Macbook Vid Card Memory

[Hoopdy]

Right now I have a HP dv6000 series and it has a Nvidia Geforce Go as a video card, but it doesn't work with the Video Camcorder I just got(Panasonic HDC-SD5) because it isn't able to edit or play anything back in 1920x1080 because of the Vid Card. I have both Pinnacle Studios Plus HD Version and Sony Vegas 8.

Would the Macbook be able to handle these programs without running sluggish?

 

[CanadaRAM]

If you want to do HD video you have to look at a professional level machine, not the $1400 consumer machine.

 

[Hoopdy]

If you want to do HD video you have to look at a professional level machine, not the $1400 consumer machine.

So go Pro or go home?

I was thinking about the Macbook Pro because it's only a couple hundred more than the Blackbook I originally wanted.

 

[Sage Harupyuia]

Macbook Pro.

No questions about it, especially when we're talking about HD rendering.

Unless you dont mind waiting forever for the Macbook to complete the rendering.

 

[Cave Man]

I have both Pinnacle Studios Plus HD Version and Sony Vegas 8. Would the Macbook be able to handle these programs without running sluggish?

There are a lot of factors that go into this. If these apps don't leverage the gpu, then equal cpus will give you roughly equal performance. For example, here's a comparison from MacWorld on the new Penryn-based Macs (2.4 gHz cpus):

H.264 encode
MacBook: 2:40
MacBook Pro: 2:57

Cinema 4D render
MacBook: 0:54
MacBook Pro: 0:53

Compressor MPEG2
MacBook: 1:52
MacBook Pro: 1:51

iMove HD Aged Effect
MacBook: 0:51
MacBook Pro: 0:49

 

[Sage Harupyuia]

There are a lot of factors that go into this. If these apps don't leverage the gpu, then equal cpus will give you roughly equal performance. For example, here's a comparison from MacWorld on the new Penryn-based Macs (2.4 gHz cpus):

H.264 encode
MacBook: 2:40
MacBook Pro: 2:57

Cinema 4D render
MacBook: 0:54
MacBook Pro: 0:53

Compressor MPEG2
MacBook: 1:52
MacBook Pro: 1:51

iMove HD Aged Effect
MacBook: 0:51
MacBook Pro: 0:49

i see that the Macbook actually whipped the Pro in H.264 encoding by an astounding 17 secs..

 

[say]

I've been wanting to buy a macbook for some time now ever since my HP-laptop crashed. I just want to make this clear from everything i've read so far... If I by the 2.1 GHz, 2Gb M., 1280x800 pixels macbook, will I be able to connect it to my 42" plasma true VGA with a higher resolution than 1280x800 pixels? For instance ****x1080 pixels, Without any problems?

Nice mac-community you all have here

 

[Sage Harupyuia]

I've been wanting to buy a macbook for some time now ever since my HP-laptop crashed. I just want to make this clear from everything i've read so far... If I by the 2.1 GHz, 2Gb M., 1280x800 pixels macbook, will I be able to connect it to my 42" plasma true VGA with a higher resolution than 1280x800 pixels? For instance ****x1080 pixels, Without any problems?

Nice mac-community you all have here

i dont think the Macbook can drive that high a resolution. For your case, an MBP may be better.

 

[Cave Man]

I just want to make this clear from everything i've read so far... If I by the 2.1 GHz, 2Gb M., 1280x800 pixels macbook, will I be able to connect it to my 42" plasma true VGA with a higher resolution than 1280x800 pixels? For instance ****x1080 pixels, Without any problems?

The MacBook will display 1920x1200 out its Mini-DVI port. What are you intending to do with it at this resolution?

Nice mac-community you all have here

You forgot "handsome" and "suave."

 

[murc585]

if you;re having issue running 1080p video, its a gpu + cpu issue. the nvidia 8600m in the macbook pro does have h.264 acceleration (at least it does in windows) so it shoudl help take a lot of load off the cpu when playing back these high definition files. The GMAX3100 is garbage for this and anything else that requires any kind of gpu processing power. If you are going to be editing video you should go for the MacBook pro. Those stats posted are for encoding, not playing back video, and if apple is using nvidia technology in the 8600m to decode h.264 video properly, then i would definitely suggest the pro.

 

[Cave Man]

i dont think the Macbook can drive that high a resolution. For your case, an MBP may be better.

It certainly will.

 

[Cave Man]

if you;re having issue running 1080p video, its a gpu + cpu issue. the nvidia 8600m in the macbook pro does have h.264 acceleration (at least it does in windows) so it shoudl help take a lot of load off the cpu when playing back these high definition files. The GMAX3100 is garbage for this and anything else that requires any kind of gpu processing power. If you are going to be editing video you should go for the MacBook pro. Those stats posted are for encoding, not playing back video, and if apple is using nvidia technology in the 8600m to decode h.264 video properly, then i would definitely suggest the pro.

It depends on the OP's target file for 1080. If he intends MPEG-2 or VC-1, then the X3100 will be fine as it has decoding for these algorithms. If it's low bit-rate H.264 it will also be fine. If he needs high bit-rate H.264 decoding, then he may or may not need such gpu power. Even my Minis play low bit-rate H.264 1080 video just fine, and they don't have near the power of the X3100.

But if his apps don't even leverage the gpu, then there's no reason to get the MBP. He needs to determine this first.

 

[Hoopdy]

It depends on the OP's target file for 1080. If he intends MPEG-2 or VC-1, then the X3100 will be fine as it has decoding for these algorithms. If it's low bit-rate H.264 it will also be fine. If he needs high bit-rate H.264 decoding, then he may or may not need such gpu power. Even my Minis play low bit-rate H.264 1080 video just fine, and they don't have near the power of the X3100.

But if his apps don't even leverage the gpu, then there's no reason to get the MBP. He needs to determine this first.

What do you mean by that?

The HP I'm using has a 1.8 dual core and it specifically says that my vid card is the problem, so I'm guessing the Macbook or even the Macbook Pro would be more than enough on the cpu side of things.

 

[Cave Man]

What do you mean by that?

Some software packages will determine if the gpu of your video card has the ability to offload some of the tasks for video decoding and, sometimes, encoding. If your software can take advantage of that muscle, then you should exploit it (i.e., buy a computer with that power). If not, then there's no reason to spend money on something that won't help you. You will need to check your software vendors' web pages for the specs on those packages. If you can't find it, then email them to see if they do use the gpu for those tasks. Be specific - ask "does it use the gpu for (1) encoding and (2) decoding?"

The HP I'm using has a 1.8 dual core and it specifically says that my vid card is the problem, so I'm guessing the Macbook or even the Macbook Pro would be more than enough on the cpu side of things.

Which Nvida Go gpu does your HP have? Some of the Go chips can decode H.264, such as the one in the Apple TV (which is why it has such an anemic cpu - it's not used for video decoding at all, only managing the OS).

Also, when you say it is the "problem", can you be more specific as to what this problem is? Is it an input problem (i.e., acquiring video from the camera), or editing problem, or something else?

 

[Hoopdy]

That's the error it's giving me...

And the Nvidia Go I have is just a shared with 64mb.

 

[Cave Man]

OK, now things are clearer. If you move to a Mac, your Panasonic should work with a MacBook since it outputs AVCHD, which is supported by Apple's Final Cut Express at 1080. You'd need to get confirmation from Apple or someone who uses this camera. The Pinnacle software you are showing isn't available on Macs and I don't know how well it would do under Boot Camp or emulation.

 

[Hoopdy]

So if Mac supports it, it should run fine right?

I could care less about the Pinnacle software working on a Mac, I just want to know whether it is absolutely necessary that I get a Macbook Pro for editing HD video.

 

[Cave Man]

Yes, it should work fine. I wouldn't bother with iMovie - I'd invest the money in FCE. Don't plan on using some of the 3rd-party plugins or Motion that utilize the gpu. But if you're just going to be doing straight video editing, rendering and output with MPEG-2 or MPEG-4/H.264, cpu power is what you need. With the money you'd save over a MBP, you could buy yourself a 24" display for 1920x1200 output (i.e., 1080 video). You'd be good to go.

 

[Hoopdy]

Yes, it should work fine. I wouldn't bother with iMovie - I'd invest the money in FCE. Don't plan on using some of the 3rd-party plugins or Motion that utilize the gpu. But if you're just going to be doing straight video editing, rendering and output with MPEG-2 or MPEG-4/H.264, cpu power is what you need. With the money you'd save over a MBP, you could buy yourself a 24" display for 1920x1200 output (i.e., 1080 video). You'd be good to go.

Thanks a ton!

So a Macbook should be ample for video editing of 1920x1080 video?

 

[Cave Man]

Yes, but its native resolution is 1280 by 800. You'll need an external display (and mini-DVI to DVI adapter) that is capable of 1080 resolution (i.e., 1920x1200) to do full-screen editing.

 

[Hoopdy]

Yes, but its native resolution is 1280 by 800. You'll need an external display (and mini-DVI to DVI adapter) that is capable of 1080 resolution (i.e., 1920x1200) to do full-screen editing.

So even though the display on the Macbook is only 1280x800 it can output 1920x1080 on an external display?

Thanks so much, again. I should be ordering my Macbook by the end of May.

 

[Cave Man]

Yes, here you go.

 

[Hoopdy]

Yes, here you go.

Dude, you rock.

 

[say]

The MacBook will display 1920x1200 out its Mini-DVI port. What are you intending to do with it at this resolution?

Well, the quality is great on 1080p, playing 1080p.x264 movies.. and also I want to play a game that need 1440x900 pixels. Which I can do now on my extern screen.

Thanks for the answer Cave Man!

 

[Cave Man]

Well, the quality is great on 1080p, playing 1080p.x264 movies..

Just remember that the X3100 gpu in the current MacBooks cannot decode H.264, thus it relies on the cpu for such decoding. GHz is king on MacBooks. It will handle low-bit rate 1080 content just fine (for example, go to Apple's trailers page and download a 1080 trailer), but if it's high bit-rate (e.g., Blu-Ray quality) it will likely have playback issues. On the other hand, if your content is encoded in MPEG-2 1080, the X3100 has hardware decoding for it and will likely play high bit-rate MPEG-2 video just fine.

and also I want to play a game that need 1440x900 pixels. Which I can do now on my extern screen.

If your game is 3D-intense, you might have problems with the X3100. It is not known as a 3D rendering gpu, mostly as a 2D rendering gpu (video and photos). With that said, I get nice performance of Quake I, Quake II and Unreal (original) on my Mac Mini, which has a lesser gpu than the current MacBook's X3100. I have not tried any of the newer games (e.g., Quake 4), but my suspicion is it would have trouble with them. YMMV.