Dual core vs Quad core for a Filmmaker?

Hi, I'm a 14 year-old filmmaker who really wants their next computer to be a mac mini. I am obviously on a tight budget being 14, so I was thinking just buying the standard dual-core processor. But for a filmmaker like myself, is it worth the extra $200 for my heavy-duty video-editing applications? I would use a mixture of Apple Motion 5, and the video-effects program Hitfilm Ultimate. I know quad is faster, but is it worth it for me?
Thanks.

"Hyperthreading" is the key. Hyper-threading enables each execution unit (or core, if you will) to process two threads (tasks) simultaneously.  It can do this because not every instruction takes only a single instruction cycle.  Sometimes instructions have to wait for a read from memory, which can take many clock cycles.  Sometimes multiple instructions can be performed at once -- for example, a floating point addition and an integer multiplication, as long as both instructions already have their operands in registers and store the results in different registers.  Hyper-threading enables each processor to handle multiple tasks by allowing one task to work while the other is waiting for a result, or allowing both instructions to be completed at the same time because they use non-conflicting resources.
So, two "hyperthreaded" cores work as fast as four without hyperthreading, or the difference in speed is so negligible, you wouldn't notice it.  Since the Mac Mini Core i7 is also hyperthreaded, it works as well as dual quad cores, so if you need inudstry standard speed, then the Core i7 would be your best choice.
As I said though, I can take 1080p video from my Canon Vixia, and edit it with OnLocation or Premiere Pro, and render it with barely a drain on my processor cores (2 or 4). So far, the biggest vid file I've done was about 250Mb, which was about a ten minute shoot. If you're going to work with 2Gb and up, then I'd definitely go with the Core i7 and max the RAM out to 16Gb.

Similar Messages

  • New dual core for running osx and windows-need autocad!

    considering a new desktop. I own a powerbook g4
    Machine Model: PowerBook5,6
    CPU Type: PowerPC G4 (1.2)
    Number Of CPUs: 1
    CPU Speed: 1.5 GHz
    L2 Cache (per CPU): 512 KB
    Memory: 512 MB
    Bus Speed: 167 MHz
    Boot ROM Version: 4.9.1f3
    and use mostly for Adobe Creative suite and Powercadd 7.
    I then own a Dell Inspiron with Windows XP to run Autocad.(which I dislike PC)I would rather use a mac and wonder if the new dual core is something I should consider or is it not worth the pain?

    You have to use the crossgrade/update 7.2 for Logic Pro to work on an Intel Mac.
    It is now available and people have ordered it but I don't think anyone has received their upgrades as yet.
    It has been pointed out both by Apple and in numerous other places that Logic Pro will not run under Rosetta so unless you have 7.2 it aint gonna be working......
    If you DO have 7.2 already, then please tell us more.....

  • Is 2.8 ghz dual core for a mbp advisable?

    i want to buy a mbp 13 inches but im thinking if 2,8 ghz dual core is enough..
    im going to study system engineer, and i need a powerful laptop because i dont want to buy one for the first two years and then buy another one casue i dont have to much money.
    i dont think that i will need high quality for design, power is what i want and need

    I see.  I would purchase the most powerful mac laptop you can afford.  I also noticed that you started two topics on this one, so I will advise anyone reading this to direct their responses to the original one: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3778146?tstart=0

  • WHICH OPERTON DUAL CORE FOR K8N DIAMOD PLUS X16????

    Okay all of you experts out their  I want to upgrade to a dual core Operton which would be better the 165 denmark or the 175 Denmark I really dont know anything about overclocking but I do wish to explore it when the weather cools down! But primarily I want to know what the difference of haveing the 165 multiplier at x9 and the 175 multi at 11x what is the difference I would like to overclock but only if it does not jepordize the stabillity of my system and I dont run the risk of data corruption so basically if you have the 165 denmark at 1.8 core what can you bring it to for a rock solid system with over clocking???? 2.0   2.2 what can I expect???? I want speed and rock hard stability as this is my only P.C I do alot of gameing multi tasking , burning music file transfering  can you overclock the 165 to 2.2 and leave it at that over clock permanently without data corruption? Or is the 175 Denmark the better choice with my memory???
                                         Please help and thanks in advance........

    I suppose that is true, as we all seem to have addictive personalities when it comes to this stuff! But regarless I still did not think that much of the dual core that I had before! Would have liked to get the 185 Operton buttttt well you know money. It's gonna be quite a while until they get the AM2 platform straightened out and stabilizeled I personally woul'nt touch that platform with a 10' pole right now! Besides I am quite happy with my 939 K8N Diamond Plus 
    this is the best system that I have ever owned probably because I built it myself I mean I dont even overclock right now and this thing is pumped on nitrous! Yhea one thing that I over looked was that they were out of stock on the opty that I bought at New Egg I called them this morning to see if i got lucky and kopped the last one but unfortunayely it looks like perhaps 10- 14 days before I get it and I cant change my order what a kick in the balls!!!!!

  • Quad core vs dual core for motion

    Hello all,
    I'm just about to invest in a new Mac Pro, With the following specs
    x1900 512 mb graphics card
    3x 750 gbHDD (raid 2 at 3GBs and 256K bit) 1 independent
    4 x 2gb memory
    But I'm confused as it is wether spending the extra 600 pounds on going from a 3ghz DC to a quad core. I want to soup up my projects with motion graphics, in particular using 3D. How much more performance will the extra processing power give me. If anyone can give me a real time answer that'd be great.
    I.E. how much more time will i spend waiting for it to render etc.
    Thanks very much for all help, I really want to get this right before buying.
    Cheers
    Fred

    "...Motion uses the graphics card to do all its drawing, so while having a faster processor is always going to help, you will see much more improvement by getting the biggest baddest graphics card out there..."
    But doesn't this only apply to the building - playing - interacting - tweaking aspect of using Motion in real-time? So while you're actually creating inside Motion, it's mostly GPU.
    When you're finished inside Motion, I feel like you're going to implement the creation in one of two ways: Send it to FCP, where it's going to want to render - which falls back onto the CPU(s). Or you're going to export a self-contained movie from motion. Again, CPU, right? Or is there something I'm misunderstanding about how Motion functions under-the-hood?
    If I'm wrong, then the Processors won't likely have a huge effect. But anytime it's time to actually render, I'd think you're bouncing back to CPU's again - not just GPU. In which case the Quad Core is going to help out.
    Just thowing out some theories....

  • 13 vs 15" Retina.  Quad or Dual Core for Aperture and IMovie?

    Does iMovie or Aperture take advantage of quad core?  I'm debating if I should return the 13" Retina I just purchased for the 15".  Thanks

    A quad core will definitely allow you to stack more layers of instruments and decrease your buffer size (resulting in lower latency).  I have a 3.06gHz core 2 duo 17" with 8GB RAM and a mate of mine has a 13" i5 with 4GB RAM and we compared how many synths we could cram into 1 patch before we got system overloads.  My mate's i5 easily handled at least 60% more than my machine....I was blown away by how much difference the extra CPU speed makes. 
    If I were in your shoes, I'd definitely go for the quad core if you want MS to handle (just about) anything you can throw at it.  This will also give you a few more years of use as plugins evolve and consume more and more processing power.  That's one of the main reasons why I splurged at the end of 2009 and upgraded every "power" feature I could when I bought my current MacBook Pro.....I've easily gotten more life and use out my system than most users who bought the standard config at the time.  I've also just upgraded to a 512GB SSD to get some more juice out of my machine to keep me happy for at least another year before I get a new MacBook Pro.

  • Dual-core or Quad-core for Premiere, After Effects, and Photoshop CS4?

    We are planning to purchase around 25 computers for a computer lab for working with CS4 Production Premium at the high school level.  Mainly Premiere Pro, After Effects, and Photoshop.  Our budget is, unfortunately, a mere $550-$625 per machine (just the tower though, we have monitors).  I've already established that a 64-bit operating system makes a significant difference in the performance, even though Photoshop is the only 64-bit application, and I'm now hung up on whether or not it's worth the cost of a quad-core processor over a dual-core.
    I'm discovering the different hardware needs for each application, so I'm trying to find an economic balance that will give me the best performance per buck.  It seems that Premiere benefits significantly from more cores (we're editing 1440x1080 AVCHD), and this article over at Tom's Hardware has convinced me that I don't want to compromise with a hyperthreaded dual-core for After Effects.
    I'm also struggling with what part the graphics card plays in the mix.  Which applications lean on the graphics card, and will it make much difference as long as I meet the requirements (OpenGL 2.0, Shader Model 3.0, Direct3D 10, and 256 Mb Ram)?
    I understand I will need to settle for less-than-awesome with my budget, but I'm already making sacrifices to get the number to $625.  I would like to make sure that those sacrifices will be worth it for a quad-core system.

    I think I may have answered my own question by looking at these charts over at Tom's Hardware:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-desktop-cpu-charts-update-1/Adobe-Premiere-Pro-CS4 ,1404.html
    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-desktop-cpu-charts-update-1/Adobe-Photoshop-CS-4,1 387.html
    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/Video-Editing-Adobe-After-Effec ts-CS5,2427.html
    I  think that the jump to the quad core in Premiere Pro is worth it, even if I  don't see as large of an improvement in Photoshop or After Effects.  I am still interested in the role of the graphics card in the mix if anyone can shed some light on that.  Will an integrated graphics card (like an Intel GMA x4500 or Radeon HD4200) suffice or will I need an actual graphics card to realize the benefits?
    Thanks

  • Macbook pro, dual core or quad core?

    Hey guys Im getting an early college present and was wondering which Macbook I should look at. This will be my one and only computer while im in college. No photo editing or anything like that, maybe some video editing but it will be almost none. Will be used to surf the web and write documents. My question is should i get the dual core or quad core processor? Will it really matter for what i want it for? One thing I absolutely hate is lag! So the faster of the two the better.

    tony477g wrote:
    So if I went with the quadcore because you guys say it is faster than the 2.9 ghz dualcore. Would the difference be noticable between the 2.6 ghz and the 2.3 ghz? I noticed the 2.6 has 8 gb to the 4gb and 750gb to the 500 gb.
    Well, actually, only one guy said the quad core would be faster, but it is not clear why they said that. You said you were only going to use it "to surf the web and write documents." Well, guess what. You don't need a quad-core for that. You don't need a dual-core for that. I've surfed the web and written documents on my old single-core iPhone. Those tasks are just not that demanding.
    So unless there are more things you want to do that you haven't mentioned, there is just about no way it's worth paying for quad-core or a 2.6GHz processor if all you are going to do is surf the web and write documents.
    The quad-core is going to speed up operations that specifically benefit from parallel processing, like intensive editing of photo/audio/video, or bulk encoding of audio and video, or specific math apps, stuff like that. And most Mac users would not benefit from choosing the 2.6GHz over the 2.3GHz because the performance of so many common uses depends not only on the CPU speed, but actually on the overall balance of CPU, RAM, and disc. In other words, if you really have a legitimate application for 2.6GHz it usually means you must also install a great deal more RAM and also an SSD to avoid creating a bottleneck that holds back the CPU. But then you would have a machine that is massively overpowered and overpriced for surfing the web and writing documents.
    You could surf the web and write documents quite effectively on the least expensive MacBook that Apple sells. But since you do want to keep it throughout all of college, it is a good idea to buy something higher than the bottom of the line. For a Mac for very basic uses that should last four years, I would suggest:
    13-inch MacBook Air with 256GB SSD storage and 8GB RAM
    13-inch MacBook Pro with 500GB HD storage and 8GB RAM
    13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display with 256GB SSD storage and 8GB RAM
    (You didn't mention what your budget is)
    I suggested 13-inch because it's more portable than the 15-inch but more comfortable for 4 years than an 11-inch. I chose storage sizes that would be appropriate since you said you would do some video. And I chose 8GB RAM because 4GB may not be enough for 4 years, and also because insufficient RAM is often a bigger cause of lag than CPU or disk speed.
    If you have a limited amount of money, from this point on you'll need to justify why you would want a bigger screen, a faster CPU, or more cores given the two tasks you said you'd be doing most of the time. Because again, if you didn't actually need a Mac, you could write documents and surf the web on an iPad with the Logitech Ultrathin Keyboard Cover and be done for $600.

  • What is the best osx upgrade for a G5 2gig dual core

    what is the best osx upgrade for a G5 2gig dual core for running music software please

    That box definitely needs an additional graphics card to run Aperture. I seem to remember the Nvidia 8800 GT as the one to get (~$60 at Amazon) but you need to verify that it will work in that old G5 because my recall could be faulty.
    HTH
    -Allen

  • Mac book pro i5 dual core Adobe CS5.5 Design Premium

    Hi All,
    I am thinking of getting a 13" 2011 mac pro i5 dual core for graphics design and not for any video editing. Can anybody advice the on board HD 3000 graphics is adequate to run adobe CS5.5 suites (illustrator, indesign,photoshop etc)?
    Thanks in advance
    Gaj

    It is adequate but not great. Also the screen size would be limiting for this type of work.
    I suggest you look into the 15" models as they have a dedicated graphics chip and a larger screen, of course.
    You will also want to upgrade the RAM from the standard 4GBs to 8GBs but you can do that yourself for much less money then buying it from Apple with the unit.

  • All things being equal, does 4th gen quad core i7 (2.5GHz) need more RAM than 5th gen dual core i5 (2.7GHz) for same tasks?

    Bought mid/late 2014 15" MBPr with the i7 2.5GHz and 16GB RAM. I'm within 2 week exchange period at Best Buy, and thinking of switching to 2015 13" MBPr with i5 2.7GHz and 8GB RAM for battery life and weight, and they don't offer the upgraded 16GB RAM option for any 13" models.
    Needs to be Best Buy because of gift cards
    Use docked at office 75% of time vs 25% out of office, so portability and battery life are nice to have but not as important as if I had 8 hour flights on weekly basis
    See appeal of having 5th gen i5 in 13" vs my 4th gen i7 that will be updated this summer
    Not a gamer and don't use Final Cut or other video editing, but I tend to leave several applications open and usually have between 1-3 GB free RAM of the 16GB total at any time according to my Memory Cleaner readings
    Therefore, worried that 8GB is a non-starter as simple math says that I would have shortfall of 5-7GB RAM based on above readings, but wondering if dual core i5 will use RAM more efficiently than quad core i7
    Any help greatly appreciated!

    Also to note, would like this to last 4 years, which was reason that I bought the higher spec'd model even though I don't run games or video editing

  • Mac Mini dual core or Mac Mini quad core server for normal use ?

    Hello
    I am looking to replace my desktop work computer from my 2011 i7 quad core 2.0 MBP for a Mac Mini because it was actually made for desktop use and my minidisplayport - dvi adaptor just broke ( I think because to many unplugs and plugs from the laptop to the monitor ) .
    I work in Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Aptana, Netbeans, open 20 + tabs in chrome, firefox so I need a bit of performance
    I have no use for Mac OSX Server, I just want to be at least as fast as my MBP. I can see that the 999$ Mac mini has the same processor as my MBP ( 2.0GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 ) but no dedicated video card. Also, the 800$ Mac mini has a video card BUT just a dual core - 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 .
    What do you think I should get ? I don't play games, I have windows for that anyway. Would the dedicated video card make much of a difference ? ( does photoshop or mac use it much - openCL etc. )
    Thanks!

    You might also consider the Apple only available Mini
    which has a 2.7 GHz i7 dual core which has dedicated
    graphics. Also, all the 2011 i7 processors (Sandy Bridge)
    are hyperthreading.
    As for dedicated graphics, they are really only needed
    for high end gaming or 3D rendering apps.  It will
    make no difference with the software that you mention,
    as they are more CPU intensive.

  • Macbook Pro: Dual Core i7 vs. Quad Core i7 for iMovie

    Hi-
    Debating whether to purchase the 13" MBP 2.8 GHz dual-core i7, or whether to pony up $700 more for the 15" MBP 2.4 GHz quad-core i7.  Another consideration would be whether to install 4 GB extra of RAM to get 8 GB at the cost of $180.
    Critical question here is whether video editing in iMovie would be OK with the dual-core i7 plus the extra RAM, or whether the quad-core is really necessary.  Anyone have some thoughts on this?  Thanks in advance.

    Ralph has pointed you in the right direction regarding RAM.  Both MBP'a will do the job, but I suspect the 15" machine will have the edge.  That aside, another consideration is the screen size it self.  Larger is better to put it simply.  I have 17" MBPs for that purpose.  That becomes a very big price jump, but I'm spoiled.
    Another factor to consider in working with video, is storage.  Video files can become very large.  Think about external storage and data flow for various types of connections.  Another advantage of the 17" MBP that it can accept and eSata connection (with an appropriate express card) where as the other MBPs cannot.  esata is significantly faster than Firewire, which in turn is faster than USB.  Naturally the enclosure will have to be eSata compatible.  Faster yet will be the Thunderbolt connection, but as of now I am not aware of any compatible enclosures.
    Ciao.

  • Processor for graphic design application: dual-core i5 or quad core i7?

    I am planning on buying a MacBookPro, and I am comparing the processor options.  Using the MacBook for graphic design – Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign – will I see a significant difference in performance between the 2.6GHz dual-core Intel Core i5, and the 2.2GHz quad-core Intel Core i7? I will typically need multiple files open at once, but I will not be doing any video editing or gaming. If going with the dual-core i5 won’t be too slow, I’d like to save that money! Thanks.

    Thanks for answer!
    That means I should take the Dual Core (i5),because I don't play games very often.
    But Portal 2 should work?!
    At the moment I have a PC with 2,4 Ghz Core 2 Quad and it works fine
    Please explain with more information

  • Dual core vs Quad Core for mild video and photo editing

    I've owned PC's since ever and I'm now contemplating on coming over to the Mac world, my question is would a fully upgraded 13" MBPr Suffice for mild photo and video editing or should I try to shell out the extra cash for a lower end 15" with Quad-Core?
    13" specs
    2.8GHz Dual-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz
    16GB 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
    512GB PCIe-based Flash Storage
    2199$
    15" specs
    2.3GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.5GHz
    16GB 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
    512GB PCIe-based Flash Storage
    2599$

    Sorry, yes it will suffice? if so how many years would I expect this computer to last me? (Sorry I'm really new to apple)

Maybe you are looking for