When will Premier Pro be upgraded to Match Final Cut Export performance?

[nermie]

Do any forum users or Adobe staff know if Premier Pro is going to be optimised or upgraded to match or better the rendering and export performance of Apple's final Cut?

From all reviews I have seen, it seems Premier Pro is way behind in this area and is considerably slower. As I understand it, given the same hardware, Final Cut is much faster as it has been optimised. As CS is one of the leading software packages for creatives, I am surprised that this performance issue has not been addressed by Adobe by now. Maybe it is more difficult than appears but I would still like to know what, if anything, is being done or planned to close the gap.

I would have thought this is really important to most editors and Adobe would be trying to achieve the best performance and be the class leader.

Thank You

[Peru Bob]

There is a saying:

Those that know can't tell and those that tell can't know.

[Jim_Simon]

As I understand it, given the same hardware, Final Cut is much faster as it has been optimised.

The other side of that is that a Windows machine, which can't run Final Cut, is significantly faster and cheaper than a Mac.

$2,000 Custom PC vs $4,000 Mac Pro - YouTube

[R Neil Haugen]

FCPx is clearly "juiced" between the app & OS to ensure best performance. This is of course typical Apple behavior, being the jealous kindergartners they are. So ... neither Avid nor Resolve nor PrPro will probably ever quite match FCPx on say export speeds.

But ... that's on a Mac. Of course, those not on a Mac can't even test FCPx, can we? 

As Jim notes, the PC exports work quite well, on a proper machine. At times there are limits when choosing a less competitive, less customizable, closed-system option. Which is why so many of the colorists I know have recently left the Mac world ... higher performance and more gear options. I've chuckled at how they just used the lower cost per performance item savings to mean they could buy more stuff. Bigger client monitors, that sort of thing.

But it's what works for each editor.

Neil

[Meg The Dog]

I work in both FCP-X and Premiere Pro and my experience is the export times are fairly close. Is this not your experience?

When you refer to "optimized", are you referring to the FCP-X feature, that (if selected) will transcode your source media in the background from a highly compressed format such as H.264 to ProRes, a much more edit friendly format?

If so, you can choose in Premiere to have the transcode done on ingest via the ingest settings.

nermie  wrote

From all reviews I have seen, it seems Premier Pro is way behind in this area and is considerably slower.

Well, reviews are reviews - it might be better to test for yourself. FCP-X has a 30 day free trial download, you can work in both Premiere and FCP-X and see which one is better for you.

MtD

[Guest]

It never will be because Adobe is an incompetent company. The people who make the next software we all use will get things right, which is why a switch away from Premiere is coming.

[R Neil Haugen]

Fascinating statement. So as this phantom company ain't Apple, pray tell who this brilliant firm is that will solve all types of editing needs with one far reaching new unheard of software?

Neil

[Peru Bob]

Moved to the Video Lounge.

[Kevin-Monahan]

nermie,

Do any forum users or Adobe staff know if Premier Pro is going to be optimised or upgraded to match or better the rendering and export performance of Apple's final Cut?

Please look into smart rendering.

Thanks,
Kevin