Is it pointless to try to build a super strong PC...

[Higgins2002]

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

this looks like a low level budget desktop...

it's funny how they don't mention the most important specs like cpu, gpu, and ram. instead they talk about harddrive space which is the least important spec. no wonder they're asking about mac XD

Intel Core i7 7th Gen - Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake Quad-Core 4.2 GHz LGA 1151 91W BX80677I77700K Desktop Processor

ASRock Z270 Extreme 4 LGA 1151 Intel Z270 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 ATX Motherboards - Intel

CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3200C1

oh yeah that's PLENTY good. would be super dumb to get another machine if that's what you already have.

I thought it should be. The guy who built it for me (who I've since lost touch with) said it would be a pretty strong setup, and he knew I used it mostly for photo stuff.... But I told him I never did video.

Anyway, TY.

For editing 8k buy a better gpu nvidia RTX 3060 12GB is pretty cheap

minimum for 8k is 8GB RAM on gpu. ( PC ).

I upgraded my PC from 16GB RAM to 32GB RAM, but it still filled up when running Lr/Ps. So, I just went to 128GB, and found 64GB would probably be enough.

I was talking about RAM on GPU.

 

[r6 shooter]

Yes, transcoding to 12bit 4:4:4:4 ProRes prores saves image information (I believe you suggested 422 HQ, which has less information than RAW) - but those 12bit 4444 files are truly gigantic. Care to tell us the size relative to a H265 clip? 10X the size? 20X? The space requirements are enormous for that codec. If you shoot, say, 20 minutes of H265 8K video, how large would the transcoded 8K 12bit 4444 prores files be?

they are not truly gigantic though, they are 1/5 the size of raw files. so if a raw clip is 10GB, the prores clip will be 2GB. that's a massive difference for something that is visually lossless and multi-generational. i never said 422 hq.

now you're strawmanning me with this new workflow. you were going on and on about raw so i changed my own argument to respond to your raw arguments and now you bring it back to h265. it's a strawman because i never said you would save the prores files for h265.

if you shoot 12bit raw and transcode to prores, you can delete the original raw file. if you shot 10bit clog h265, then you can transcode for your editing then delete the prores files after you're done. why? because if you need to edit again you can just transcode the h265 file again. the h265 file will be smaller than the prores file. and obviously if you're recording 10bit h265, you only need to use 10bit prores. you can always select the prores version that matches what you shot with.

Also, give us an idea how long it takes on a low-specced PC to transcode from an H265 10bit 422 8K file or an 8K RAW file to 12bit 4444 prores (or 10bit 422 HQ)? Again, take the 20-minute H265 example. Three hours?

i have a really old cpu and it takes like 2min for 1min of footage. most of the work i do is clips and they are all 30sec or under. so batch processing all of them is usually less than 5min. if i have multiple shoots in a day it could be 15min for 3 shoots worth. not a big deal at all.

If you shoot RAW you do not need to transcode, since with no compression the files are relatively easy to edit - I can do it on a MacBook Air m1 (cheap).

still not a good reason to buy a completely new machine. if you're adding effects, it's certainly more efficient to use prores. not to mention again, it's 1/5 of the space.

Oh c'mon, don't impute my motive - "advertise" really? Do you think I financially benefit from someone following my suggestion of an alternative? Btw, can any software create prores files on a Windows computer? Why didn't you mention DNxHR 12bit 4444? Pushing Apple?

nothing to do with financially benefiting. people like to f@nboy. as far as software goes, there's a bunch of free apps to transcode. shutter encoder being my favorite.

As to spending "tons of money" - that is what an R5 and lenses cost. The relevant audience here has bought a very expensive R5, so why cheap out for making use of its features? You invest in equipment to save lots of time and space, get a better screen, and avoid hassle.

getting a new computer for something so simple that's 5x more efficient (literally) is so stupid. they already have a good computer. maybe they could upgrade their graphics card. but if you act like omg i need a mac because m1 you're just f@nboying hard. did you see the specs they have? all they need are some minor upgrades for what they already have. it would take them even less time to transcode then me lol

Your pushing of how transcoding avoids hardware investments is useful, but very slanted. It is useful for someone with lots of time, and a low opportunity cost of that time, and lots of disk space but who somehow ran out of money after purchasing an expensive camera and lenses.

nah you misunderstand. i'm saying they already have plenty. the specs they have are fine. they just need a few minor upgrades. i would never say get a whole new computer also just because "m1 m1 m1". total non-sense. prores still edits better. it renders faster. it saves 75-80% of the space for raw. for h265, you can just delete the prores files. very efficient workflow that allows one to fully utilize the hardware they already have. the only small downside is the time it takes to transcode which is not very long at all.

 

[Digitalis32]

My thoughts regarding Mac Vs PC as a post processing platform is that MACs use a lot of proprietary hardware designed with the explicit design intent of not being repairable - and any attempts at user repair is actively discouraged by apple in the TOS.

It's not practical to compare 'platforms' for postprocessing. Comparing the actual h/w specs is much more beneficial. In this thread, people seem to tend to compare brands not specs.

What brings you faster from A to B, Toyota or Ford? The question is meaningless without knowing the actual technical details and concrete car models.

In terms of LR and PS, RAM is very important but your CPU may become a bottleneck.

I have to say a rather biased perspective. Viewing strictly as platforms of equal value all things being equal a PC is a better long term investment than a Mac, as the Mac does not provide the modular flexibility of upgrades. With Macs you have to buy an entirely new system to make any significant improvement in terms of specs and capability.

 

[MarshallG]

My thoughts regarding Mac Vs PC as a post processing platform is that MACs use a lot of proprietary hardware designed with the explicit design intent of not being repairable - and any attempts at user repair is actively discouraged by apple in the TOS.

It's not practical to compare 'platforms' for postprocessing. Comparing the actual h/w specs is much more beneficial. In this thread, people seem to tend to compare brands not specs.

What brings you faster from A to B, Toyota or Ford? The question is meaningless without knowing the actual technical details and concrete car models.

In terms of LR and PS, RAM is very important but your CPU may become a bottleneck.

I have to say a rather biased perspective. Viewing strictly as platforms of equal value all things being equal a PC is a better long term investment than a Mac, as the Mac does not provide the modular flexibility of upgrades. With Macs you have to buy an entirely new system to make any significant improvement in terms of specs and capability.

In reality, this isn't true. If you upgrade your system every 3 to 4 years, all the components will be obsolete anyway. The new CPU will need a new motherboard, new RAM, and the graphics card will be pretty old as well. I've been through this as well.

Macs solder in their internal memory and storage, but this also improves reliability, and their internal storage is blazing fast. Everything else needs to connect with Thunderbolt -- that's the expensive part; no PCIe slots for expansion, although most people don't use them.

So there is some PC advantage in this regard, but it's not that great. I alway's use Apple's laptops, with a big external display. I don't get the iMac concept, where you throw away the monitor when you get rid of the computer. Monitors usually last a very long time.

 

[Mako2011]

My thoughts regarding Mac Vs PC as a post processing platform is that MACs use a lot of proprietary hardware designed with the explicit design intent of not being repairable - and any attempts at user repair is actively discouraged by apple in the TOS.

It's not practical to compare 'platforms' for postprocessing. Comparing the actual h/w specs is much more beneficial. In this thread, people seem to tend to compare brands not specs.

What brings you faster from A to B, Toyota or Ford? The question is meaningless without knowing the actual technical details and concrete car models.

In terms of LR and PS, RAM is very important but your CPU may become a bottleneck.

I have to say a rather biased perspective. Viewing strictly as platforms of equal value all things being equal a PC is a better long term investment than a Mac, as the Mac does not provide the modular flexibility of upgrades. With Macs you have to buy an entirely new system to make any significant improvement in terms of specs and capability.

In reality, this isn't true. If you upgrade your system every 3 to 4 years, all the components will be obsolete anyway. The new CPU will need a new motherboard, new RAM, and the graphics card will be pretty old as well. I've been through this as well.

Depends on the use case. Being a heavy gamer and photo editing software user...I find that after about 2/3 years a GPU upgrade is the only particle required upgrade...then another 2 years add maybe a motherboard/CPU. DD4 memory is holding up well and even solid state drives can stay pretty viable for a long time. From experience, normally don't sacrifice performance mush spreading out updates over a 5/6 year time period. I have a tendency though to start with high end gear and can usually skip a GPU generation and a CPU generation or two. I dont think that would be the case if starting with current gen mid level components


I also help out with a production company that uses a Mac workflow. There upgrade times/requirement are notably a bit more frequent/expensive but works well for their needs...only issue they are currently having is the lack of support for Final Cut Pro which has forced migration to Adobe.

 

[higheronymous]

....for R5 photo and video work ?

I ask this because apparently Mac seems to handle R5 photo and video, quite easily, by default.

Is it even possible to build a comparable PC ?

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

So would it be worth it to try to upgrade it to the point that it could fly though giant photo projects (forget 45 mp's... I'm into stitching and stacking) and also maybe some 4K 60 fps video, or even some 8K...

OR, could one spend a BUNCH of $$$ on PC upgrades, and it still not work as well as a much more modest Mac ?

I totally understand their might be a little bias here lol But I'm ready for that.

You really opened up a can of worms with that question lol. I'm a Mac guy that used to be a PC guy. I use a 2017 27" iMac that was maxed out at the time including 64gb memory.

I'm not going to go there with who's better etc but I will say this, I'll never go back to a PC. It drove me crazy before I retired and had to use a PC at work. My Mac is an intel based computer so in theory its comparable to a PC of similar specs. The OS is what's the main difference. if you are going to do 4K or 8K video you may want to upgrade your graphics card and defiantly your Hybrid drive to a full SSD drive. Spinning drives are a huge bottleneck. Memory is pretty cheap and the second best way to amp up your box, max it out too.

I'm excited about the M1 series of Macs but not enough to want to upgrade (they haven't released the M1 in the 27" iMac anyway). I've got $3600 in my box so I need to keep it going for a few more years or until they stop supporting it.

But I will say this, when I was in school studying Photography 2006-2008, we were all Macs. We had 1 (One) IT guy take care of all the computers, and he spent most of his day flirting with the pretty girls lol. At work we had about a dozen IT guys to keep the PC's running. I used to like tinkering with PC's and figuring out how to get things going again. But not anymore, I just want to turn on my computer and start working or surfing... It was a rare day I could come home from work and NOT have my wife or kids ask me why they can't print or get online or whatever. "My experience" is Macs are a lot easier to get things done because I dont have to tinker with anything in the OS to keep things going.

But for you if you're happy with windows, stay with them and upgrade, one of the biggest advantages to PC's, upgradeability. Its also the downfall of PC's is all the 3rd party manufactures making PC parts mean the OS its less stable, need drivers, etc...

I remember back around 2000 the Macs were soooo bad. They were unbearably slow. I also remember editing 640x480 video footage. Haha! To think, computers back then would struggle with that. I actually worked in a photo lab around that time. The Macs would crash if you tried to make them do two things at once. I could be wrong but I still don’t think OSX is a true multi-tasking OS, which Windows has been for years. Everyone always says Linux is sooo fast! It’s lightweight!!! Here is secret…. Lightweight != fast. It takes logic to make things happen fast in a computer with fine tuned optimizations. None of which exist in Linux. Which is why things like Ubuntu are ungodly slow and bad. I have to give Apple credit though, I’ve never seen so many rich people happily plunking down huge sums of money The thing is, Apple marketing is so good you almost want your current Mac to break so you can buy the new one. I think that is why they get away with the 1 year warranty. The people who buy them plan on buying a new one within a year anyway.

 

[Chris Wolfgram]

....for R5 photo and video work ?

I ask this because apparently Mac seems to handle R5 photo and video, quite easily, by default.

Is it even possible to build a comparable PC ?

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

So would it be worth it to try to upgrade it to the point that it could fly though giant photo projects (forget 45 mp's... I'm into stitching and stacking) and also maybe some 4K 60 fps video, or even some 8K...

OR, could one spend a BUNCH of $$$ on PC upgrades, and it still not work as well as a much more modest Mac ?

I totally understand their might be a little bias here lol But I'm ready for that.

It's not pointless, but you need to understand a bit to do it right without blowing tons of money.

Check this post: How to speed up Lightroom & Photoshop for professional media creators! | Learn Photography Skills

I actually followed what it said, I have 32GB of RAM and 3 SSD's, a 1TB drive for the system, a 2TB "cache/swap/scratch disk", and a 2TB "working SSD". Using 3 drives massively improved things in all my media programs. You'll need to manually set Windows, and your software, to use the correct drives but once that is done, you're all set.

BTW, if your software doesn't allow you to specify a drive for its cache (like Capture One) it's probably letting Windows manage the cache so it will follow whatever you set for the Windows system cache.

As for the cost, my SSD upgrades cost about $450. Not a huge amount of money, but it made a discernable difference. Mainly the whole system just runs smoother no matter what I am doing. It never starts that annoying "chugging" behavior. I wouldn't say it is lightning fast yet, but it maintains a good speed without ever slowing down.

I will read that article. TY for the link

 

[Chris Wolfgram]

The SSD hybrid drive you mentioned sounds suspect. Adding one or two PCIe 3.0x4 M2 drives might make a difference.

Well, I actually have 3 hard drives, including this one, that I use for my operating system, Photo programs, and temporary photo storage

WD Black 256GB Performance SSD - M.2 2280 PCIe NVMe Solid State Drive - WDS256G1X0C

I should have gotten at least a 512GB though, as it fills pretty quickly, with photos, then has to be dumped off into my my 4TB hard drive.

 

[Chris Wolfgram]

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

this looks like a low level budget desktop...

it's funny how they don't mention the most important specs like cpu, gpu, and ram. instead they talk about harddrive space which is the least important spec. no wonder they're asking about mac XD

Intel Core i7 7th Gen - Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake Quad-Core 4.2 GHz LGA 1151 91W BX80677I77700K Desktop Processor

ASRock Z270 Extreme 4 LGA 1151 Intel Z270 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 ATX Motherboards - Intel

CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3200C1

oh yeah that's PLENTY good. would be super dumb to get another machine if that's what you already have.

I thought it should be. The guy who built it for me (who I've since lost touch with) said it would be a pretty strong setup, and he knew I used it mostly for photo stuff.... But I told him I never did video.

Anyway, TY.

For editing 8k buy a better gpu nvidia RTX 3060 12GB is pretty cheap

minimum for 8k is 8GB RAM on gpu. ( PC ).

I'd totally consider it. But pretty cheap ? Really ? All the 12GB graphics cards I saw, started at like $1500 and went up from there.

I'll look back again at the one your suggesting.

TY.

 

[Chris Wolfgram]

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

this looks like a low level budget desktop...

it's funny how they don't mention the most important specs like cpu, gpu, and ram. instead they talk about harddrive space which is the least important spec. no wonder they're asking about mac XD

Intel Core i7 7th Gen - Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake Quad-Core 4.2 GHz LGA 1151 91W BX80677I77700K Desktop Processor

ASRock Z270 Extreme 4 LGA 1151 Intel Z270 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 ATX Motherboards - Intel

CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3200C1

oh yeah that's PLENTY good. would be super dumb to get another machine if that's what you already have.

I thought it should be. The guy who built it for me (who I've since lost touch with) said it would be a pretty strong setup, and he knew I used it mostly for photo stuff.... But I told him I never did video.

Anyway, TY.

For editing 8k buy a better gpu nvidia RTX 3060 12GB is pretty cheap

minimum for 8k is 8GB RAM on gpu. ( PC ).

I upgraded my PC from 16GB RAM to 32GB RAM, but it still filled up when running Lr/Ps. So, I just went to 128GB, and found 64GB would probably be enough.

Speaking of which, I have another dumb question.... So I have two empty slots. But my two 16GB memory sticks are out of stock everywhere, and no notice of when or if they will ever be back So I'm assuming I couldn't run a different brand of memory sticks in the other two slots, even if they were also 16GB, right ?

 

[Chris Wolfgram]

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

this looks like a low level budget desktop...

it's funny how they don't mention the most important specs like cpu, gpu, and ram. instead they talk about harddrive space which is the least important spec. no wonder they're asking about mac XD

Intel Core i7 7th Gen - Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake Quad-Core 4.2 GHz LGA 1151 91W BX80677I77700K Desktop Processor

ASRock Z270 Extreme 4 LGA 1151 Intel Z270 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 ATX Motherboards - Intel

CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3200C1

get a pair of NVMe SSDs instead of mechanical clunkers (even if one has SSD cache in it), add 2x16 GB RAM and what about GPU ? then you can be OK for a long while

Geez, I wish I could afford 8 or 12TB's of SSD storage !

About the only thing I can afford SSD for is my operating system, photo programs, and current photos. But I do have a 256GB SSD also.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

My thoughts regarding Mac Vs PC as a post processing platform is that MACs use a lot of proprietary hardware designed with the explicit design intent of not being repairable - and any attempts at user repair is actively discouraged by apple in the TOS.

It's not practical to compare 'platforms' for postprocessing. Comparing the actual h/w specs is much more beneficial. In this thread, people seem to tend to compare brands not specs.

What brings you faster from A to B, Toyota or Ford? The question is meaningless without knowing the actual technical details and concrete car models.

In terms of LR and PS, RAM is very important but your CPU may become a bottleneck.

I have to say a rather biased perspective.

Biased to what?..

Viewing strictly as platforms of equal value all things being equal a PC is a better long term investment than a Mac, as the Mac does not provide the modular flexibility of upgrades. With Macs you have to buy an entirely new system to make any significant improvement in terms of specs and capability.

The OP asked about the best performance. But you don't buy a PC or a Mac for performance, like you don't buy a Ford or a Toyota for speed (or towing capacity). You have to check the concrete technical specifications, otherwise your dilemma is totally moot.

You should consider CPU, RAM, frequency, GPU, HDD/SSD - then your can check if a PC or a Mac model satisfies the requirements.

Most likely a PC will be just cheaper that a Mac of similar performance.

 

[J.K.T.]

WD Black 256GB Performance SSD - M.2 2280 PCIe NVMe Solid State Drive - WDS256G1X0C

I should have gotten at least a 512GB though, as it fills pretty quickly, with photos, then has to be dumped off into my my 4TB hard drive.

That - or 1 TB drive - might still be a possibility. Yours has pretty bad sustained write performance as far as NVMe drives go - about 430 MB/s. It is reasonable in read, but write is slow at 700 MB/s and sustained write even slower. Current drives (not all - check tests) can pretty much saturate the bus both ways.

 

[BobKnDP]

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

this looks like a low level budget desktop...

it's funny how they don't mention the most important specs like cpu, gpu, and ram. instead they talk about harddrive space which is the least important spec. no wonder they're asking about mac XD

Intel Core i7 7th Gen - Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake Quad-Core 4.2 GHz LGA 1151 91W BX80677I77700K Desktop Processor

ASRock Z270 Extreme 4 LGA 1151 Intel Z270 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 ATX Motherboards - Intel

CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3200C1

You mention no discrete graphics card. Are you using the I7-7700K's integrated graphics?

Some software (DXO Photolab, the Topaz programs) can use a GPU to greatly accelerate the processing. Unfortunately, GPU prices are a bit out of control now. If you could afford an nVidia GTX 1650 card, you might be approaching the point of diminishing returns for GPU processing.

Serious video editing is another matter. Example: https://www.pugetsystems.com/recommended/Recommended-Systems-for-DaVinci-Resolve-187

Buy what you need, I guess.

 

[Big-Al]

....for R5 photo and video work ?

I ask this because apparently Mac seems to handle R5 photo and video, quite easily, by default.

Is it even possible to build a comparable PC ?

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

So would it be worth it to try to upgrade it to the point that it could fly though giant photo projects (forget 45 mp's... I'm into stitching and stacking) and also maybe some 4K 60 fps video, or even some 8K...

OR, could one spend a BUNCH of $$$ on PC upgrades, and it still not work as well as a much more modest Mac ?

I totally understand their might be a little bias here lol But I'm ready for that.

You really opened up a can of worms with that question lol. I'm a Mac guy that used to be a PC guy. I use a 2017 27" iMac that was maxed out at the time including 64gb memory.

I'm not going to go there with who's better etc but I will say this, I'll never go back to a PC. It drove me crazy before I retired and had to use a PC at work. My Mac is an intel based computer so in theory its comparable to a PC of similar specs. The OS is what's the main difference. if you are going to do 4K or 8K video you may want to upgrade your graphics card and defiantly your Hybrid drive to a full SSD drive. Spinning drives are a huge bottleneck. Memory is pretty cheap and the second best way to amp up your box, max it out too.

I'm excited about the M1 series of Macs but not enough to want to upgrade (they haven't released the M1 in the 27" iMac anyway). I've got $3600 in my box so I need to keep it going for a few more years or until they stop supporting it.

But I will say this, when I was in school studying Photography 2006-2008, we were all Macs. We had 1 (One) IT guy take care of all the computers, and he spent most of his day flirting with the pretty girls lol. At work we had about a dozen IT guys to keep the PC's running. I used to like tinkering with PC's and figuring out how to get things going again. But not anymore, I just want to turn on my computer and start working or surfing... It was a rare day I could come home from work and NOT have my wife or kids ask me why they can't print or get online or whatever. "My experience" is Macs are a lot easier to get things done because I dont have to tinker with anything in the OS to keep things going.

But for you if you're happy with windows, stay with them and upgrade, one of the biggest advantages to PC's, upgradeability. Its also the downfall of PC's is all the 3rd party manufactures making PC parts mean the OS its less stable, need drivers, etc...

I remember back around 2000 the Macs were soooo bad. They were unbearably slow. I also remember editing 640x480 video footage. Haha! To think, computers back then would struggle with that. I actually worked in a photo lab around that time. The Macs would crash if you tried to make them do two things at once. I could be wrong but I still don’t think OSX is a true multi-tasking OS, which Windows has been for years. Everyone always says Linux is sooo fast! It’s lightweight!!! Here is secret…. Lightweight != fast. It takes logic to make things happen fast in a computer with fine tuned optimizations. None of which exist in Linux. Which is why things like Ubuntu are ungodly slow and bad. I have to give Apple credit though, I’ve never seen so many rich people happily plunking down huge sums of money The thing is, Apple marketing is so good you almost want your current Mac to break so you can buy the new one. I think that is why they get away with the 1 year warranty. The people who buy them plan on buying a new one within a year anyway.

My experience having used both PC's and Mac's is that I upgrade less with a Mac. In addition the OS and hardware is better optimised as both are developed by Apple which gives me more time to use them rather than faffing around to get thing working properly.

But each to their own and if your experience is different that's fine just don't make sweeping generalisations!

 

[MarshallG]

....for R5 photo and video work ?

I ask this because apparently Mac seems to handle R5 photo and video, quite easily, by default.

Is it even possible to build a comparable PC ?

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

So would it be worth it to try to upgrade it to the point that it could fly though giant photo projects (forget 45 mp's... I'm into stitching and stacking) and also maybe some 4K 60 fps video, or even some 8K...

OR, could one spend a BUNCH of $$$ on PC upgrades, and it still not work as well as a much more modest Mac ?

I totally understand their might be a little bias here lol But I'm ready for that.

You really opened up a can of worms with that question lol. I'm a Mac guy that used to be a PC guy. I use a 2017 27" iMac that was maxed out at the time including 64gb memory.

I'm not going to go there with who's better etc but I will say this, I'll never go back to a PC. It drove me crazy before I retired and had to use a PC at work. My Mac is an intel based computer so in theory its comparable to a PC of similar specs. The OS is what's the main difference. if you are going to do 4K or 8K video you may want to upgrade your graphics card and defiantly your Hybrid drive to a full SSD drive. Spinning drives are a huge bottleneck. Memory is pretty cheap and the second best way to amp up your box, max it out too.

I'm excited about the M1 series of Macs but not enough to want to upgrade (they haven't released the M1 in the 27" iMac anyway). I've got $3600 in my box so I need to keep it going for a few more years or until they stop supporting it.

But I will say this, when I was in school studying Photography 2006-2008, we were all Macs. We had 1 (One) IT guy take care of all the computers, and he spent most of his day flirting with the pretty girls lol. At work we had about a dozen IT guys to keep the PC's running. I used to like tinkering with PC's and figuring out how to get things going again. But not anymore, I just want to turn on my computer and start working or surfing... It was a rare day I could come home from work and NOT have my wife or kids ask me why they can't print or get online or whatever. "My experience" is Macs are a lot easier to get things done because I dont have to tinker with anything in the OS to keep things going.

But for you if you're happy with windows, stay with them and upgrade, one of the biggest advantages to PC's, upgradeability. Its also the downfall of PC's is all the 3rd party manufactures making PC parts mean the OS its less stable, need drivers, etc...

I remember back around 2000 the Macs were soooo bad. They were unbearably slow. I also remember editing 640x480 video footage. Haha! To think, computers back then would struggle with that. I actually worked in a photo lab around that time. The Macs would crash if you tried to make them do two things at once. I could be wrong but I still don’t think OSX is a true multi-tasking OS, which Windows has been for years. Everyone always says Linux is sooo fast! It’s lightweight!!! Here is secret…. Lightweight != fast. It takes logic to make things happen fast in a computer with fine tuned optimizations. None of which exist in Linux. Which is why things like Ubuntu are ungodly slow and bad. I have to give Apple credit though, I’ve never seen so many rich people happily plunking down huge sums of money The thing is, Apple marketing is so good you almost want your current Mac to break so you can buy the new one. I think that is why they get away with the 1 year warranty. The people who buy them plan on buying a new one within a year anyway.

I don’t think you understand computer software, and your anecdotal experience of twenty year-old computers has no bearing on today’s systems.



What Chris is trying to understand is what kind of performance improvement, if any, he can see with the applications he currently uses, for the particular tasks he performs. Video gaming and twenty year old operating systems and our biases are irrelevant.

 

[Tristimulus]

....for R5 photo and video work ?

I ask this because apparently Mac seems to handle R5 photo and video, quite easily, by default.

Is it even possible to build a comparable PC ?

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

So would it be worth it to try to upgrade it to the point that it could fly though giant photo projects (forget 45 mp's... I'm into stitching and stacking) and also maybe some 4K 60 fps video, or even some 8K...

OR, could one spend a BUNCH of $$$ on PC upgrades, and it still not work as well as a much more modest Mac ?

I totally understand their might be a little bias here lol But I'm ready for that.

You really opened up a can of worms with that question lol. I'm a Mac guy that used to be a PC guy. I use a 2017 27" iMac that was maxed out at the time including 64gb memory.

I'm not going to go there with who's better etc but I will say this, I'll never go back to a PC. It drove me crazy before I retired and had to use a PC at work. My Mac is an intel based computer so in theory its comparable to a PC of similar specs. The OS is what's the main difference. if you are going to do 4K or 8K video you may want to upgrade your graphics card and defiantly your Hybrid drive to a full SSD drive. Spinning drives are a huge bottleneck. Memory is pretty cheap and the second best way to amp up your box, max it out too.

I'm excited about the M1 series of Macs but not enough to want to upgrade (they haven't released the M1 in the 27" iMac anyway). I've got $3600 in my box so I need to keep it going for a few more years or until they stop supporting it.

But I will say this, when I was in school studying Photography 2006-2008, we were all Macs. We had 1 (One) IT guy take care of all the computers, and he spent most of his day flirting with the pretty girls lol. At work we had about a dozen IT guys to keep the PC's running. I used to like tinkering with PC's and figuring out how to get things going again. But not anymore, I just want to turn on my computer and start working or surfing... It was a rare day I could come home from work and NOT have my wife or kids ask me why they can't print or get online or whatever. "My experience" is Macs are a lot easier to get things done because I dont have to tinker with anything in the OS to keep things going.

But for you if you're happy with windows, stay with them and upgrade, one of the biggest advantages to PC's, upgradeability. Its also the downfall of PC's is all the 3rd party manufactures making PC parts mean the OS its less stable, need drivers, etc...

I remember back around 2000 the Macs were soooo bad. They were unbearably slow. I also remember editing 640x480 video footage. Haha! To think, computers back then would struggle with that. I actually worked in a photo lab around that time. The Macs would crash if you tried to make them do two things at once. I could be wrong but I still don’t think OSX is a true multi-tasking OS, which Windows has been for years. Everyone always says Linux is sooo fast! It’s lightweight!!! Here is secret…. Lightweight != fast. It takes logic to make things happen fast in a computer with fine tuned optimizations. None of which exist in Linux. Which is why things like Ubuntu are ungodly slow and bad. I have to give Apple credit though, I’ve never seen so many rich people happily plunking down huge sums of money The thing is, Apple marketing is so good you almost want your current Mac to break so you can buy the new one. I think that is why they get away with the 1 year warranty. The people who buy them plan on buying a new one within a year anyway.

My experience having used both PC's and Mac's is that I upgrade less with a Mac. In addition the OS and hardware is better optimised as both are developed by Apple which gives me more time to use them rather than faffing around to get thing working properly.

But each to their own and if your experience is different that's fine just don't make sweeping generalisations!

Those suggesting that PC vs Mac makes a difference when post processing are funny.

Get the proper PC or Mac for the job, and done.

Spend more time practicing photography and post prosessing - skills matter, can not be aquired from a certain brand or from the credit card. ;-)

 

[LesT]

I ask this because my PC was built for me only 2 1/2 years ago, and it still has a lot going for it. Nice tower, strong power supply, an SSD Hybrid hard drive + a 4TB hard drive, great monitor, etc.

this looks like a low level budget desktop...

it's funny how they don't mention the most important specs like cpu, gpu, and ram. instead they talk about harddrive space which is the least important spec. no wonder they're asking about mac XD

Intel Core i7 7th Gen - Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake Quad-Core 4.2 GHz LGA 1151 91W BX80677I77700K Desktop Processor

ASRock Z270 Extreme 4 LGA 1151 Intel Z270 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 ATX Motherboards - Intel

CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3200C1

oh yeah that's PLENTY good. would be super dumb to get another machine if that's what you already have.

I thought it should be. The guy who built it for me (who I've since lost touch with) said it would be a pretty strong setup, and he knew I used it mostly for photo stuff.... But I told him I never did video.

Anyway, TY.

For editing 8k buy a better gpu nvidia RTX 3060 12GB is pretty cheap

minimum for 8k is 8GB RAM on gpu. ( PC ).

I upgraded my PC from 16GB RAM to 32GB RAM, but it still filled up when running Lr/Ps. So, I just went to 128GB, and found 64GB would probably be enough.

I was talking about RAM on GPU.

All you need to do in that system is to upgrade to a SSD and slip a USB 3.2 2x2 or Thunderbolt 3 adapter into the open PCIe slot. There are no drivers. There are no other required cables other than that of which you get with the reader. The problem is the Z270 is USB 3.0 based and you need the adapter for the upgrade. Very simple. Less than $100

 

[pdqgp]

Heck no it's not pointless. I scored a few key components including a 3090 Video card and went from there.

In fact, I just made my first upgrade to what I built this summer. Went from 32gb of 3200MHz to 64gb of G.Skill 4400 MHz DDR-4 RAM
Files, videos and online gaming, etc. ZERO issues.

 

[cnyphotoguy]

Speaking of which, I have another dumb question.... So I have two empty slots. But my two 16GB memory sticks are out of stock everywhere, and no notice of when or if they will ever be back So I'm assuming I couldn't run a different brand of memory sticks in the other two slots, even if they were also 16GB, right ?

You can mix and match RAM vendors. Best to install same speed/sized RAM sticks in the same bank channel though for best performance.