![]() ![]() It will be 3x to 4x faster than Premiere in every category. Word to the wise: if you're using a lower-end Intel-based Mac to do your video editing, and especially if you're using high-resolution source footage, use Final Cut Pro. Even without a discrete GPU and 4 fewer CPU cores, the MacBook Pro/Final Cut still outperformed the Razer/Premiere in a couple of benchmarks. The Razer was still able to render previews, export an H.264, and produce a master file more quickly, but it's not the staggering performance difference you would expect when going from a 4-core CPU and integrated graphics to an 8-core CPU and an NVIDIA RTX 3080. The MacBook Pro/Final Cut combo was able to export an H.265/HEVC file almost three minutes faster than the Razer in Premiere, and it can apply stabilization to the same clip more than two minutes faster. Even without a discrete GPU and 4 fewer CPU cores, the MacBook Pro running Final Cut still outperformed the Razer running Premiere in a couple of benchmarks. Not only does Final Cut Pro on the M1 iMac sweep all but one category, just compare the Final Cut results from the relatively meager 13-inch MacBook Pro against the Premiere Pro results from the beefy Razer Blade 15. ![]() We all hate on Apple's walled garden from time to time, but having such tight integration of hardware and software comes with perks. You can, of course, draw your own conclusions, but we noticed three major takeaways from these numbers. The third and final graph shows Premiere Pro vs Final Cut Pro on the same scale, using the Razer as a high water mark for Premiere performance on Windows: ![]() Note that the iMac was tested using the Arm-optimized Beta version of Premiere Pro: The second compares Premiere Pro performance across all three machines. The first chart shows Final Cut Pro performance, comparing the MacBook Pro against the iMac: Obviously, in this context, shorter bars mean better performance. Each time is the average of at least three consecutive runs of every render, export, or stabilization run, with outliers thrown out if the system happened to glitch. You can see the full results of our testing in the graphs below. Unfortunately, we didn't have an AMD laptop on hand to see how a Ryzen CPU or Radeon GPU would have fared compared to the Intel, Apple Silicon, and NVIDIA hardware tested here, but stay tuned because we have more head-to-head comparisons and computer reviews planned for the coming months. It was important to include a high-powered Windows machine with an NVIDIA GPU in order to demonstrate the benefits of CUDA hardware acceleration When set to 'Software Only' encoding, you can expect these same exports and renders to take a brutal 3x to 5x longer. In fact, it's the RTX 3080 laptop GPU inside the Razer Blade that really turned this head-to-head into a fair fight. Obviously we couldn't run the Final Cut tests on the Razer laptop, but we felt it was important to include a high-powered Windows machine with an NVIDIA GPU in order to demonstrate the benefits of CUDA hardware acceleration in Premiere Pro. Match Sequence Settings in Premiere), since Final Cut will use the rendered previews by default. Previews were rendered with identical settings in both programs, and 'Use Previews' was checked when exporting the master file (i.e. To keep things as even as possible, all Final Cut Pro exports were done at 'Better Quality' and all Premiere Pro exports were configured to match the bitrate of the Final Cut File using VBR 1-pass encoding. Similarly, previews for this piece were set by default to 4K ProRes 4:2:2 in Final Cut's Project Settings, with no option to change the resolution of your previews without changing the resolution of the entire project/timeline or going through the additional step of generating proxy media. We took 8K footage from a Sony a1, compiled it into two identical timelines with identical effects, scoured the settings to ensure everything was identical, and ran both of these video editors through the same battery of tests. It makes only a slight difference in total bitrate, and may be similar to Premiere Pro's option for CBR vs VBR 1-pass vs VBR 2-pass encoding, but we have no way of knowing for sure. For example, the difference between H.264 'Faster Encode' and H.264 'Higher Quality' isn't explained anywhere in Apple's documentation. Coming up with tests that were close to identical was tricky because Final Cut Pro gives you less control over how and what you can render and export unless you also buy Apple's Compressor software. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |