Render faster on Intel or G5?

I have a 5 minute project with tons of stuff going on inside it. Everything is finally rendered (after 5 hours of render time). Now I'm trying to export it to a DVD using both the "Export to QT" option and the Compressor option in separate instances. The Export first method says it will take 3 hours of time. The Compressor method will take 23 hours!
This got me to thinking, I have a MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo and a Dual G5, 2.5 GHz. Which will render and encode FCP files faster?
I don't suppose it's possible to link up 3 Macs on a LAN to use QMaster? Have never used the program before. Anyone else use it using in a 10-base-T environment?

I would suspect you can link them either through an xgrid setup such as http://www.atpm.com/10.06/blender.shtml . I'm sure big boys like http://www.apple.com/pro/profiles/lowry/ must do this all the time. That said, when you figure this out, let the rest of us know

Similar Messages

  • Is rendering faster on Intel machines

    I was curious if there's any benefit to purchasing an Intel Mac in order to speed up rendering? Our office is going to be doing more video work this year, and our Dual G5 takes many hours to render projects. Would an Intel machine with a comparable number of processors render faster?

    Our Mac pro Quad 2.66 is much faster (at leat a third) than our Dual G5 2.7s, but twice as many processors.
    joe

  • How to render faster when working on project

    how to render faster when working on project in motion 5? Working on a project gets very slow when a lot of elements are going such as 3D

    In the Render menu, top right of the Canvas pane, you can turn off all the render settings not in use, such as lighting, shadows, etc.  Also, set the resolution and quality in that menu down lower.
    When you're ready to export, you can re-set those settings to how you want it to export.

  • PowerMac faster than intel Mac when running video programs?

    Hello everyone! Having a question now so wonder if any of you have the same experience?
    Recently i have many video works to do. I have a powerbook, which is the lasted 17inch powerbook and an intel imac (early 2008, 2.66GHz). I run the same version of finalcut pro and compressor. But thing become very strange, which is that when i run compressor to make final video files, my powerbook is much faster (about 2 times faster) than intel iMac. When i run XDCAM program to import video clips to finalcut from Sony XDCAM blueray reader, powerbook is also much more faster than intel iMac, and which is about 10time more faster than intel iMac. So it become very strange. I list my configurations below, and any of you can help me to solve the 'problem' or explain the strange fenominal.
    Maybe theres anything wrong with software configurations, any one can also help me with that?
    Thank you very much!
    Powerbook G4 17inch:
    CPU: powerpc G4 1,67GHz
    RAM: 2GB (two 1GB module)
    HDD: 120GB IDE
    System: Mac OS X Leopard 10.5.8
    Program: Final Cut Studio 2
    iMac 20inch Early 2008
    CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 2,66GHz
    RAM: 4GB (two 2GB module)
    HDD: Cosair 256GB SSD
    System: Mac OS X Lion 10.7 (tried also on Snow Leopard)
    Program: Final Cut Studio 2 (tried also Final Cut Studio 3 on friends imac with the same configuration)
    Camera:
    Sony XDCAM PDW530 Broadcast Camcorder.
    Media:
    Sony XDCAM blueray disk
    Reader:
    Sony XDCAM blueray disc drive
    Program:
    XDCAM transfer for Final Cut Pro 2.12
    XDCAM browser software 1.20

    Of course it depends on what you're doing and how well you know how to use available resources... the general rule for Logic is:
    >>>Fastest machine with the most RAM you can afford.<<<
    That said, someone who knows what they're doing can get an amazing amount of effects and virtual instruments on an old PPC G5 computer running Logic 8.
    So, while fast machines will allow more plugins/VI with less overloads... knowing what you're doing will take you further so that the difference between machines would not make a difference in the music.
    pancenter-

  • SETI at home--FAST on Intel MacBook

    Folks, I've been running SETI@Home for years on my Macs and PCs. For the past couple of weeks, I have using the Universal version (BoincManager 5.49) on my MacBook, in the background.
    This thing is fast. BoincManager treats the Intel Core Duo CPU setup as two separate computers. Each one of these is amazingly faster than either my Dell P4 Tower or my G4 Tower.
    And, oh yes, when SETI kicks in, and both of those CPUs are cranked up, things heat up in a hurry. But the computer doesn't bog down, slow down.
    If you are into the SETI project, and other similiar projects, this UNIVERSAL build is simply amazing.

    I don't worry about the heat. I just use the computer. The CPU is going to throttle back if programming cycles / interrupts cause thermal events. There are plenty of sensors to determine this.
    However, the BOINC settings do allow you to throttle back the CPU use.
    Also, settings allow you to have the project stop as soon as you touch a keyboard or mouse / pad. After a timed duration, it will resume.

  • How much faster is Intel then G4

    Hey Guys,
    I currently have a 17 inch Powerbook G4 for on the go and I am debating weather to get a new 17 inch MacBook Pro (Unibody) but my Powerbook is very zippy, Just to ask how does the Intel chip in The new 17 MacBook Pro differ from my Powerbook's G4 chip?

    Hi, Zach. Without knowing which 17" G4 model you have or which of the two 17" MBPs you're considering, it's pretty hard to say what kind of difference you're likely to perceive. You can be sure either MBP will benchmark at three to six times faster than the G4, but exactly how that will translate into user experience will depend some on what uses you make of the new machine.
    My 1GHz Powerbook G4 with 5400RPM hard drive scored about 550 in GeekBench, while my bottom-of-the-line 2.4GHz late-2008 15" MBP with 5400RPM drive scores 3100-3200.
    Besides the faster CPU, the MBP makes major gains over the PB G4s in GPU, RAM and hard disk speed.
    Message was edited by: eww

  • Does having multiple GPUs installed let motion render faster than just one?

    if you have 2(or more) GPU's installed and hooked up to monitors, does motion split the work, i.e. render twice as fast? or does it just pick one and use it?
    I have 2 cards, but only one monitor, and motion renders using whichever card has a monitor attached. so i wonder if i picked up another monitor and run it from the other card would that speed up my rendering process?
    thanks

    Heya,
    Motion renders (IIRC) on your system's primary GPU, which is the monitor that has the titlebar menus (File, Edit, etc). Adding additional GPUs does not speed things up.

  • Render fast, then render slow

    Perplexing.
    I'm a fairly long time Motion user. I have a simple (3 layer) animation, A globe turning, a copy of the globe turning (with Gaussian blur and color correction to make the haze around the earth) and a star background. All are renders from Lightwave.
    There's no keyframing of any kind going on in Motion, just put the 3 layers together, a little transparency here and there, bloom filter on the stars.
    Then I export the movie, H.264, 1920 x 1080 (which is the original size of the files). The first 240 or so frames render at about 1 second per frame. Yahoo. Then at around frame 240, the render slows to a crawl. Remaining time goes from 19 seconds, to 2 minutes to 5 minutes!
    Nothing happens in my timeline at this spot. In fact, the place were rendering slows down seems to vary from render to render. I even rendered out the back to layers (glowy blurry earth and starfield) to make a single frame backdrop, and turned this into a 2 layer comp, with the second layer a rendered still... problem persists.
    Anyone out there seen this or know of possible solution?

    Perhaps your computer is insufficient? Have you tried to render out a less compressed codec and then compress it after in Compressor?
    Andy

  • Does FCX render faster than FCP7?

    Hi Folks,
    So I'm using FCP7 and I despite how long it takes to render files.
    I have a quad 2.66 MP and I know it's not the fastest MP, but it would be nice to use all cores during a render (and for exporting files to self-contained QT files)!!! Of course, for the latter, I just read that I could use Compressor for that and it would use all cores?
    So does FCX use all cores to render? I know it does alot in background processing, but can I force it to use all cores if I wanted to step away and have my timeline ready to go?  Currently, once I'm done editing, I sometimes need to render a 2 hour SD movie for various reasons and seeing the processes work at 25% or so is frustrating.  Adding to the fact that it takes hours to do and I could almost start to cry.
    Cheers,
    Keebler

    FYI - In a different thread someone reported poor performance with the GT120. You will probably need to upgrade to the 5770 to get good performance from FCPX. If you have a 2008 or later Mac Pro, you also have the 5870 as an option (but not for the 2006 Mac Pro).

  • Render faster

    I just got an 8 core Mac Book..4 gigs of ram and Final Cut Pro 6. I'm looking for some help with virtual clustering.
    When I installed FCP it asked if I wanted this machine to be apart of the a network for clustering. I said yes. I have followed the instructions in this video...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPEIdrHE5hM and still the machine is not moving like it should.
    My QMaster is green put only one item is selected and my CPU bars are only 4 blocks high from the bottom. I have tried QuickCluster with services and Services only. When I submit my clips in Compressor it asks what cluster to use. I have tried This Computer and the cluster name when I use QuickCluster.
    What is the deal? I have tried using mp4, qt reference files, and wmv.
    Anyone know how to make this work?

    I just got an 8 core Mac Book..4 gigs of ram and Final Cut Pro 6.
    OK, first, let's clarify exactly what you've got here. Apple does not make an 8-core MacBook, nor do they make an 8-Core MacBookPro. What computer do you have? A Mac Pro?
    K

  • Why does Premiere render the same sequence sometimes fast and sometimes really slow?

    I use Premiere Pro CC 2014.
    I have a Nvidia GTX 590
    Intel Core i7 X990 @ 3.47GHz
    24GB RAM
    Windows 7 (64)
    200GB free space on an SSD drive and 2 more drives with each 1TB free.
    I'm having trouble with performance when rendering sequences.
    The sequences themselves are pretty simple. They contain MOV files from my Canon EOS 5D Mark III and transparent PNG files as overlays for titles and additional graphics.
    I also use lumetri looks and have turned on Cuda rendering. As a codec for exporting I use H264 (fullhd, 25fps, 20mbits, 2pass, max render quality, max depth)
    Whether or not I export in Premiere or via AME doesn't matter, the problem stays the same.
    Now, when I start exporting, at one point, which is seemingly random (sometimes at 35%, sometimes at 60%, sometimes at 2% - I'm talking about the same sequence!) rendering becomes really really slow (~1 hour for a 3min video), and I don't understand why. I keeps slow until the whole sequence is finished. But before that, rendering was fast!
    But sometimes, I'm lucky, and - after restarting my computer and Premiere, the same sequences render in whole, in under 2 minutes!
    So obviously my computer is able to render fast. But it does not always do that. Sometimes - even after a fresh reboot, I'm out of luck and the same sequence renders in an hour - but only after a random point in the sequence.
    It's as if Premiere stumbles and can't get up again. The only thing that CAN help (though does not alway), is rebooting the system and hoping for the best.
    Where does this strange behaviour come from? I use ordinary footage, ordinary filters and an ordinary export codec. I have lots of RAM and lots of disk space
    I have not found a topic in this forum with a similar problem

    Similar problem here but on a Mac.   AME is always much slower than directly exporting from Premiere, but if I start to get slow renders a reboot always sorts the issue out.

  • How to render/export fast in Adobe After Effects CC

    Hi,
    How can I export and render fast in Adobe After Effects, I bought a new PC but it's not quick enough in my opinion.
    I want to export a 1920*1080 60FPS project, 10 seconds long. It takes a very long time.
    I have already set my GPU as processor but if I start the render and look at my GPU usage, After Effects won't use it.
    Screenshots of my project and settings:
    Project - https://snapr.pw/i/b18473e4cc.png
    Momory - https://snapr.pw/i/e92cb228a9.png
    Cache - https://snapr.pw/i/30addc6d0c.png
    GPU - https://snapr.pw/i/2b36b10748.png
    Computer system: popoqwerty - Profiel - Tweakers
    CPU - Intel Core i7- 8520K six-core
    GPU - Asus GTX 780 OC 6GB STRIX
    MOBO - Asus X99-A
    RAM - 16GB Crucial
    SSD - Samsung SSD PRO 850
    HDD - WD Black 2TB

    > How can I export and render fast in Adobe After Effects,
    See this page for resources about making After Effects work faster: http://adobe.ly/eV2zE7
    > I have already set my GPU as processor but if I start the render and look at my GPU usage, After Effects won't use it.
    After Effects uses the GPU for almost nothing. See this page for details of GPU features in After Effects:
    GPU (CUDA, OpenGL) features in After Effects
    > A ''verry long time'' is 10 minutes for a 10 second video.
    10 minutes is not a long time for a 10-second movie with visual effects, compositing, 3D, or many other kinds of computationally intensive processing. Often, people leave 30-second movies overnight or over the weekend to render. This is true for all aoftware that does this kind of work, not just After Effects.

  • Do I Really need to render this much all the time????

    I just upgraded from a G4 to a MacBook Pro. I am using FC 5.0 HD.
    I decided to use the Offline RT Photo Jpeg option to capture all my footage and edit on my MacBook. I figured I could render faster and store a lot more footage on the go.
    Trouble is when I have Unlimited RT ON it can't even play back without dropped frames. So with Safe RT it requires me to render each and every clip I drop into the timeline. I have my sequence set to Offline RT Photojpeg but it still requires rendering just to play a clip in the sequence window.
    I must be doing something wrong. The playback of the clips are also showing up as 1/2 the size in the viewer window. I have all my settings at the lowest quality for playback. Photos below.
    Please help me get this project on the roll. I am stuck.
    Thanks so much.
    Intel 2.0   Mac OS X (10.4.7)  

    Thanks David I didn't know that. I can't afford it right now given that I just spent a ton of money on the new computer but I will save up for it.
    By the way, I copy and pasted my project into a new sequence. It works great now and I do have RT playback for slow mototion, titles, etc. I think my initial problem was that my sequence was NTSC DV and trying to play my Offline RT photo jpeg clips that I captured. That caused it to require rendering.
    All is good now.

  • 12 core Mac Pro does not improve render time over iMac quad core

    I'm rendering the same composition independently on two computers and they are basically rendering at the same rate, which is slightly better than 1 frame per second.
    The project settings and preferences are identical in each instance (with the exception of memory and multiprocessing, which I have experimented with ad nauseum). The composition includes no motion blur, no effects, just a couple of layers of chroma keyed .mov files (using keylight 2.0) and some still images. Neither machine is running any other applications, except occasionally Google Chrome, which seems to have no effect on performance.
    Both systems are running the latest version of After Effects CC (2014) and using the Classic 3D renderer.
    System 1 MAC PRO:
    Mac Pro 12 core 2.7 GHz Intel Xeon E5
    dual AMD FirePro 500D 3072 MB GPUs
    32 GB RAM
    OS X 10.9.4
    System 2 iMAC:
    iMac quad core 2.5 GHz Intel Core i5
    AMD Radeon HD 6750M 512 MB GPU
    8 GB RAM
    OS X 10.9.3
    As you can see, system 1 is vastly more powerful, and yet no combination of memory/multiprocessing settings can get the system to render faster than system 2.
    It doesn't seem to matter how much or little RAM I reserve for other applications (I have settled on 4 GB), or the number of CPUs I reserve for After Effects. The one setting that has improved performance is turning OFF render multiple frames. And even then it only brings the performance of the Mac Pro up to par with the iMac. I have cleared my cache, rebooted the computer, and read everything I can find online regarding the optimization of render settings.
    Here's a comparison of the respective CPU Loads:
    iMac
    Mac Pro
    With such a low CPU load, After Effects is obviously not utilizing the resources available to it on the Mac Pro. What a waste.
    Can anyone help?

    There's plenty of debate about the new Mac Pro vs a kitted out iMac.  Benchmarks show that some iMac After Effects processing can actually be faster than on a Mac Pro, depending on the content and some other factors.  If you're using software that has been optimised for the Mac Pro's GPU-centric architecture, like Final Cut Pro X, you will see great benefits.
    mac pro vs imac
    In my own facility recently we opted out of purchasing Mac Pros this year, and bought top-end iMacs instead.  The benefit to cost ratio simply didn't make sense for us right now.  Mac Pros are awesome machines, but a significant component of their cost is the dual GPUs, which are simply no benefit to After Effects.
    Reports say that the After Effects engineers are working on a major revamp of the After Effects processing system, so I'm betting you will realise far greater benefits from your Mac pro in coming AE versions.  For now, you may continue to see performance that is not spectacularly better than a souped-up iMac, depending on the type of processing involved.
    I've seen a few benchmarks that suggest the 8 core systems give better bang-for-buck than the 12 cores.  Try reducing your processors to 8 in After Effects and see if it makes a difference.  With 8 cores, allocate 3GB of RAM per core to leave some RAM for the OS.

  • Laptop intel 4000 gpu and nvidia 675m offer same performance?

    in photoshop...particularly when rendering 3d extrusions they both do the same time rendering a layer.  obviously i can force photoshop to use either gpu.  the 675m is a heck of a lot more powerful than the integrated intel gpu. 
    any special trick to make it render faster using the nvidia as opposed to the intel?

    The concept of a dual GPU laptop is that the embedded Intel GPU will come into play, when you are on the battery, doing very low-level and general computing, and it will save battery life.
    In a perfect world, when using higher-intensity programs, such as Ps, the nVidia, or AMD/ATI GPU will automatically come into play, giving you greater performance. That is not always the case, but is what is intended.
    With a program, such as Ps, you will not be using both GPU's for any process - it's one, or the other.
    Good luck,
    Hunt

Maybe you are looking for

  • XDB annotations on complex XML Schema

    I am currently testing this in 11gr2 Express, while I wait for our DBA to upgrade our main AIX dev instance to 11gr2 enterprise edition. I have a fairly complex xmlschema, provided by the IPTC and trying to annotate it to override some of the default

  • Difference between rmi us  ejb

    difference between rmi and ejb

  • Unable to open Canon 450D RAW files

    I'm running CS3 and Lightroom 1.4.1, recently installed the updated DNG and Camera Raw plugin, but still cannot open my .CR2 files. Plugin went to HD>Library>App. support>Adobe>Plugins>CS3>File formats Any ideas? Matt

  • "XDM: too many retransmissions" Error.

    Hi, I try to connect my Mac to a distant linux server using the command: " xhost +" "X :1 -query HOSTID" from the X11 application. Its open Xquark and say that it creates a display. But, nothing appear on my monitor. I wait few minute and it returns

  • Underlining in class diagrams

    Can anyone please explain the following? 1) I have a class diagram where two of the three operations are underlined. The third operation is not underlined. 2) In a second class diagram, all four attributes are underlined. None of the operations are u