hi john
Not sure I would do it for a system I was relying on as my sole source of income, but I purchased a mint used 2009 Mac Pro 2.26 8 core Nehalem with 32GB of eBay for 800 bucks. I also purchased a matched pair of used 2.93 ghz Westmere 6 core processors pulled from a server for 250 bucks, and upgraded the computer to a 12 core beast. You need to upgrade the firmware to 2010, which is an easy hack. The best part was that the 2009 came with two AMD Radeon 5770 video cards, which I was able to sell for $400 bucks. For an outlay of around a thousand bucks, my home system now has a Geekbench score over 27,000, which is not far off from a new trash can Mac Pro. And I kept my Nvidia GTX 680, my raid card, my SSD PCI card, and my Kona Card in service from my old Mac Pro 3,1 (2008).It's a option if you are handy and comfortable getting your hands dirty inside a computer. Not saying I'd recommend it for the heart of your business, but I couldn't happier._____________________________
From: Bruce Tovsky bruce@skeletonhome.com [Avid-L2] <avid-l2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 12:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] MC 7.0.4.3 buggy behavior
To: <avid-l2@yahoogroups.com>
yes, i did read them all - don't like squeeze too much, prefer AME, and the way i was working did the trick without hiccups till recently. this cpu has been running constantly for 7 years and has paid for itself many times over, and since i've recently moved into more graphics intensive work in after effects and cinema 4d the upgrade of my GPU would give me a boost on that side. tempted to go for a trashcan, but i've got a fair amount of legacy stuff i'd have to upgrade to integrate it.
i've been making movies since the days of film, almost 40 years now, and worked on just about everything that edits: 16mm & S8 flatbeds, 1/2" open reel with backwinding scales, 3/4" rm440 to cmx A/B roll, 1", BetaSP, D3, D2 edit suite, EMC non-linear and finally Avid. when i have a piece of hardware that is at the very cusp of going obsolete - and the Early 2008 MacPro3,1 is right there these days on compatibility charts - i get antsy.bEeh, you've not read the suggestions, did you?There is nothing wrong with your hardware, perhaps an OS refresh is needed, but c'mon, movies were made before Avid existed.Get your current stuff in the state it 'should' be in, and you'll be fine after following the advise already given.Bouke----- Original Message -----Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 3:51 PMSubject: Re: [Avid-L2] MC 7.0.4.3 buggy behaviorthanks for all the suggestions folks. seems like my old faithful mac pro is getting cranky - had a scary kernel panic this morning, the kind where you see code on the screen. restarted fine, and i'm updating a backup now just in case. thinking about getting a late model mac pro (pre trashcan) as a holdover till i can work out converting our install to TB and the new mac pro. the news that the nitris dx will be supported was heartening, but obviously if you're going to work higher that 2K t's not going to hack it. decisions, decisions…
bOn Apr 9, 2015, at 8:08 PM, Bogdan Grigorescu bogdan_grigorescu@yahoo.com [Avid-L2] < Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:another option that we started using about 6mo.ago for h264s is ResolveLite.Great scaling, encoding, burns, etc. Twice as fast as RT on an NVidia GTX680 for Mac.Also, free of charge.cheers,BG
From: "Mark Spano cutandcover@gmail.com [Avid-L2]" <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
To: "Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com" <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] MC 7.0.4.3 buggy behaviorAnother vote for Media Encoder is its ability to handle RGB or 709 source files without issue. Squeeze is a bit more temperamental with that, just have to be more careful.I use both, each when the occasion calls for its particular strengths. Media Encoder is faster overall, and always looks great without fudging with gamma or other settings. Squeeze gives access to far more intricate parameters which need attention for great encodes, is a bit slower serially, but can parallel process multiple files and save lots of time if you have them.Squeeze: pretty fast, can easily crunch multiple files at once per processor.Media Encoder: extremely fast, but can only crunch multiple versions per file at once, otherwise serial process.On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Dave Hogan mactvman@yahoo.com[Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:I throw in another vote for Sorenson Squeeze. It does a great job, you can tweak it for performance/quality, and it is still tons faster than Compressor or QuickTime. I like X264 encoder much more than Main Concept, both of which are a choice in Squeeze. Cannot comment on Media Encoder, never used it.And most of you already have a license copy from when you bought your AVID.For cooking high quality files when time is not an issue, I really like free and open source Handbrake. It cooks great reduced size files of my favorite Blu-Ray rips, which I can travel with and watch on my laptop.Dave HoganBurbank, CAAvid uses the Quicktime engine when you export. That really is ancient technology.
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.combruce tovsky"Flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."Douglas Adams
bruce tovsky
"Reality is whatever refuses to go away when I stop believing in it.."
Philip K. Dick
Posted by: Bruce Tovsky <bruce@skeletonhome.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (14) |
No comments:
Post a Comment