Which is the better processor?

Hi, I've been looking at different cpu benchmarks but some are saying different things. Which is the better processor adobe premiere pro and after effects cs6? Intel core i5 3210M or AMD A8 4500M?

The best benchmark site for Premiere Pro is http://ppbm5.com/
If you are going to edit HiDef you need an i7 or for standard def video at least an i5
The AMD lacks some of the special firmware instructions that PPro uses, so will always be slower than Intel
If you are looking at a laptop, read http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1069742
-and http://forums.adobe.com/message/4578948

Similar Messages

CSM Redundancy : FT or HSRP +FT .. Which is the better option?

Hi,
I would like to know for redundancy between CSMs which is the better option FT or HSRP with FT.. and why ?
Regards
Kas

The CSM does not run HSRP.
So your only option is FT failover.
Gilles.

ToString() and new String(),which is the better?

now,there is very big StringBuffer sb,i want convert it to String s,which is the better:
s=sb.toString();
s=new String(sb);
Thanks.

now,there is very big StringBuffer sb,i want convert
it to String s,which is the better:
s=sb.toString();
s=new String(sb);
Thanks.this is the implementation advice for
toString(StringBuffer)
This method can be coded so as to create a new String object
without allocating new memory to hold a copy of the character sequence. Instead, the string
can share the memory used by the string buffer. Any subsequent operation that alters the
content or capacity of the string buffer must then make a copy of the internal buffer at that
time. This strategy is effective for reducing the amount of memory allocated by a string
concatenation operation when it is implemented using a string buffer.
so decide urself
regards
robert

Which is the better option?

Hey, I'm looking at getting a new mac but I'm not sure what's the better option. My choice right now is between the base 21.5 inch iMac or the Mac mini ( $799 model), and my main use for it would be recording instruments, music production, and movies / netflix. The 21.5 inch Mac would only give me 8gb of ram, whereas the Mac mini I'd instantly be able to upgrade to 16gb. Another bonus to the mac mini is that I can hook it up to whatever screen I want including my TV for movies.Also, the firewire on the mac mini would be extremely useful as some of the higher quality recording interfaces use firewire. And from what I understand I can also add a SSD to the mac mini? For these reasons I'm leaning towards the Mac mini but I've been recommended by representatives at apple to get the iMac as it's more powerful supposedly, so I'm not sure which one would be better. I know the iMac has a dedicated graphics card vs the integrated hd 4000 on the Mac mini, but I'm not exactly sure how that affects me for what I plan on using the computer for. I'd have to buy a monitor and mouse + keyboard for the mac mini, so it ends up costing me the same as the base model iMac. Any suggestions/ opinions would be appreciated, thanks.

I would recommend getting the 16GB iMac. If money is an issue then consider using Apples refurbished store, there is no downside to buying from it as they sell current machine, the products have the same warranty as a new machine, and are eligible for AppleCare.
Because you did not compelete a profile we have no idea where on the planet you are located. To find the US refurb store click:
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals

Which is the better iTouch size?

New here and I'm trying to decide which iTouch to buy my wife. I have been going back in forth between the 32GB http://amzn.to/wgM5BX and the 64GB http://amzn.to/zzTs2U
She listens to books and music and I image will get into a few games and apps. She will also probably want to have some pictures of our kids on there too. I usually thought you should buy the bigger size to future proof the purchase, but now I hear you can stream your music and other stuff, so maybe the hard disk size isn't as relevant. Can anyone give me some feedback on what size to get a medium user of an itouch? Am I making a mistake and should I be looking at the 8GB?

Personally I think that 6gb is too small even for a medium user which is the available memory for the 8gb ipod touch. When it comes to memory the bigger the better, lol. I would suggest the 32gb model. 6 gigs won't be enough for music, games and apps. Think also about her music collection, 1,000 songs at 128kbps take about 3-4 gigs of memory and the majority of games use about 100mb of memory. If you are planning on streaming the content then you can get the 8gb version but then that will limit the music playing to just your home or if you go to someone's home you will only have access to their music library.

Which is the better upgrade: EOS 5DS R or EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM?

I have the 5D Mark II with a 100-400 mm lens (the old version). As a wildlife photographer, which would be the better upgrade, the EOS 5DS R or EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM?

I always assumed lens upgrade first. In this case I was impressed by the new features of the 5DS R because I photograph small birds, often in trees, often at a distance of 30-50 feet, and almost always moving around. I thought the 61 point high density reticular AF might be quick enough to get a photo (that my current set up can't get) and with a file that would allow severe cropping which would make up for the distance.
On the other hand, photographing birds in riparian areas where there is usually poor lighting might suggest the better lens is the answer.
That's basically why I thought to ask others.

Which is the better low-cost 24" Alum refurb'd iMac and why?

OK, I admit I don't pay enough attention. I have a couple year old 24" White iMac with 2.4GHz processor and 500Gb drive, and I'm thinking of "upgrading" to an Alum iMac for no particular reason. So I've been looking at the refurbs in the Apple store. Right now I've got a choice between
1) 2.66GHz, 4G, 640G HD, Nvidia GEForce 9400 w/256 for $1299, and
2) 2.93GHz, 4G, 640G HD, NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 256MB memory for 1549, and
3) 3.06GHz, 2G, 500G HD, NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS with 512MB memory for 1599,
all more or less in budget. Are there significant differences and are they mostly to do with the vid card?
Any opinions? Buy the most expensive one you can afford? There used to be an older 2.8GHz model that many said was better than the 2.66GHz model here, so are there sig differences? Sould I just keep the white one for the present and wait?
Mired in Doubt

Pier Rodelon wrote:
One poster remarked that the 2.8 GHz model unlikely to be noticeably faster than my present 2.4GHz with 3G ram. If that also holds true for the 2.93 and 3.06 I might just sit still and wait a bit, since my machine has operated flawlessly since I bought it on eBay 2 years ago.
As a side-question, what is the projected schedule of new iMac releases, and where can I find a history of all releases?
Again, many thanks for the help.
All the choices you refer to, including the 2.8 GHz that I mentioned, won't have significant speed differences. You already have an Intel Core 2 Duo processor, and the difference between 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9, and 3.06 is only an issue of seconds, not minutes. If you were moving up from PowerPC to Intel, then yes, a new Mac would provide a huge increase in speed.
If you want to know the history of all Macs, download the free Mactracker program.
http://mactracker.dreamhosters.com/
It provides details of every Mac model made, including the introduction and discontinue dates. Macs lasted a lot longer in the old days: Mac IIci introduced September 1989 and discontinued February 1993. The shortest lived Mac would be the original Power Mac G4 from August 1999 to October 1999. The iMacs have typically run the course of a year before a new model is released. Complete design changes have been around a two to four year period, or sometimes longer.

Which is the better converter for mts and mpg files?

Ok, I just have a quick question regarding conversion software. Does anyone know which is better...PAVTUBE or CLIPWRAP2? Besides the cost...pavtube is cheaper. Which one is faster and offers the best quality? OR is there even a better one out there? I have mts files and mpg files I'd like to convert for use in FCP 6.
Message was edited by: CJAZZY

ClipWrap2.

Which is the better lens for wildlife, sport action canon 70-200 is usm ii series L or Canon 100-400

Which would be a better for wildlife and sport action Canon 70-200 mm is usm ii serie L f/2.8 or Canon 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6?

On what camera? It makes a big difference depending upon whether you are using full frame or a crop camera.
Also depends upon the particular sports and type of wildlife most commonly involved, how much reach you might need. Outdoor, daytime sports vs indoor and nightime sports is another key factor.
On a crop camera a 70-200 is generally a lot more usable than it is on full frame, for sports and wildlife. An f2.8 lens and 70-200 might be ideal for indoor sports even with a crop camera. It also might be plenty for large game that can be pretty closely approacted. But for small and more shy wildlife, sports on a larger playing field, you'll more likely need the 100-400. But as an f4.5-5.6 lens that's going to be more of a daytime-only lens.
The 100-400mm is unusual in that it's a push/pull zoom. This can be particularly fast to use and makes the lens popular among photograhers shooting fast moving subjects such as birds in flight and air shows.
If you give serious consideration to the 70-200/2.8 IS II in combination with teleconverter EF 2X III, I'd suggest renting and trying them toghether first. The reason is that a stronger 2X teleconverter has more effect on image quality than a weaker TC. The specific combination of the 70-200 Mark II lens and the 2X Mark III TC is pretty darned good.... better than the combo earlier versions of each item. But whether or not it's up to your expectastions is a judgment call only you can make. So it might be wise to rent before you buy, just to be sure.
If instead you start to take a hard look at the 100-400mm, once again you might want to rent it and give it a try. Some people really like the push/pull zoom design. Some don't. (I'm one of the latter... but to be fair this is largely an old prejudice from trying to use that type of zoom in the past, long before IS. I always found push-pull zooms hard to get a steady shot with.... But the 100-400's IS goes a long way toward solving that problem.)
And those two really aren't your only choices.
Personally I use a pair of crop cameras (7D), most of the time one fitted with a 70-200, and the other fitted with a 300/4 IS, sometimes in combination with an EF 1.4X II teleconverter. Or, when I don't need to be mobile and can set up a tripod, I'll use a 300/2.8 IS, both by itself and with EF 1.4X II or 2X II teleconverters.
Another possibility is two lower cost lenses... such as a 70-200/4 IS in combination with a third party lens such as the Sigma 120-400 OS or 150-500 OS. Those lenses are considerably less expensive than the 70-200/2.8 II and the 100-400, respectively. You might be able to afford both and still find they meet your needs very well.
I use the 70-200/4 IS, as well as a copy of the first version of the 70-200/2.8 IS, and they are excellent lenses too. No doubt about it, the 70-200/2.8 IS Mark II is top of the heap and exceptionally good... but rest assured those other 70-200s are no slouches.
If using a full frame camera, for large field sports and more distant, smaller wildlife.... better start saving up. You're going to need one or two of the super telephotos, such as the new EF 200-400/4L IS 1.4X that I'm saving up for!
p.s. By the way, if not already doing so you might want to try Back Button Focusing. It's a very popular technique among sports/action and wildlife photographers. I've been using it for years for virtually everything I shoot, and can't imagine using any other method now.
Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM

Which is the better way to import videos into FCPX?

Hello to all. I have recently purchased an iPhone 5 and while importing videos, I could import them directly via the camera import of FCPX which was open at that time.
Later, when I tried to import a few stillshots, I found that I could not do it directly with FCPX importing into an event: reason being FCPX would not read the still photos. I learnt from the internet that one could import photos/videos from iPhone either through iPhoto or image capture. I tested out both of them and learnt that I could get my phoyos into FCPX via either of them.
My question is this: is it better for me to import videos into FCPX directly or to first save them on an external HD via image capture? Will there be any effect in the quality of the video in these two different methods of import?
Thanks in advance.

You have already pocketed my thanks in advance Tom! The early bird catches the worm! Awake so early? Have a great day.

Airport Extreme (cone) & Dial Up - Which is the better ISP?

Hello everyone, and thank you for reading this post.
I'm in a situation where I'm away from my glorious broadband, and stuck with only a phone jack several days a week. My only option is dial-up.
I've ordered an AEBS with the built in modem, and I was wondering if anyone out there is using one to connect to a dial up provider with some success. It appears the big 3 to choose from are AOL, netZero, and Earthlink.
Browsing through some of the older posts, it appears that netZero has some app that has to be installed to connect?
Thank you in advance for your reply. I'm basically wanting to connect my MBP wirelessly and browse the internet and play an online game.
bE
ps: any tips for configuration, or is it Apple Easy?

Hello,
I do have the airport extreme (g) with dial-up for backup too.
Yes, there are the big three, with earthlink being most native to the Mac. Netzero sends out a disk to load, if you go that route. (You can also download it, but not when you have no internet).
I have a local one here, which works fine with the Mac. No CD, just the user name and ID plus Password... phone number to dial and in I was. These can be entered in the Network Preferences clicking the Apple.
You have more options then you think. Dial-up is slow when you are used to DSL, but it does get the job done. Heck, I remember the 300 baud back in the 80's... that was "fast", but it only sent text then, no graphic's.
Check your options, prices are lower for the non-big-three, as you will be using it for a back-up, not as an "only".
Powerbook G4 Mac OS X (10.3.9)

Which is the better option for using windows on mac ...parallel or vm ware fusion

i want to use c# ,.net, c++ , on my macbook pro ....which software i should purchase parallel or vmware fusion

They both work well. I like Fusion. Others like Parallels. Still others like VirtualBox.
They all have free trials, VirtualBox is a free product, so try them for yourself and stick with the one that works best for you.
I opted to install Windows using Boot Camp Assistant.

Which is the better upgrade: RAM or a fusion drive?

I am on the verge of ordering one of the new iMac models but I find myself in right ole quandary regarding the Fusion Drive. On the one hand it looks like interesting technology and I'm sufficiently geekly to be motivated by that. On the other hand, I am very reluctant to spend £350 for a speed bump of a second or two here and there. (Yes, it is £350: £200 for the drive, plus £150 extra for the upper end 21.5"). A RAM upgrade seemed a much more sensible option, espeically since this cannot be upgraded later (boo hiss to that!). But then I started thinking: all-flash systems like the MacBook Air have no distinct RAM as such: it's 128 or 256Gb of flash and that's it. So what function does RAM have on a fusion drive system?? Would I not get the same benefits from a fusion drive as I would from a RAM upgrade??
Informed input much appreciated: I am very confused!

Cameron Paterson wrote:
I see what you mean Martin. They do seem distinct but there is some overlap, isn't there? There is no RAM in a MacBook Air is there? Just a quantity of flash memory....
<omitted>
Most computers today do not have RAM which is just Random Access Memory, they have Dynamic Random Access Memory or DRAM, but the 'idea' is the same. DRAM is memory used by the OS and applications for storing objects they are working on in the computers 'memory'.
SSD or flash is flash memory configured to handle 'hard drive' functions. Compared to hardware disk drives with their inertia latency issues SSD is lightning quick. The hard drive function is usually referred to as 'storage' and not as 'memory'.
For example, my mid-2011 MacBook Air has 256GB of SSD which is flash memory used as the main disk drive. It is very fast. It also has 8GB of DRAM, which is enough for most applications to have room to run without paging to the SSD. Since paging to SSD is very quick apps that have to page to the SSD run very quickly too.
A fusion drive is one that has a SSD drive 'married' to a hardware drive via software. Apple's implementation has a 128GB SSD and a 1TB or 3TB hard drive. The software is designed to keep the most often accessed items stored on the SSD. So while it is really two drives, a fusion drive for all practical purposes appears as a single drive. One would have to get to the system level to see it as two drives and Apple has made that very difficult. Accessing the drives separately is a quick and sure way to hose your system.

Which is the better app for devloping a freelance design website?

Hey Forum
I'm putting together a website for my freelance design business. I've rough out the site, but now I'm stuck between using Dreamweaver or Flash. The site is relatively simple with the common home, about, philosophy portfolio and contact pages. I know that Dreamweaver is a real workhorse and is very stable. But as a designer I want a little more glitz and freedom which Flash seems to have. If I do use Flash, I'm worried about bandwidth, search capabilities and device compatibilities.
Any insight would very helpful
KatyDad

The stability of Dreamweavere will have no little bearing on the stability of your web site--Dreamweaver provides tools, it doesn't teach you how/when to use them. Your decision on which way to go should be based on what it is you are trying to sell. If you are selling web site design, then you may want to temper things towards a non-Flash design base so that you can demonstrate your coding skills alongside the graphics aspects of it. If you are selling Flash-based designs, then Flash would be a good vehicle to demo the work itself. If Flash is not a big part of what you are selling, then it should not be a big part of what you put on display. But you can always mix things up, showing Flash elements and html/css elements, if the intention is to show well-rounded skills across the design options palette.
Be prepared for a large swing in differences in the responses.

PAL - NTSC which is the better way ?

Hi
In need of a NTSC DVD disk to US I wonder which way that gives best result:
From original PAL miniDV -> FCP -> QT-PAL.mov -> JES Deinterlacer (conversion from PAL to NTSC) -> iDVD NTSC project
or
PAL miniDV -> FCP -> QT-NTSC.mov -> iDVD NTSC project
Last suggestion will be quicker - but will it give a good result ?
alt. suggestions ??
Yours learning Bengt W

Thank You
Yes it's to easy to go in old tracks - Compressor - Yes that's the way.
Yours Bengt W

Which is the better processor?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for