to computers.
Again, we could take existing gear – currently costing $7,000 – 9,000 and use Thunderbolt converter boxes to connect it to an iMac, but, this simply takes a unit which is already too expensive and makes it even more unaffordable.
NOTE: The Tolis Group announced yesterday new gear aimed at creative producers. The ArGest line supports both LTO-5 and LTO-6, and the Thunderbolt version, which still requires a converter box, starts at $6,898. (Information about this new product is not yet on their website.)
I’ve said this before and say it again: The LTO vendor that can figure how how to provide a direct-attached LTO drive that works with a Mac and connects directly via Thunderbolt for less than $4,000 is going to make a lot of money.
For now, I REALLY need some way to archive my media. but none of the units out there support either my budget or my computer.
SUMMARY
Buying any computer is always a trade-off between dreams, performance, and budget. I’m looking forward to getting my new system. I’m also looking forward to figuring out what I can use for external storage. To me, THAT is the key to successful video editing – storage that is large, fast, secure, and affordable. That, and some way to back it all up.
I’ll keep you informed as I decide what to add for the remaining pieces. As always, feel free to share your opinions.
Larry
85 Responses to Configuring An iMac For Video Editing
← Older Comments Newer Comments →-
Mark says:
December 17, 2012 at 5:44 pm
-
Mateusz Czuba says:
January 3, 2013 at 7:45 pm
-
Larry says:
January 9, 2013 at 12:12 am
-
jon p says:
January 14, 2013 at 9:53 am
-
Larry says:
January 14, 2013 at 1:10 pm
-
Bibiana says:
January 14, 2013 at 6:28 pm
-
Larry says:
January 14, 2013 at 6:46 pm
-
Bibiana Ormandy says:
January 15, 2013 at 10:04 pm
-
Larry says:
January 15, 2013 at 10:12 pm
-
Bibiana Ormandy says:
January 17, 2013 at 4:00 pm
-
Larry says:
January 18, 2013 at 2:27 am
-
Tyler Jordan says:
January 30, 2013 at 12:06 am
-
Tyler Jordan says:
January 30, 2013 at 12:16 am
-
Larry says:
January 30, 2013 at 12:23 am
-
Tyler Jordan says:
January 30, 2013 at 1:06 am
-
Larry says:
January 30, 2013 at 1:12 am
-
Mishi says:
February 17, 2013 at 6:01 pm
-
Larry says:
February 17, 2013 at 11:23 pm
← Older Comments Newer Comments →You’d think that if they did a good job with this Pro X and made it work well they would sure sell a lot to pros, semi-pros, and anyone wanting a little extra. Especially at a good price point which they have here.
Hello,
I’m planning to buy a new computer soon (mainly for HD video editing) and I was thinking about the new iMac. But the best model I can afford is the 21.5 one with the following specs:
2.9GHz quad-core Intel Core i5
8GB of RAM
1TB hard drive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 512MB
My question is – do you think this model (with Final Cut Pro X installed) will be “better” (faster, more reliable, more intuitive) than a PC with better specs – i7 processor, GeForce GTX 670 with 2 Gb VRAM running Sony Vegas Pro 12?
I’m not a pro, but I’m planning to go to film school soon and I’m going to need a decent machine (and a decent system) for editing.
I’m wondering if the simplicity of Mac OS X and the interface of FCP X are worth the extra money. I’m not sure if 512 mb of GPU memory is enough for smooth HD editing.
Also – what do you think about Sony Vegas Pro?
I’d be very glad if you could answer my question or at least write what you think.
Cheers,
Mateusz
Mateusz:
Without question this iMac will be fast enough for virtually all video editing. The KEY is not the computer, but the speed of your storage. I strongly recommend you budget to add a Thunderbolt RAID so that your storage will be both fast enough and large enough for video editing. Promise, G-Technology, and LaCie (with TWO drives) are all good choices.
I have never edited video on a PC – nor do I intend to start – so I have no opinions on how well it works.
Larry
Do you know something we don’t? Is this a nudge by apple to show the mac pro is not necessary for editing? I’ve still got my FCP 1.0 disc and have edited on 7 for years. I have lost my trust in apple and recently switched to the Adobe suite for all my post production needs. If the pro is dropped I can at least buy a pc to run adobes programmes. (I have one core i7 27″ imac edit system, fw800 works ok. it has no thunderbolt or esata so it’s outta here)
damn, I hate dealing with phone companies.
No. This article is NOT to imply or say anything about the MacPro. I fully expect Apple to ship a truly stellar MacPro later this year. Why? Because there is no reason or advantage for Tim Cook to lie about this. I think the MacPro will be completely different from the current version, but I expect it to be released, to emphasize Thunderbolt, and to be a powerhouse.
Larry
I have a hardware question: I ordered 27″ iMac with lots of RAM and 3TB Fusion drive. I understand that solid part of internal fusion drive is under OS control, but I would be disheartened to hear that I can not use 3TB Fusion drive for storage of current project media (is this the same as scratch disk?).
I hope that my 32GB RAM and 2GB VRAM (on graphics card) will allow FCP to run in memory as much as possible (though I have doubts whether FCP uses VRAM effectively i.e. for rendering). If my project does not fit in RAM, FCP should drop first to solid drive, then to internal drive for access to media of my current project, 3TB should be enough for current project. I would like to use external drive only for storage of source video clips ( and for storage of finished projects) and do not mind to duplicate clips used by current project from external drive to internal Fusion drive.
Am I being naive assuming that FCP accesses scratch drive for current project media and does not go to original source clips? Can you set FCP to do this if it is not a default? I get a sinking feeling reading this forum as you guys only refer to one type of “media” storage, i.e. on external drive. If FCP always goes to original source clips during editing this would mean I wasted money on 3TB Fusion drive.
Bibiana
Bibiana:
Answers depend on which version of FCP you are using. If you are on FCP 7, no, it won’t take advantage of much of this RAM or graphics card, but it WILL use the Fusion Drive properly.
If you are using FCP X, it will access the RAM, GPU, and Fusion Drive. The Fusion Drive is totally controlled by the OS, not FCP. What the Fusion Drive does is load frequently used files onto the SSD. In general, this means OS and application files rather than media files, which tend to only be used once. FCP does use VRAM for rendering, because it uses the same rendering engine that is in Motion, which is heavily dependent on the GPU and VRAM.
You determine where your scratch disks are located (in FCP X) when you create the project and event. Scratch discs can be on either internal or external drives. Also, you can determine whether you want FCP X to copy media to the Event folder or link to the original source clips when you import the files.
In other words, YOU, not FCP, determines where media is stored and how it is accessed.
Larry
Larry,
Thank you very much for your answers, they are quite encouraging. I do use FCP X and did not loose any sleep over letting FCP 7 go.
I assume that Event Library (and Project) is residing on scratch disk (residing on internal Fusion drive), is that correct? Would that mean that if I copy my media files to Event Library than during the editing FCP would never go to external drive?
I am delighted to hear that FCP X uses the same rendering engine as Motion and does use GPU. On my existing 4 year old iMac I have to wait for rendering very long time. 1500+ cores of 680 MX GPU should speed my work significantly.
Bibiana
The Event LIBRARY is the collection of all your Events. It can include Events on multiple hard disks. Same with the Project LIBRARY; which is a listing of al your Projects on all hard disks. Each Event and each Library can be stored on any disk. Any new media added to an Event will, by default, be stored with the rest of the media for that Event.
Larry
Thanks Larry,
I still do not understand concept of scratch disk. I assumed that FCP keeps on scratch disk temporary files created by editing actions for fast retrieval during editing. What I want to prevent is constant access to my slower external drives while I am editing the project. Is there a general way to do that or do I have to manually copy all my events needed by specific project from external drives to my faster internal fusion drive before I start a new project? That seems awkward to me.
Bibiana
Scratch disks are where FCP X stores media. In more common terms, these are the locations of the Event and Project folder. So, when you create an Event or Project, be sure to select the hard disk where you want them stored FIRST. You select the hard disk and create the Event/Project inside Final Cut Pro.
Larry
Mateusz, I respect what Larry is saying in regards to using the system you can afford for video editing, but I have a similar system here: iMac 27in. 2.66GHZ i5 with 16GB Ram and 512mb video RAM and it is downright awful for video editing. I’m reading this blog for info on upgrading and am trying to make sure the next Mac I buy can handle Premiere Pro and After Effects because this computer cannot. Well, not to any satisfying speed. We need our workflow to not force us to spend double the time waiting around. I would save my money for a faster video card and an i7, but many here probably know more than me. Just saying that from personal experience I would never recommend a system like this for video editing unless it was the very last option in the world and you simply have no choice.
Then again, perhaps Thunderbolt and RAID makes up for it? Then why all the hoopla over these new graphics cards? I hope someone can help me understand. Thanks.
Tyler, stuttering playback is “generally” caused by either a hard disk that is too slow, or a video codec that is too complex for your computer to playback in real-time. Examples of the first include drives connected via USB 2, or FireWire 800. Examples of the second include older computers trying to play back H.264 or AVCHD media, or editing lots of multicam streams. Adobe Premiere only accesses the graphics card in your computer if you are running a MacBook Pro. iMacs are not supported by Adobe, yet. Thunderbolt provides FAR more speed than FireWire 800. Given current editing software, almost all rendering is done by the graphics card, which is why it is so important. This was NOT the case a few years ago, when the CPU did all the work.
Larry
Thanks Larry. Sounds like some are still getting around the Adobe support issue with these cards or no? I’m at a point where I want to update my Mac (I have a VERY fast PC laptop which I use for heavy edits now, but prefer the Apple experience for obvious reasons.) I just don’t know if I want to save some cash by buying this new iMac and hope it will suffice and not make me waste a lot of time like my current machine does, if even a little faster, or wait for the new Mac Pro.
Tyler:
First and most important rule: Never buy, or not buy, on a rumor. Only make decisions on shipping products. Rumors have many fathers, and not all of them are friendly. Second, try renting an iMac, or borrow one from a friend / associate / store and do a quick test. Is it faster? Make your decision then.
Larry
Hi Larry,
I found your article to be quite enlightening. I’m considering using the 27″ iMac for an FCP X edit system and I have a few questions that I’m hoping you might be able to answer.
Why did you choose the 1 TB Fusion Drive instead of the 768GB Flash Storage?
What is your opinion of using the 768GB Flash Storage as the iMac system drive?
Besides price and speed, are there any other benefits to using the 768GB Flash Storage drive instead of the Fusion Drive?
Thank you.
Mishi:
1. Why choose Fusion? Because it holds more and costs less. Also, I have about a zillion applications, yet my total boot drive uses only 190 GB of space. I don’t need tons of room on my boot drive, only my data drives.
2. Why spend more money to get less storage? The Fusion drive is a great combination of more storage, SSD speed, and price.
3. Remember, an SSD drive works best when accessing the same files over and over. This makes it ideal for the OS, applications, and databases, but less so for media files. I only need 200 GB of Flash storage, there is no benefit to me of spending more and getting storage that I won’t ever use.
Larry