Participating Frequently

Question

The realities of inexpensive Apple Editing

Forum|Forum|8 years ago
January 23, 2018
6 replies
2068 views

Hello Everyone!

More matter less art style :

Am I dreaming in thinking that I can edit a feature on a :

Mac Pro 1. 1, Intel Xeon 8 core 2, 66 Ghz, 32 Gb RAM, Nvidia 7300 GT 256 Mb, 640 Gb hdd, Mac OS X 10. 7 Lion.

Thank you so much! These Forums are really fantastic: Tall Shoulders and very far gaze!

CA

[Here is the list of all Adobe forums... https://forums.adobe.com/welcome]

[Comments is to ask about the operation of the Forum, not a specific program]

[Moved from the Comments forum to the Creative Cloud forum... Mod]

[Moving this to the video hardware forum - other mod]

This topic has been closed for replies.

A

acapmedia

Participating Frequently

Just wanted to chime in that I'm still successfully working with Premiere Pro CC 2017 on a 3,1 Mac pro 2x 2.8GHz Quad-Core with 22GB 800MHZ RAM + ATI Radeon HD 5870. I mainly work with 4K footage from the Panasonic GH5 and have to make ProRes proxies so I can playback at full resolution but apart from that it's definitely usable. I've been using Premiere Pro for years, always updating to the latest version without problems until one of the later 2017 releases, when suddenly adding Lumetri quadrupled my render times for some reason.

C

Chauncey AlanAuthor

Participating Frequently

Thanks everyone! Saved me a nightmare!

R

RjL190365

Legend

You're welcome. You see, even the Mac Pro 4.1, at the cost that you would have paid for it as equipped, would have required you to spend a lot more money than what that machine is worth just in upgraded parts just to bring its performance level up to today's standards.

A

Anonymous

also most of this parts can be reused in a brand new PC if I ever need to make the switch for faster CPU

Performance is always expensive

Peru Bob

Community Expert

A Windows machine might be more affordable.

Bill Gehrke

Inspiring

That second configuration if tested by my Premiere Pro BenchMark would on the CPU intensive test would create an new low (bad) score.for performance. Those Quad core CPU's do not have hyperthreading and no turbo mode. A single Hard disk drive is totally inadequate for anything but possible Standard Definition video. The internal PCIe gen 2 and external USB 2.0 are useless for any expansion.

Your "Am I wrong in thinking I can update a Mac Pro for years to come?" question is ridiculous, You cannot do anything with that antique.

R

RjL190365

Legend

Actually, that second configuration - in the Mac Pro 4.1 - contains a quad-core hyperthreadable Xeon. Unfortunately, it is essentially a first-generation i7-920 CPU, which as you found out is actually a weakling CPU (ranking at the very bottom of the list of CPUs on that site). And if the Mac Pro 4.1's CPU is that weak to begin with, the Mac Pro 3.1's is even weaker because (as I mentioned above) it is based on the Xeon equivalent of the now-obsolete Yorkfield Core 2 Quad CPU. Both of those systems are actually as weak as or weaker than some cheap laptops in CPU performance.

And I found out why the GT 120 cannot use MPE GPU acceleration at all whatsoever in any version of Premiere Pro that has that feature: It does not have enough onboard graphics RAM to even enable the feature at all. And even if it did, newer versions of Premiere Pro don't support it at all because it's now obsolete. And that's not to mention that the GT 120 has only 32 CUDA cores - way too weak to be of much use in any event. In fact, it is so very, very weak that even today's on-CPU integrated Intel HD Graphics that's in the recent Haswell and newer generation CPUs completely slaughters that GT 120 in graphics and GPGPU performance.

So, to recap:

All three of those Mac Pros that the thread starter mentioned are completely useless for even casual video editing these days.

R

RjL190365

Legend

Unfortunately, you will not be able to run even Premiere Pro CS5, let alone the latest releases of Premiere Pro CC, on that Mac Pro 1.1. This is because although the CPU technically supports 64-bit, the EFI and kernel of that system is only 32-bit, rendering that entire system only 32-bit capable. And that's even considering that the last version of Premiere Pro CC that supported OSX 10.7 was the first, 2013 (aka 7.0), release of Premiere Pro CC.

C

Chauncey AlanAuthor

Participating Frequently

What about this bad boy? My absolutely useless computer instincts tell me it might be the winner!

MAC PRO 2008 (3,1) 2x 2.8GHz Quad (8 Core total)

32GB RAM 667MHz

1TB HDD

nVidia GeForce GTX 470 1280MB (No Apple Boot Up screen)

or

Apple Mac Pro 4.1 2.66 Ghz Xeon Quad-Core 1 TB, Nvidia GT120 8 GB Osx 10.11 (With a later on Memory upgrade)

Am I wrong in thinking I can update a Mac Pro for years to come?

Sorry for all the questions but hopefully that's what we are here for!

Many thanks!

R

RjL190365

Legend

Neither of those, as configured. The first one still has a CPU that's too old to handle any newer codecs (it still predates the first-generation i7 CPU lineup), while the second one has a GPU that's not supported at all in any of the newer versions of Premiere Pro CC (that is, the renderer will become permanently locked to the software-only mode) because either the GPU is too old or it lacks a sufficient amount of graphics RAM to even enable GPU acceleration at all.

And that's not to mention that software companies do not like to support anything that's more than three years old. Your systems above are now more than eight years old.

Peru Bob

Community Expert

Maybe, but not comfortably, if you get more, fast storage and a better graphics card.