the magic box

omyben · Post by **omyben** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 8:36 pm

this could start a debate...
but ive been shopping around for a new a pooter and the mini mac has caught my eye
im looking for something under a grand that i would use only to run graphic applications, specifically(sp?) moho.

.....thoughts anyone?

hemorrhoid · Post by **hemorrhoid** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 8:49 pm

well if you know anything about putting a computer together i would recomend just buying the parts and putting it together yourself (or with someone who knows how) because you will save so much money.

kdiddy13 · Post by **kdiddy13** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 9:23 pm

I believe (please jump in anytime if I'm wrong, I'm going off a post I read a long time ago), that the main thing to look for in a Moho computer would be processor and memory. I don't think that Moho takes much (any?) advantage of 3d graphics cards, other than putting it up on the screen (ie. it doesn't use the graphics card's processor or memory for much like it would in something like Maya or Doom 3).

I'm using Moho on a PIII 1ghz with 512 Ram and a Geforce 2 w/ 32 MB Ram (slow by today's standards) and it seems to work just fine. It also runs Maya, Photoshop, Painter, After Effects, Premiere, etc. fine. Anything faster than that will work even "finer", I'm sure.

As far as I can tell, the Mac/PC debate has become a bit of a mute point as far as graphics and sound go. In relatively distant past (a whopping 10 years ago), Mac was the hands down winner for multimedia. But now it's all a matter of preference. Each has their advantages and disadvantages, but all and all do the same thing at pretty close to the same speed with the same software.

The real question is, and think about this carefully, when the computer breaks (and it will when you most need it) which type are you comfortable fixing, either in software or hardware? Do all your friends have one type or another? What does your resident computer expert use? Make friends with them and ask them, because they'll be the ones you may need to turn to for help when the shit hits the fan and if you have a different platform, they may be unable to help much.

Personally, I'm a PC guy (I like Dell in particular), if only because I've been using one since DOS and know how to fix and maintain one. The only real compelling reason for me to consider a Mac would be for Final Cut Pro, my favorite editing program to date. Other than that, it's like choosing ice cream flavors, everyone has their favorites, but they'll all make your ass fat if you eat too much.... Um, I think you get what I mean.

AcouSvnt · Post by **AcouSvnt** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 1:47 am

Even if moho itself doesn't make use of graphics cards, it doesn't hurt to be able to watch your rendered movie on the same machine you rendered it on, without skipping, etc.

Also, if your export format is .mov, there's just something about trying to use Quicktime on a PC that's like pounding a square peg into a round hole.

kdiddy13 · Post by **kdiddy13** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:40 am

Does the video card memory and Open GL with texturing actually have anything to do with video playback? I thought that had more to do with processor, hard drive speed, and memory requirements. Short of supporting higher resolutions, 3D requirements, or multiple monitors, the graphics cards don't kick in to things like video playback. Getting a better graphics card won't hurt you, but in the case of Moho, I don't think it will help you much. Maybe I was wrong.

As far as Quicktime goes, I've found it to play as well on my PC as any Mac. And in some cases I've found QT files skipping on a Mac of similar price and age, that would play back fine on my PC. It won't play an uncompressed file (Quicktime or AVI) back other than short bursts but I haven't met a Mac that would either. Quicktime DV plays back flawlessly as does Avi. Video playback seems to be more of a codec issue than a platform question. In my experience, , if it plays on one, it will in all likelihood play back on another.

Video editing in Premier works fine with no skipping, and that's at a nearly identical format (AVI DV vs QT DV) that Final Cut uses (unless your doing Final Cut HD, but who has 10 grand to drop on the equipment?).

I'll stand by my argument that the power of the PC vs. the Mac are so similar that it really isn't worth comparing them. You show me a suped up Mac and what it can do, I can show you a PC that can do the same thing. What really matters these days is what you're comfortable working in or if you need platform specific apps.

AcouSvnt · Post by **AcouSvnt** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:53 am

I pretty much agree with you on this anyway, Kdiddy. I just raised the playback thing because you mentioned the graphics card, and I thought video playback made use of the ram/processing in those (not an expert).

What I would say is, don't base the choice on Moho, since it's perfectly suited for Windows or Mac (unfortunately limited in some ways on Linux, though). It's unnecessary to even factor Moho into the equation. Instead, base it on how you like an OS to behave, and what other applications you're going to want to use.

And then if it's still a close call and you need a tiebreaker, watch Pirates of Silicon Valley. That should help.

kdiddy13 · Post by **kdiddy13** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 5:34 pm

I thought video playback made use of the ram/processing in those (not an expert).

Me neither. I'm guessing based on conversations I overheard or didn't quite understand. In any event a decent video card certainly won't hurt anything.

unfortunately limited in some ways on Linux, though

As are many other software apps that are either ported to Linux or rely on using wine or some other emulator. I would use Linux in a heartbeat if it was a tad more user friendly, and had more multimedia industry support (what the hell are you waiting for Adobe!?)

And then if it's still a close call and you need a tiebreaker, watch Pirates of Silicon Valley. That should help.

Very true. Microsoft is not the friendliest of companies, although I believe that Mac would very much like to hold a monopoly much like Microsoft does. Again, I would switch to Linux in a heartbeat if it had more of the tools that I've grown accustomed to.

One strong point in favor of Mac, if you aren't a computer expert and don't have friends who are, Mac has customer support that's far and above any of the PC competitors. Dell for instance has outsourced most of it's tech support to India, and their typical help amounts to asking whether you rebooted the computer. Although that's the way it was before they outsourced, the language and cultural differences don't help getting your questions answered (unless of course you're living in India).

Hiddicop · Post by **Hiddicop** » Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:01 am

I thought video playback made use of the ram/processing in those (not an expert).

I certintly think they do, cause when I play some videos on my 233 Mhz - 64 Mb RAM computer, without any good videocard, it sure goes slow and jerky.

kdiddy13 · Post by **kdiddy13** » Fri Jan 14, 2005 4:56 pm

I certintly think they do, cause when I play some videos on my 233 Mhz - 64 Mb RAM computer, without any good videocard, it sure goes slow and jerky.

Two questions, is it a Mac? Do you have the same computer with a good videocard? Because if it's a PC, those stats are pretty low for playing back video by any type, and I seriously doubt a video card is going to help much.

Video codecs rely very heavily on decoding by the central procecessor, they also load as much as they can into RAM (two things here, how fast can the hard drive spit out info, and how much can the RAM hold). 64 MB, depending on your OS, is barely enough to RUN the OS. 233 Mhz is pretty old school (for a PC anyway, not sure of how it stacks up in Mac world) Bloated XP recommends a minimum of 96MB.

I'm still sticking with my story that a suped up graphics card (not including MPEG decoders, and Avid type cards, but that's not what we're talking about) won't help for average tasks like video playback, unless you're running multiple monitors, playing off a DVD (again, this is different than Quicktime or AVI stuff) or doing 3D stuff.

But please, if someone knows for sure, please write in and help settle this debate. I'd really like to know for sure.

Maybe Lost Marble can help out.

Does Moho take advantage of a graphics card's processor or RAM? Does it do anything in open GL?

kdiddy13 · Post by **kdiddy13** » Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:25 pm

http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphi ... de-06.html

Looks like I was wrong. I'm guessing that I was going off of old info, back when video cards only helped out with resolution and 3d stuff, leaving most of the codec conversion to the processor. Sorry for the confusion

As I read it, according to the article, putting better video playback in the cards is a relatively new thing/effort by the manufacturers (I'm guessing to capitalize on TiVo like capabilities of the PC/Mac). In any event, a new graphics card will in all liklihood only help you out with video playback. It's probably worth checking the claims/reviews on the card before you get it though, but that goes for any peripheral.

I'm still curious though, how much does Moho take advantage of a video card's CPU or RAM?

Post by **Lost Marble** » Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:53 pm

As far as I know, the graphics card is not used for video playback. I think there used to be some graphics cards with hardware MPEG decompression built in, but these days it's pretty easy for the processor to handle full-screen video on its own.

Many video codecs are designed so that they take more processing power to compress than to decompress. By putting more work into the compression stage, it makes it easier for common hardware to decompress and play back at a good speed.

The graphics card may be used to smoothly scale up a video to full-screen, but the actual playback is depended on the processor and being able to pull the data off of disk fast enough to keep up.

kdiddy13 wrote:Does Moho take advantage of a graphics card's processor or RAM? Does it do anything in open GL?

No, Moho's drawing is all in software. We may be starting some OpenGL experiments, but it's too soon to say what effect it may have on playback.

nobudget · Post by **nobudget** » Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:41 pm

Good luck buying a new computer that ISN'T up to the task... Excluding games most computers are so powerful it's almost not worth thinking about.

I have a Dell 2.4Ghz, the standard 256 RAM and a extra bigger HD (extra HD is more important than more memory in my opinion) and it works great. The price was the reason I choose that brand by the way. I've read a lot of bad stuff about Dell but all the people I know, myself included only have good stories to tell, so what the hell I yell...
No need to add to any Windows/Mac/Linux debate but is it me or are there more bug reports concerning Mac on the forum? Don't mean to step on any toes, it's just something I noticed lately.
I'm a user, not a techie but like I said, it will be more likely you choose something that works for you than something that won't. Moho doesn't require THAT much power for normal use, syncing to audio is the only thing that should really be much faster but that might be more a Moho issue than processing power.

"watch Pirates of Silicon Valley"
Just my luck it is on Dutch television tonight, coincedence or destiny?

Good luck and enjoy whatever you choose. But if your animations suck don't blame the computer!

Reindert.
www.nobugetvideo.com

Post by **Lost Marble** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:11 am

nobudget wrote:Good luck buying a new computer that ISN'T up to the task... Excluding games most computers are so powerful it's almost not worth thinking about.

Exactly.

the magic box

the magic box

Whoops. My mistake