# Video editors: is 128MB video ram enough?



## kloan (Feb 22, 2002)

I really want to start doing some video editing, it's always something I've loved doing.. did a little in school and really enjoyed it. I'm going to start making some videos for my music...

So, I am wondering if the Macbook Pro with 128MB video is fast enough to handle real-time effects, etc, or should I be patient and wait until I can find the right deal for the one with 256MB video?

I'm going to be using Final Cut Pro, and possibly Motion, as well as some VJ software.

Input is appreciated.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

Although somewhat important I think 128mb is enough. Your key's to video editing is RAM and lotsa, lotsa, lotsa storage - investing in a large external or two would be a good idea. As well, a dual layer/format dvd burner. 

Overall, a video card rarely causes bottlenecks leading to dropped frames. What it can do, however, is make for very sluggish screen redraws. A fast display adapter that supports high screen resolutions and colour output is preferred for editing video which I think the 128mb card in the MBP can handle.


----------



## Glipt (Aug 7, 2003)

I'm using Final Cut Studio on my G4 733 Quicksilver with only a 32 M video card. FCP has been fine. Of course Motion won't even install but I have found FCP to run quite well.


----------



## kloan (Feb 22, 2002)

I plan on doing a lot of effects, and I certainly would prefer them realtime.. this is something I don't have any experience with (but something I've always wanted), since back when I was editing video before, no computers were fast enough to handle that.

Is the 128MB capable of realtime effects? Would the 256MB be better for it?

There's also going to be 3D stuff as well, matted... (is that the term? don't even remember.. lol)


----------



## Guest (Nov 7, 2006)

Those are a good choice for what you're looking for. VRAM isn't everything, those are pretty fast video cards in the MBP's  i thikn yo'll be happy with it for sure.


----------



## fyrefly (Apr 16, 2005)

For Just video editing (supposing you don't want to do Motion or anything) you should be fine with 128. Even the MacBook with 64 MB Shared works great with FCP. (even though it's not supported).


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

"Remember Dynamic RT. Due to FCP’s scalable realtime architecture, the user can specify at what quality the footage plays back on the timeline. This makes it possible to view more and more effects and video tracks in real-time, depending on the speed of your system.

Dynamic RT does it for you – adjusting the image quality and frame rate as your footage plays, taking into account your system speed and the amount of effects, transitions and tracks you’re trying to view in real-time. You can still change playback quality to High, Medium or Low by means of a small dropdown at the top-right of the timeline."


----------



## Guest (Nov 7, 2006)

fyrefly said:


> For Just video editing (supposing you don't want to do Motion or anything) you should be fine with 128. Even the MacBook with 64 MB Shared works great with FCP. (even though it's not supported).


Motion works decently on my 128MB card which is about 3 generations older than the one on the MBP and I'm driving a pair of 23" screens with mine.


----------



## kloan (Feb 22, 2002)

interesting... though still not sure what to do... i guess i'm still leaning towards 256MB.. only because it's a lot of money to spend (on either one), so i want to be sure i'll be totally happy with my decision.. i don't want to cut any corners this time around...


----------



## Suite Edit (Dec 17, 2003)

FYI - As soon as you apply a matte filter in FCP, you'll be rendering anyways. I think 128mb is plently of VRAM for editing... as your processor does the work when rendering, I would focus your energy on RAM, CPU and HD (as Macinist has said) rather than the 128 mb. I think you'd be better served by eliminating the HD bottleneck in the laptop.


----------



## liamcward (Nov 6, 2006)

*256MB Card*

Hey,

It depends mostly what video you think you will be dealing with, and what software.

Well its true you will be rendering with most graphic or matte effects in final cut, there are benefits to higher Vram in other software such as motion and after effects. Both of this programs will pull more heavily on Vram and RAM in order to ram preview your work, more smothly and higher quality settings...without having to render your build first.

If you are atleast somewhat serious about persuing some graphic design I would say the 256MB, the 128 is borderline outdated and you still won't be paying top dollar for say a 512MB card.


----------



## Suite Edit (Dec 17, 2003)

liamcward is 100% right about Motion and AE VRAM benefits... but 256mb is THE top-dollar card right now. Kloan's looking at the Macbook Pro which doesn't have a 512 option. I'm sure they will at some point, but right now he'd be buying the top-of-the-line GPU.

IMO you can always talk yourself into way more than you need (as I've done this a number of times). It does depend on what software you're running, but I would assume that because you're looking at a portable (and you're talking about _starting_ back into video work) you aren't going to be doing really heavy-lifting for a while. If I'm reading this wrong and you believe that you'll be in Motion/AE/games enough to justify the cost of the performace gain, great! It all comes down to the application of the tool you're gonna buy


----------



## liamcward (Nov 6, 2006)

*Pardon me...*

Sorry I completely must have missed that you were thinking of putting in a powerbook. In which case, its not exactly a system I would worry about building up for intensive motion graphics or high definition editing, there are just too many things that can become inconvenient such as expensive parts, limited space, mass storage...firewire drives just aren't the best for working off of.

I say definitely stick with the 128 on this one. You will have a more than capable enough system to play around with lots of editing (especially if working in standard definition) as well as trying out grapic programs.


----------

