Initiation :
The 27-inch iMac from Apple scores with very high resolution and a racy processor. We propose it is in good test in terms of video editing and what it should be noted when it was a media worker’s pull on the short list.
Specifications :
First of first, the technical specifications of the tested by us iMac 27 “model:
Model Name: iMac
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor speed: 3.06 GHz
Number of processors: 1
Total number of cores: 2
L2 Cache: 3 MB
Memory: 4 GB
Resolution: 2560 x 1440
Graphics Chipset Model: ATI Radeon HD 4670
VRAM (total) 256 MB
Hard drive: 1 TB / HFS +
We conducted the render tests with three different programs, each in the latest version: After Effects CS 4, Final Cut Pro and Motion 7:00 4th. Which allows a good classification in comparison with other systems, as far as possible and documented for each even try. In Final Cut Pro and Motion were render intensive but for the everyday production typical scenarios selected (animated transparencies of multitrack video, color correction, transitions, the trans-coding into other formats, etc.). The raw material was as DVPRO HD (1080p 25) are available. To obtain additional comparisons were the same render tests on a current MacBook Pro (2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GT 256 MB) and a stationary Mac Pro (2×2, 8 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon , 2GB RAM, ATI Radeon HD 3870 512 MB) running. Render Test total :
Advance must be said that the rendering results are to serve as a rough guide to assess the system performance, and we associate no scientific claims that (what the reader will notice no later than the comparison systems that use different hard drives, RAM sizes, etc.). Trend and comparability of the actual system performance are still clearly given.
Here the overview of all the rendering results are summarized as graphics:
Here are the different tests in a precise timetable:
Old RenderTest
MacBookPro = 745
27 “iMac = 501 seconds
Mac Pro = 332 seconds
FCP / DVCPRO HD> DVCPROHD
MacBookPro = 578 seconds
27 “iMac = 390 seconds
= 159 seconds MacPro
FCP / DVCPRO HD> H264
MacBookPro = 1180 seconds
27-inch iMac = 590 seconds
MacPro = 298 seconds
FCP / DVCPRO HD> ProRes 422 HQ
MacBookPro = 615 seconds
27 “iMac = 430 seconds
MacPro = 179 seconds
3D Space / DVCPRO HD> ProRES 4444
MacBookPro = 1129 seconds
27 “iMac = 329 seconds
MacPro = 281 seconds Sticky Notes for the iMac 27″ :
The processing of the iMac 27 “and its components (monitor, Keyboard, Mouse Magic) is on Apple’s typical very high level. It is hard to find in the processing of real vulnerabilities. To our opinion, very successful design concept contributes in no small measure to the desk at nearly wireless on which is presenting the iMac. Only one power cable leading out of the rear center of the screen. Mouse and keyboard are connected via Bluetooh with the computer. Except for a slight delay when starting the iMac, is up to the Blue-Tooth connection, we have no significant delay in keyboard or mouse input can register.
Special attention deserves the LED backlight working TFT display, with its extreme brightness and resolution (2560 x 1440 pixels). About the reflecting variant divorce but you know, the ghosts, but who by reflections bsp. is disturbed by nearby sources, it can with the very high brightness of the displays”. In our setup in several typical office environments we could not detect any unpleasant reflections, and this in itself strongly dimmed display brightness. The 27″ iMac at length, with the ulterior motive of being able to due to its high resolution two parallel 720p video editing in Final Cut Pro, which however should be able to live with a compromise: We have two Final Cut Pro clips in full 720p resolution only almost next to each other can provide. “Almost” because of one clip to let represent approximately 100% size, but others only about 99%. In practice, this small drawback, however, plays little role, since two 100% HD displays only reserved for professional color grading (if any) are absolutely necessary for this anyway and you would choose a professional two-monitor solution.
The Screen-Estate of 27 “iMacs is nonetheless absolutely huge. You have to really get used to it, turning his head from left to right in order to view the entire monitor. Above all, photographers who work with very different original media as video resolutions graphs (eg, files of a 12.1 megapixel DSLR with a resolution of 4256×2832 pixels) are likely to use the high resolution of the 27 “iMac monitor meaningful and ultimately just a tad bit more efficiently major use iMac as their video counterparts.
Conclusion :
Apple 27″ iMac boasts first-class workmanship, top design and its giant screen. Its full potential, he developed especially for media workers who have to do with large graphics or photos – even here I believe that most professional needs are met. In the area of video, we recommend more of a two-monitor solution, one that is feasible with the 27″ iMac, reserved but due to lack of expansion options with a professional video cards in the first place the consumer environment remains. In terms of rendering power for video applications is the here tested model almost exactly between Mac Pro and MacBook Pro and is fully adequate motorized – who needs yet more power, should the quad-core model with Intel’s i5 processor a closer look.