Mac MHz/GHz vs. PC MHz/GHz - how different are they?

LABachlr,

I went to the local Mac store a few weeks ago and ran some tests in Photoshop and Final Cut, among other things.

It was a Dual 2 GHZ with only 1 GIG RAM.

On a couple hundred MB Photoshop file, the G5 was quite snappy, but you could tell it was hitting the hard drive on occasion. Presumably more RAM would really make that thing shine. Overall, very solid. I'm used to working on multi-gigabyte files, so it takes a lot to impress me in Photoshop.

Final Cut on the other hand was just wicked fast. I was getting several tracks of video and titles, each with filters, transitions and motion with NO RENDERING required. Now, keep in mind, that's just DV proxy mode no rendering, but that's pretty much how we all edit anyway. I could realistically say that many of my video projects could be fully edited without ever rendering until the end stage. Certainly 90% of most any project would be render-free. HUGE production efficiencies. Keep in mind, this is without Apple's new CoreVideo, which presumably will open this up ever farther.

For more compelling evidence of OS X's/Mac's power in video:

http://www.apple.com/motion/video/
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/video/
 
I really think that at this point on hte grand scheme of things the lowest one should go would be an 800mhz G4/G3
 
Um. in regard to the PCs at work not being "maintained". I work in the IT Services department. the thing had winxp reinstalled maybe.. 5 months ago at the most. and not it does not have spyware/viruses.
 
Back
Top