#Final cut pro vs adobe premiere musicians windows
Obviously we couldn't run the Final Cut tests on the Razer laptop, but we felt it was important to include a high-powered Windows machine with an NVIDIA GPU in order to demonstrate the benefits of CUDA hardware acceleration in Premiere Pro.
Specs were essentially maxed out on all three machines (see below), and each computer was fully charged and/or plugged in, with no other programs running in the background to take up memory, CPU, or GPU resources. Match Sequence Settings in Premiere), since Final Cut will use the rendered previews by default.Īll 5 tests were run on 3 different computers: a 13-inch Intel MacBook Pro, a 24-inch M1 iMac, and a Razer Blade 15 Advanced. Previews were rendered with identical settings in both programs, and 'Use Previews' was checked when exporting the master file (i.e. To keep things as even as possible, all Final Cut Pro exports were done at 'Better Quality' and all Premiere Pro exports were configured to match the bitrate of the Final Cut File using VBR 1-pass encoding. Similarly, previews for this piece were set by default to 4K ProRes 4:2:2 in Final Cut's Project Settings, with no option to change the resolution of your previews without changing the resolution of the entire project/timeline or going through the additional step of generating proxy media. We took 8K footage from a Sony a1, compiled it into two identical timelines with identical effects, scoured the settings to ensure everything was identical, and ran both of these video editors through the same battery of tests. It makes only a slight difference in total bitrate, and may be similar to Premiere Pro's option for CBR vs VBR 1-pass vs VBR 2-pass encoding, but we have no way of knowing for sure. For example, the difference between H.264 'Faster Encode' and H.264 'Higher Quality' isn't explained anywhere in Apple's documentation. Note: preview codec, target bitrates, and other settings in Adobe Premiere Pro were based on analyzing the Final Cut Pro files.Ĭoming up with tests that were close to identical was tricky because Final Cut Pro gives you less control over how and what you can render and export unless you also buy Apple's Compressor software. So we took an 8K project filmed on the Sony a1, compiled it into two identical 4K timelines with identical effects, scoured the settings to ensure everything was as similar as reasonably possible, and then ran both of these video editors through the same battery of tests. Pure performance, on the other hand, is measurable. How quickly you can edit a video from start to finish in either Premiere Pro or Final Cut is largely a matter of personal preference and familiarity with each application's quirks.
Tests | Computers | Results | Key takeaways | Final thoughts But for all the head-to-head editing shootouts and 'why I switched' anecdotes from disgruntled Adobe and/or Apple users, what matters in the end is raw performance.
They both have 'Pro' in the name, so according to Apple nomenclature rules they should both be excellent. But among video editors, especially the ones on YouTube, one scuffle comes up more than any other: Apple Final Cut Pro or Adobe Premiere Pro? Crunchy peanut butter or smooth? (Smooth). There are some debates that stand the test of time.
0 kommentar(er)
