BruceX: Try this new Final Cut Pro X benchmark
To help people work out which Macs work best with Final Cut Pro X, it is useful to refer to a standard speed test.
All but one of the MacBook Pros with Retina configurations do not have dedicated GPUs. New Mac software is depending more and more on GPU power. Editors want to know if the integrated Intel Iris and Iris Pro Graphics GPUs are powerful enough to run professional software well.
Early testing shows that Iris Pro graphics are better than many expected. Take a look at a new post at Bare Feats:
In the past we sneered at the integrated GPUs and their puny performance. Not any more. The Intel Iris and Iris Pro are every bit the match or master of discrete NVIDIA Mobile GPUs — at least when it comes to OpenCL acceleration.
Although it is great news that integrated GPUs are getting better, many are worried that the MacBook Pros should be avoided until Iris Pro has improved a little more.
A speed test proposed by FCP.co was to time the render of Final Cut Pro X’s built-in ‘Far Far Away’ title on a 23.975 1080p timeline. This test puts enough pressure on main memory and GPU memory to separate older generation Macs from more recent computers.
Over at the the FCP.co forum, qbe asked me to do the ‘Far Far Away’ test on my new late 2013 MacBook Pro 15″ using only the built-in Iris Pro Graphics and also on only the Discrete GeForce GT 750M GPU which I included in my BTO Mac.
It turns out that the test wasn’t tough enough to show a difference between the two GPUs:
MacBook Pro late-2013 Discrete GeForce GT 750M 2GB 18.8 seconds
MacBook Pro late-2013 Intel Iris Pro Graphics 1GB 19.2 seconds
I’ve come up with a test that shows the differences between these GPUs and other Macs…
The BruceX benchmark
BruceX is a small Final Cut Pro X XML file that you import into Final Cut Pro. It creates a very short timeline at the highest possible standard resolution that Final Cut can handle: 5120 by 2700 (at 23.975 fps). It uses standard Final Cut generators, titles and transitions. As it uses many layers of complex content, it requires lots of GPU RAM.
The benchmark is based on timing how long a Mac configuration takes to export the project to disk.
To use this import the XML file at
http://Alex4D.com/BruceX_Test.zip
…and time the export of a 5K master file from the timeline.
1. Have both QuickTime player and Final Cut Pro X open at the same time.
3. In Final Cut Pro X, go to ‘Final Cut Pro:Preferences…’ – in the Playback tab make sure ‘Background Render’ is off.
3. Use the ‘File:Import:XML…’ command to import ‘BruceX Test – 5K.fcpxml’ to create a very short but complex 5K project.
4. Click the new ‘BruceX Test – 5K ‘ timeline (this makes the Share command selectable)
5. Export the QuickTime movie by choosing “File:Share:Master File…’
6. In the dialogue box that appears, click the ‘Settings’ Tab
7. In the ‘Video Codec’ section choose a flavour of ‘ProRes’ (this instruction used to require H.264 but this selection caused exports to fail in OS X 10.9 – the version of OS X require by Final Cut Pro X 10.1 and the late 2013 Mac Pro)
8. In the ‘Open With’ section, choose ‘QuickTime Player’
9. Click the ‘Next’ button in the bottom-right of the dialogue box
10. In the Save sheet, choose a name and location for the export – export to your fastest drive connected using your fastest connection.
11. Get your stopwatch ready and time from when you click ‘Save’ until you see the movie open up in QuickTime Player (some testers report that the movie plays as black in some setups – this is likely to be the player having problems with 5K H.264, the movie is probably fine and will work in other players such as VLC)
12. If possible do the export at least three times. Your configuration’s BruceX Score is the average export time in seconds. Before timing the next export, restart Final Cut (otherwise the exports speed up each time because X does a little caching renders to save time).

These results include those posted at the FCP.co Forum and from BareFeats.com.
The results show that BruceX tests processor power, but also shows that Iris Pro Graphics has some way to go to match a discrete graphics GPU in the new MacBook Pro 15″ with Retina
MacBook Pro late-2013 2.6 Ghz Quad Core i7
16GB 1600 MHz
1 TB SSD
Discrete GeForce GT 750M 2GB GPU
OS X 10.9.0
88 seconds
MacBook Pro late-2013 2.6 Ghz Quad Core i7
16GB 1600 MHz
1 TB SSD
Iris Pro Graphics 1GB GPU
OS X 10.9.0
163 seconds
( To choose which GPU to use for the test on my MacBook Pro, I used gfxCardStatus by Cody Krieger – a Shareware app downloaded from gfx.io )
If you post results in the comments below, I’ll update the graph.

15-inch, Mid 2012 MBP
Processor 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7
Memory 8 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 1024 MB
My result after the average of three exports: 135 seconds, exporting to a 5400rpm external drive via Thunderbolt. Seems to be right about where it should be according to the other findings, given the drive speed.
Interesting test.
53 second average
Late-2013 27-inch iMac 14,2
3.5gHz i7
Memory 32GB 1600 MHz DDR3
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M 4096MB
27inch iMac, mid 2011
3.4ghz Intel i7
16GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD6970M
average time 49:39
Hackintosh
Ivy Bridge 4.2GHz
32GB RAM
AMD 7970
time 30.5
From results two instances are noted. Hack with 660Ti took really long, acording to specs it should be way more powerful than 750m, but that is a hack and i for one know, cannot take it as general rule/basis without broader specimens.
The second instance worth noting is performance of previous rMBP (early 2012), 750m should be only little faster than 660m, the big difference here is amount of VRAM. This reason is, by my opinion, also hindering Iris Pro in this particular instance, as the test is really complex for GPU and as shown in Anandtech test, when Iris Pro is set on higher detail or resolutions (in games, DirectX or OpenGL, but i assume behaviour should be same in OpenCL), it starts slow down rather fast due to low amount of VRAM (or the whole igpu shared ram system to make things worse)
As there are no other test except one very easy and one very complex, i assume that for basic stuff with FCP-X Iris Pro is sufficient, but for heavy lifting or other apps nvidia 750m is actually very handy.
I only assume though, but will wait for more tests (barefeats), as i would love one of the new machines, but I need it only for easy stuff in FCPX, i have desktop for all the heavy lifting. Previous generation rMBP become viable alternative though, which makes the decision harder.
Thanks for the test and your time Alex4D, much apreciated!
ps: sorry for my english
correction in coment above this:
…750m should be only little faster than 650m,…
175 sec average on a
Mac Pro 2 x 2,26 GHz Quad Core (early 2009)
12 GB RAM
ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
179 sec average on:
iMac (2010), 3.2GHz, i3
12GB RAM (DDR3)
Graphics: ATI Radeon HD 5670, 512MB
MacbookPro e2011 17″ 16GB NO SSD + THB Display + WD THB Raid
134sec not so bad..
44 seconds
Mac Pro (Hackintosh)
Processor 3.89 GHz Intel Core i7
Memory 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST 20
Software OS X 10.9 (13A603)
Intel SSD drive 180GB
FCPX 10.0.9
Wow. Is there something wrong with my Mac?
Took 1hr 14m 03s to complete!
15″ MacBook Pro 2.4 i5 (mid 2010)
8gb 1067 ddr3
750gb internal hdd (5400)
Mac OS X 10.7.5 (11G63)
FCPX 10.0.8
My ram is maxed out, other than adding an ssd, looks like I need a new Mac, right?
27″ iMac 2.66 i5 (late 2009)
16 Gb RAM @ 1067 MHz DDR3
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 MB
HDD 1Tb (270 Gb free space)
Mavericks OS
FCP X 10.0.9
Time: 3 minutes 2 seconds
Here are my results, all with Mavericks 10.9.0, FCPX 10.0.9 and rendered to SSD.
MacPro 2008 8x 2,8GHz
20GB RAM
NVidia GTX 570 2560MB
Time: 110 seconds
MacBook Pro Early 2011 i7 2,3GHz
16GB RAM
ATI 6750M 1024MB
Time: 160 seconds
Old Hackintosh Intel i5-760 3.8GHz
8GB RAM 1600MHz
ATI 6870 1024MB
Time: 93 seconds
I tested my new Hackintosh with different GPU configurations:
Hackintosh Intel i7 4770K 4,3GHz
32GB RAM 2133MHz
Internal Graphics Iris Pro, Intel HD4600:
Time: 138 seconds
Intel HD4600 + ATI R9 280x (single and dual)
Time: 53-62 seconds
Single ATI R9 280x (HIS IceQ Boost Clock) Internal GPU disabled
Time: 26 seconds
Dual ATI R9 280x (HIS IceQ + Gigabyte Windforce 3x OC Rev.2) Internal GPU disabled
Time: 22 seconds
Interesting to see that FCPX doesn’t scale very well with multiple GPUs (yet). Especially with enabled Intel HD everything is bottlenecked by the internal graphics (at least on my Hackintosh). LuxMark on the other hand scales much better:
Scene: Sala (Medium Benchmark)
1x ATI 2260-2440
2x ATI 4670
2x ATI + Intel = 4900
But I guess that’ll change with OSX 10.9.1 and FCPX 10.1 with support for the new mac pro.
Interesting…
Working with a Hackintosh
Intel 4.2 GHz Core i7
32 GB Ram 1600MHz DDR3
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 2048 MB
Time: 68 seconds
*however* the output file is just a blank black video….
Any thoughts on what may be happening here? I was wondering if there any settings I may have missed…
Generally runs well but I’ve felt that the render of the regular vids I’ve been working on has been slow… That said they are still coming out perfect, so I am scratching my head why the BruceX vid is blank
Any help or suggestions is always appreciated.
Dr George
iMAC 27″ Late 2012 (3,4 GHZ Intel Core i7 “Ivy Bridge”)
Mavericks 10.9.1
FCP 10.1
RAM: 32 Go 1600 MHZ DDR3
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2048Mo
on LaCie 7200 RPM (FW800): 75 seconds
on internal drive (Fusion SSD 128 Mo and HD 3TO 7200 RPM): 74 seconds
The test doesn’t work with H.264 export (error message from FCPX, whatever the player is)
Works with PRORES 422
The same happens to me. I googled for the error code (-12348) but nobody has an answer.
On ProRes 422(HQ) 1 min 24 sec.
iMac 27″: 3,4 GHz Intel Core i7; 24 GB 1600 MHz DDR3; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2048 MB
external HDD : LaCie 3TB, 7200rpm, Thunderbolt.
Hackintosh
Intel Core i7 3.5 GHz
16 GB Ram 1600MHz DDR3
Dual ATI
AMD XFX Radeon™ HD7970
AMD MSI R9 280X GAMING 3G
Time: 16 seconds
http://my.mail.ru/video/mail/a.holzwart/_myvideo/11.html#video=/mail/a.holzwart/_myvideo/11
Yep, it really seems like AMD cards have a massive advantage on OpenCL. I have a GTX 670 and it also seemed very slow compared to some very similar cards on the AMD side (I’m thinking about the 7950, maybe 7970, which are about as fast as the GTX 670/GTX 760. I went NVIDIA because of CUDA acceleration in AE and other 3D stuff and mostly due to better support with Hackintoshes. I always knew OpenCL on AMD was WAYYY better, but I’m still quite shocked by the result..
My specs:
4.2 GHz i7 3770k
16GB 1866 MHz RAM
Samsung 840 EVO 500GB
Zotac GTX 670 AMP! 2GB (this card is one of the best 670s, quicker than a lot of 680s. Also a bit faster than the GTX 760)
Time: 65 seconds
So to make a closer test the mac mini’s tested should have a 7200rpm drive or SSD, I believe and this is an educated guess that part of the disparity in the graph above isn’t JUST the video card but also writing the render results/cache to disk on a 5400 rpm drive
iMac 2009
Core i7 2,8 GHz
8 gb Ram
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 Mo
HDD intern
Time : 216s…
OUCH ! Time to get a new Mac Pro😉
Thanks for this test! Unfortunately I’m echoing what Ben said, for me this export won’t work in H.264. I can get it to work on PRORES 422 with no problem but that doesn’t help me judge against every one else’s benchmarks.
I made sure other projects will export on H.264 and trashed and reloaded the BruceX XML file and tried again but got the same results:
“Share Failed”
The share operation “Master File” has failed.
The operation could not be completed because an error occurred while exporting (error -12348).
Shucks. This was exactly the test I was looking for. If anyone has any suggestions I’d love to hear them.
MBP 17in, Early 2011
2.2 GHz i7
16 GB 1333 DDR3 RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1024 MB
Mavericks 10.9
FCPX 10.1
For what it’s worth I went through a dozen threads on how to fix export problems. As far as I can tell this is project specific as I can export other H.264 projects.
Mac Pro Quad Core 2 x 2.66 GHz (2006 model)
16 GB RAM
ATI Radeon HD 4770 1024 MB
3 x 500 GB Striped RAID Set (Blackmagic Disk Speed Test reports 150.7 MB/s Write and 167.8 MB/s Read)
Final Cut Pro X
Mac OS X 10.7.5 (can’t upgrade!)
3 minutes 9 seconds
My MacBook Pro 15″ Mid 2009 2.7 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo with 8 GB RAM and NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT 512MB wouldn’t even render it out, Final Cut Pro X would stop after 20 seconds and report an error.
Time for an upgrade?
I tried to run this on the newest Mac Pro late 2013, maxed out with 12-cores, 64 GB’s of RAM and 1 TB SSD + D700 and I got an error. FCPX was at the newest version too.
Ideas?
Thanks for trying – it is a bug in 10.1.1 – people who have upgraded have been exporting as ProRes instead
I’m guessing exporting to ProRes is not comparable to H.264?
Got my buddy to run it on a Hackintosh:
i7-4770K @ 4.6/4.5/4.4/4.4 (1/2/3/4 cores) GHz
32 GB RAM
Asus R280X
2x Kingston HyperX 3K 480GB in RAID 0
25 secs.
I ran it on my iMac too:
iMac11,1 (late 2009)
i7 2.8 GHz
12 GB RAM
Kingston HyperX 240GB
Dammit forgot the result.
2 mins, 26 secs = 266 secs.
146 seconds.
I’m getting this error.. The operation could not be completed because an error occurred while exporting (error -12348).
Due to bugs in 10.1.X concerning H.264 BruceX results are for ProRes export for now.
Apple ProRes 422 HQ – 27 seconds –
Apple Mac Pro 6 core / D500 / 512Gb SSD / 32Gb ram
150 seconds. 2 mins and 30 seconds on Macbook Pro Retina 13 Inch, Late 2013, 16gb Ram. For me good enough!
2010 Mac Pro 3.33 GHZ 6 core, 12 GB RAM.
Geforce 680 (4GB RAM): 1 minute 47 seconds
Radeon 7950 (3GB RAM): 41 seconds
Dual R9 280X (3GB RAM each): 28 seconds
Not too shabby for an old machine. Definitely not as fast as the hackintoshes with 280Xs, but I’m not complaining.
2013 Mac Pro
Processor 3,5 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon E5
Memory 32 GB 1867 MHz DDR3 ECC
Graphics AMD FirePro D700 6144 MB
Software OS X 10.9.2 (13C64)
G-Raid 8TB Thunderbolt
11 seconds :))
Better than hackintosh….
really better?)
Hackithosh
Gigabyte GA-Z87X-UD5H
Intel i7-4770k 3.5 GHz (internal graphics HD4600 on)
Sapphire R9 390(non-x) 8192 MB
Memory 32 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
OS X 10.11.1
13 seconds, lol
3930K @ 4.5Ghz
32GB RAM
GTX 770 4GB
HyperX SSD
OS: 10.9.2
80 Seconds! Very disappointed.
Same system here (64GB RAM, though), same results. WTF??? I think I may have to sent the 770 back and get a radeon instead…Not impressed. Our systems should be SMOKING this test.
17.04 Seconds. Hackintosh
4930K @ 4.5Ghz
R9 280X x 2
32Gb Ram
10.9.2
27-inch Mid-2010 iMac
Processor 2.93 GHz 4-Core Intel Core i7
Memory 12 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
Graphics ATI Radeon HD 5750 1024 MB
OS: 10.9.2
Used Internal 2TB 7200RPM Hitachi for export
71 seconds
2009 Mac Pro
Processor 2 x 2.26 GHz Quad- Core
Memory 8GB 1066MHz DDR3
Graphics: 2 x Geforce Gtx 560ti 1024MB each
OSX: 10.9.3
FCP 10.1.1
Wrote to SSD
Average Time: 100 seconds
Custom Built Hackintosh dual Radeon 7950 3GB I7-3930k OC to 4.4
20.48 sec
Hello !
Testing my new Hackintosh i7 3770k@4.4ghz + MSI R9 280x 3Gb
OSX 10.9.3 – FCPX 10.1.1
export ProRes (tried with two different ones, same results)
time : 29 seconds !
2008 Mac Pro (3,1); 2 x 2.8 GHz Xeon, 16GB RAM, twin Radeon 5770’s
FCP 10.1.1, OS 10.9.3
Export to SSD
38 secs
Hackintosh Build:
CPU: i7 4790K@4GHz
Memory: 8GB 1866MHt DDR3
Graphics: Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC 4096MB
OS X: 10.10 (Yosemite)
FCP: 10.1.3
26,5 sec
2007 Mac Pro 2.1 2X 8 Core 2.66 Xeon, 1 Sapphire AMD 7950
6GB RAM, Kingston v300 SSD
FCP 10.1.3, OS 10.9.4 (via boot.efi hack)
80 seconds
Hey I dont know why but ever since I upgraded my softwares my export time went up.
Mavericks 10.9.3 & FCPX 10.1.2: 26-27 secs.
Yosemite 10.10 & FCPX 10.1.3: 34-36 secs.
Can anybody explain this?
13″ MBP non retina Early 2011 2.3Ghz i5 8gb RAM, Intel HD3000 512MB export to USB3 drive – 264 seconds to playing QT
Again for comparison on lower spec machines:
Mac mini Late 2012 2.5Ghz i5 16gb RAM Intel HD4000 to USB3 drive – 207 secs
Mac Pro Late 2013
Processor 3.5 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon E5
Memory 64 GB 1867 MHz DDR3 ECC
Graphics AMD FirePro D700 6144 MB X 2
Software OS X 10.9.5 (13F34)
1 TB Flash Storage
FCPX Version 10.1.3
iMac 27″ Late 2013
Processor 3.5 Ghz intel Core i7
Memory 32 GB 1600 Mhz DDR3
Graphics Nvidia GeForce GTX 780M 4096 MB
Software OS X 10.9.5
3 TB Fusion
So rendering H.264 failed to export Error 12348. So rendered BruceX in Prores 422
Mac Pro took 19.7 seconds from start to opening in QT. file size 71.5 MB
iMac took 93.4 seconds 73 MB
So I didn’t change any hardware settings on the iMac don’t know if it was using the iris or Nvidia. humm that is related to MacBooks only.
The Mac Pro is on loan from apple. We are testing it between our iMacs. When testing compression of 720p videos on green screen with background power points and audio compressions and color correction the mac pro took 2 times the rendering time of the iMac’s 4 minutes and 23 seconds render time with our 27 mins and 4 sec video. FCPX library size for project is 35.91 GB. shared as exported file with better performance selected. resolution 1280×720 QT. file size .99 GB with the iMac and file size with Mac Pro was 1.5 GB. After researching why the iMac out performed the Mac Pro, tell me if i’m wrong, but the Mac Pro’s GPUs can not be used when compressing videos on single pass, but the iMac can.
Same test but selecting for better quality. and the mac pro wins at 16 mins and 40 secs. the iMac took 20 minutes and 30 seconds.
Can anyone explain this. with better quality are we now getting into the double pass rendering where the mac pro’s GPUs can be utilized?
I’m doing another test, but will share as mater file pro res 422. Mac pro took 3 mins and 59 secs. file size 14.47gb iMac is still rendering …. 83% okay iMac took 6 mins. with the same file size
This is fun another test. redering master file uncompressed at 10 bit. hummm estimated size 123 GB. Never mind.
What do you think?
Late 2013 rMBP 15 inch – bought in 2014 when speed bumps announced
2.6GHz i7 Quad-core
16GB 1600MHz DDR3
1TB PCIe SSD
GT 750M 2GB
OSX 10.10 Yosemite
FCPX 10.1.3
77 seconds to internal SSD
Hackintosh
Core i7 3770K
Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UP5 TH
16 GB Corsair RAM
SoftRAID 5 (4x3TB)
Yosemite 10.10.1 (256 GB SSD)
Final Cut Pro X 10.1.3
With GTX 660Ti – 110 sec
With Asus R9 290-DC20C-4GB – 35 sec
Custom Mac Pro 4.1@5.1:
1xX5650 (6×2,66 ghz)
24 gb DDR3 1333 mhz
Rendered to system SSD.
Two GPUs tested:
GTX 660 2 gb (from Gainward. Must be the GTX 660 that has official nVidia clocks):
147 seconds!!!
A little disappointing: some nVidia cards less powerful than this one (GT 650m, GT 750m, GT 755m, etc). I think that Apple is doing some “tweaking” in FCPX to make it run faster on nVidia GPUs integrated in their iMacs and MacBook Pro Retina.
Gigabyte Radeon 7950 3gb flashed for boot screens (a bit overlocked by default, as the GPU is running at 900 mhz instead of 800 mhz):
First run: 60 seconds!
A great improvement.
Second run after flashing the card: 75 seconds!!!!
I did not find an answer until I realized that once flashed, the GPU is working at 2,5 GT/s (That´s PCIE 1.0). So I removed the R17 transistor and boom!
Third run: 60 seconds again!
So it seems that PCIE speed is really important for FCPX with powerful GPUs.
I also did a test with Luxmark (default scene): with 2,5 GT/s the result was 1750 and when activating the PCIE 2.0 mode the result was a bit higher: 1860.
Hackintosh mid-2014 – Built for FCPX 4K
28 seconds
i4770K 4core/8thread 3.5ghz OC to 3.9ghz
Gigabyte Z87x-UD3H
Gigabyte Radeon 280x 3mb vram
16 GB G.Skills Ripjaws X 1866mhz CL9
Crucial 512mb 500w/r SATA III 6gb/sec Boot Drive
Various WD Black 7200rpm 3TB internally on SATA for media
2 monitors
Dell UP2414Q – 4K
Apple Cinema Display – 1080
Just added another 16gb of same ram for total of 32gb. Still 28 sec.
Only change is about 15% increase in Geekbench ram numbers.
But Motion is a little quicker.
I specifically went for AMD for the openCL performance, and wasn’t disappointed. It was pretty much plug and play.
I am going to add a second Gigabyte 280x in a couple of weeks.
MacBook Pro 15inch mid 2010
Core i7 Dual Core 2.66MHz (620m)
8GB RAM
256GB SSD
Nvidia 330M GT 512
~275 seconds
Its was a dissapointment these results to me as I was expecting greater improvement of retina rMBP with 750m over my current mac, as I am thinking of purchasing the new retina Macbook pro in order to improve my Final Cut Pro X experience.
HACKINTOSH – MAC PRO 2013 – 29 sec
———————————————————-
CPU: i7 2600K
RAM: 16Gb Hdd
MB Gigabyte Z77 D2H
SSD: SX900 256Gb
HDD DATA: 2 x 1000 Gb IN RAID0
VGA: MSI 280x 3Gb
I HAD PREVIOUSLY :
1x Radeon 7950 – 45s
2x Radeon 7950 – 29s
I have compared an
ATI Radeon HD 5870 1024 MB: 75 seconds
with an
AMD Radeon R9 280X 3072 MB: 75 seconds
in my Mac Pro 12-core (Mid 2010) 2 x 2.66 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon, 64 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 ECC, Samsung SSD 840 EVO 500GB
I don’t understand why I got the same score for both cards.
When I look on the chart above a Mac Pro (2010) 12-core 3.64 with a Radeon 7950 is so much faster with 38 seconds.
Do you think there is a problem with the AMD Radeon R9 280X 3072 MB?
Previous: ATI Radeon 4870, 512mb.
New: Radeon 7970, 3gb flashed with boot screens and 5.0 gt/s
Mac Pro 2009, dual 2.93ghz, 16GB 1066mhz memory
SSD main drive, OWC Mercury Electra 3G, 240gb with TRIM enabler app.
BruceX test:
4870: 2 minutes 18 seconds
7970: 37 seconds
Maxon Cinebench R15 Open GL:
4870: about 11fps (didn’t save my screenshot I guess)
7970: 51fps
Unigine Heaven 4.0 on 1920×1200 monitor
4870: 18fps, min 8, max 35.6
7970: over 55fps for most of the test (aborted before finished)
February 24, 2015 (happy Steve Jobs 60th b-day)
MBP retina 13 (2,6, 8gb, 128SSD) 2014
With safari browsing and watching youtube video (about 10 tabs open), Mail, leaf, twitter, itunes, spotify, App Store and pages open and uptime of 7 days and change, it took 188 seconds.
Pretty happy with the result for a 13 laptop🙂 (luckily I would never edit nothing in 5k, or even higher than 1080p for the near future, so performance is more than adequate).
just tried an apple store Retina iMac, with a 2GB Video Card and 3.5 i5 and 8gb of ram, and it hit 52.5 seconds to pro res. Just was curious if the beautiful display would take too much wind out of the machines sails. They didn’t have a max spec model of course.
Hackintosh. I switced from Asus R9 290 to Gigabyte R9 280X OC
Core i7 3770K
Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UP5 TH
16 GB Corsair RAM
SoftRAID 5 (4x3TB)
Yosemite 10.10.3 (256 GB SSD)
Final Cut Pro X 10.2.1
Radeon R9 280X
BruceX test: 28 sec
Ok just had some time to kill at the apple store so I did some tests🙂
All test are on the latest macs on the Apple Store showroom floor as of June 2015!
===============================================================
MacBook Pro 15 inch 2.2Ghz i7, 16Gb Ram, Iris Pro with 1.5Gb = 60s
iMac 21inch, 2.7GHz quad-core Intel Core i5, 8Gb Ram, Iris Pro with 1.5Gb = 60s
MacBook Pro 13 inch, 2.7Ghz i5, 8Gb Ram, Intel Iris 6100 with 1.5Gb = 130s
Macbook (the little guy),1.1Ghz, 8Gb Ram, HD5200 with 1Gb = 165s
not at the Apple Store and a blast from the past ……
My old i5 2012 mac mini – 2.5 GHz Intel Core i5, SSD and 16 Gigs Ram, HD4000 Graphics with 1Gb = 190s
Lessons learnt.
=============
1- Go for something with an Iris Pro card. On a budget get the cheapest iMac.
2- The little guy, the Macbook is not too bad at all! Only 2.7x slower than the quickest of the bunch.
3- The score listed above for my mini in 2015 is 223s and I got 190s so I think, as we’ve experienced, Apple is making FCPx faster with every major release🙂 15% faster is my test.
Again with R9 290 because Gigabyte R9 280x suddenly burned out. Also I found that FCP X 10.2.1 is much faster. Old result with FCP X 10.1.3 was 35 sec
Core i7 3770K
Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UP5 TH
16 GB Corsair RAM
SoftRAID 5 (4x3TB)
Yosemite 10.10.3 (256 GB SSD)
Final Cut Pro X 10.2.1
Radeon R9 290
BruceX test: 23,5 sec
Same computer but new FCP 10.2.2 and OSX 10.10.5 have much slower result: 35.5 sec
Something went wrong
MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2015)
2.8 GHz Intel Core i7
16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2048 MB
OSX 10.10.3
FCPX 10.2.1
BruceX test: 50.80 Sec
Mac Pro (Late 2013)
2.7Ghz 12-Core Intel Xeon E5
64GB 1866Mhz DDR3 ECC
AMD FirePro D700 6144MB
1TB Apple SSD
OSX Yosemite 10.10.3
FCP 10.2.1
BruceX test: 13.1 Sec
iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
4GHz Intel Core i7
32 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
512GB Apple SSD
AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB
OSX Yosemite 10.10.3
FCPX 10.2.1
BruceX test: 42 Sec
MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2015)
2.8 GHz Intel Core i7
16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2048 MB
OSX 10.11 Beta (15A243d)
FCPX 10.2.1
BruceX test: 43.29 seconds
OSX El Capitan Cut 7 seconds off the render time on average compared to OS X 10.10.3.
Wonder if that is Metal Helping out.
i7 4790K – 11 sec – Custom Build by http://www.applekerala.com
———————————————————-
CPU: i7 4790K
RAM: 16Gb Hyperx 1866
MB Gigabyte Z97
SSD: Samsung 256Gb
Graphics : AMD Radeon R9 280X HD7xxx -3GB -custom Vbios by applekerala
BruceX test: 11 seconds
Core i7 3770
Gigabyte GA-Z77-UP5H (v1.0)
16 GB Corsair RAM
2TB HDD
Yosemite 10.10.3 (1.5TB)
Intel HD4000 + Final Cut Pro X 10.2.1 = 104 sec
Intel HD4000 + Final Cut Pro X 10.1.3 = 125 sec
nVidia 550Ti + Final Cut Pro X 10.1.3 = 107 sec
BruceX 5K test
PS: I have decided to keep HD4000 in my system because it seems super stable (vs FCPX crashes with 550Ti)
I did some tests at the apple store in France
MacBook Pro 13 inch, 2.7Ghz i5, 8Gb Ram, Intel Iris 6100 with 1.5Gb = 120s
MacBook Pro 15 inch 2.2Ghz i7, 16Gb Ram, Iris Pro with 1.5Gb = 60s
Imac retina 27 inch, 3,5 GHz i5, 8Gb Ram, AMD Radeon R9 M290X with 2Gb = 43s
MacPro 12 GB 1866 MHz DDR3, 3.7 HHz quad-core, Dual AMD FirePro D300 with 2 GB Ram each = 20s
Yosemite 10.10.5
FCPX 10.2.1
1) EVGA X58
i7 920@4.2Ghz +
24Gb DDR3 1600 +
3x R9 270X 4Gb = 13,20
2) P8H61-M LX2 +
i3 3220@3.3Ghz +
8Gb DDR 3 1600 +
1x GTX 680 4Gb = 62.97
3) P8H61-M LX2 +
i3 3220@3.3Ghz +
8Gb DDR 3 1600 +
1x GTX 280 1Gb = 73,49
Hackintosh (Asus z97 Pro wifi-ac,Clover)
i7 4790
R9 280x
32 GB 1866
Mac OS 10.9.5 FinalCut 10.1.3
stored on SSD drive as ProRs 422
13,4 sec (no other program but FinalCut running)
My Mini Hackintosh (fits in backpack) http://amzn.to/1Q8vtIR
i7-4790K
16GB RAM
GTX 960 4GB
250GB 850EVO SSD
BruceX 5K = 32 seconds (avg of 3 tests)
Just tested my new Late 2015 Retina 5K iMac
I7-6700K
16GB RAM
256GB SSD
4GB M395X
BruceX 5K Test, average of 5 tests = 17.5 seconds
Further to my test posted above:
Core i7 3770
Gigabyte GA-Z77-UP5H (v1.0)
16 GB Corsair RAM
2TB HDD (Data Drive)
Yosemite 10.10.4 (1.5TB)
MSI 7770 + Final Cut Pro X 10.2.2 = 55 sec
Surprisingly Fast (compared to before).
BruceX 5K test
On my Macbook Air (Haswell) – My 3rd Post here
1.3Ghz – i5
4GM Ram
Intel 5000 1.5GB Ram
2min 50 seconds = 170 seconds
Hopefully this will help someone make better decisions🙂
MacPro 5,1
6-Core Intel Xeon @3.46 GHz
32GB RAM 1333
Samsung Pro 850 SSD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
ProRes 422 – BruceX test: 25 seconds
BlueBeast (my Hackintosh)
GPU: x280 (vapor-tri-x)
CPU: Inte 4790K
RAM: 16gb (crucial ballistic)
SSD: 500gb (Crucial M4)
El capitan
ficpx 10.2.2 (ProRes 422)
BruceX test: 00:14:05
(extremely happy about that result, built the Hackintosh specifically for using with FCPx).
tested my other macs
mac mini 2012 (i7, 16gb)
BruceX test: 01:33:07
Macbook pro 13retina late 2013 (i5, 8gb)
BruceX test: 01:53:31
BlueBeast (my Hackintosh)
GPU: x280 (vapor-tri-x)
CPU: Inte 4790K
RAM: 16gb (crucial ballistic)
SSD: 500gb (Crucial M4)
El capitan
ficpx 10.2.2 (ProRes 422)
BruceX test: 00:14:05
(extremely happy about that result, built the Hackintosh specifically for using with FCPx).
tested my other macs
mac mini 2012 (i7, 16gb)
BruceX test: 01:33:07
Macbook pro 13retina late 2013 (i5, 8gb)
BruceX test: 01:53:31
iMac 5K retina Display 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD, i5 3.5Ghz = “28.5s” !!
Radeon 7970, 3gb flashed with boot screens and 5.0 gt/s
Mac Pro 2009, dual 2.93ghz, 16GB 1066mhz memory
SSD main drive, OWC Mercury Electra 3G, 240gb with TRIM enabler app.
BruceX test:
37 seconds on OSX 10.9.5 FCPX v10.0.9
120 seconds on OSX 10.10.5 FCPX 10.1.2 and v10.2.2
Something clearly happened in OSX 10.10 to make performance a lot slower.😦 I could tell soon as I upgraded the OS.
Mac Pro 5,1 2010, originally 2.4GHz 8 core, since upgraded to 12-core 3.06Ghz Xeons
16G 1066 RAM
1Tb Samsung 840 on a Velocity Duo 6Gb SATA PCI card
EVGA Nvidia 960 (Mac EFI flashed) with 2GB VRAM
FCPX 10.2.2, El Capitan 10.11.3
Average 43 sec
I just put in the Nvidia, but neglected to run the test with the AMD 5870 1GB I had previously cuz I was hot to upgrade the performance of Fallout 4 on my Bootcamp partition…
Mac Pro (Early 2008) 2 x 3 GHz
20 GB RAM
ATI Radeon HD 5770
SSD 500 GB
Yosemite
59 sec.