Mac I5 Vs I7 For Video Editing Rendering

If the choice was between spending money on the processor or the RAM, you'd get more bang out of photoshop with more RAM. The i7 adds 'Hyperthreading' and more cache. These two things can speed up newer applications like Lightroom and some processes in CS6 (keep in mind CS6 still uses some older code in some places so some features in CS6 may not take full advantage of hyperthreading, which is why I say you may see more of an improvement in Lightroom). Partition hard drive windows 10 for mac. The other thing that can improve speeds particularly in Lightroom is the video card. Lightroom is designed to off load some of the processing to the graphics card, and upgrading from a 512MB to a 1 or 2 GB card can offer a bit of improvement.

Still, going from 8 to 16GB of RAM is going to be the biggest bang for the buck improvement all around. The nice thing is with the 27' iMac you can add more RAM later if you need (and it may be cheaper to do so later) so you don't need to pay the extreme price for 32GB of RAM as that is one thing you can easily upgrade down the road when you feel you need more. Kb2zuz and graybalanced, Thank you for your replys and the help. At this times I consider 27' with i7 and 8GB RAM. Not sure about Fusion Drive. Usually edited photos are done in one session and the Fusion drive would not keep them on SSD portion but on the mechanical part of the HD.

The software (LR and CS6) would end staying on the 128GB SSD portion the HD, which help to reduce their openning time. I am not sure how it may effect the editing speed. It is probably the RAM, as you mentioned, has the dominating effect on the editing speed. If it is true then I may skip the Fusion Drive, because its only benefits would be the faster loading of the software and prolonging the life of the HD mechanical part. The Fusion Drive is the only left confusion to decide.

Let me know your thinking on Fusion Drive benefits. I have a 27' i5 3.1ghz iMac late 2011 that is running on 16g ram. I do a lot af video and photoshop as well as NX2. I replaced the processor with a i7 2600 and could not tell a difference in PS or NX2. However there is a huge difference in video rendering.

Yesterday I added a 256 Agility4 SSD and wow that has made a huge difference in loading and booting times as well as RAW conversion in NX2 If you are not big on video go with the i5 and ad the fusion or if an SSD only option is available go for it. Work can be stored externaly I would now like to move all the user files to the old Mac 1tera drive but must still figure out how to configure the mac to do it automatically.

Best for processing speed. The best video-editing Mac for raw speed is the iMac Pro. Apple's high-class apology to its long-neglected pro customers comes with 8 cores as standard and can be.

Nikonsyncro wrote: I have a 27' i5 3.1ghz iMac late 2011 that is running on 16g ram. I do a lot af video and photoshop as well as NX2.

I replaced the processor with a i7 2600 and could not tell a difference in PS or NX2. However there is a huge difference in video rendering. Yesterday I added a 256 Agility4 SSD and wow that has made a huge difference in loading and booting times as well as RAW conversion in NX2 If you are not big on video go with the i5 and ad the fusion or if an SSD only option is available go for it.

Work can be stored externaly I would now like to move all the user files to the old Mac 1tera drive but must still figure out how to configure the mac to do it automatically. Your replied experience is a real help. Have you installed the SSD into your Mac or you used one the fast ports? I have D7000 and small Panasonic - both set to RAW. Also, I am not in video. Started and stopped long ago as quickly realized that is too easy to shoot long boring videos. One classic photographer said: A photograph is a short video in one image:-)))) Leo.

You are correct fusion drive's primary impact will be in booting up of the computer when it is shut down and starting up applications. It may also have additional improvements for when you are low on RAM and the computer would need to be using scratch disk space. Also (and I am not 100% certain on exactly how the Fusion Drive moves things around) but if you are working on a particular file a lot (say you're working on a PSD of one image) and the Fusion Drive is smart enough to move that file to the SSD partition, then opening and saving that file would be faster. If money is tight, keep in mind the 27' does have thunderbolt ports so if in a year or two SSD drives become significantly cheaper, connecting an SSD externally via Thunderbolt would provide be pretty much just as fast as having the SSD internally. (though you might not get advantage of the Fusion Drive software automatically moving more commonly used files to the SSD). I'm looking at a very similar system myself. I'm leaning towards the Fusion Drive partly so the computer starts up quicker and partly out of curiosity.