>>> So yeah virtualization is an option, with very limited performance since 
>>> the VM 3D acceleration passthrough isn't so great.
>>
>> FWIW, both VMware and Parallels claim to have made great advances in their 
>> Windows 3D acceleration support.
>
> Like bringing honey from freezer to room temperature? I haven't benchmarked 
> any of it, but for general purpose (i.e. GPU accelerated GUI) it's quite 
> fine. But the gamers are still not all gung ho about it, so I'd think video 
> editing demands would be much the same or greater possibly.
>
> I'm a big fan of VM - that's all I use on my Mac. It's vastly easier to 
> setup, maintain, and is safer data integrity wise too. But I don't consider 
> it so much from a performance perspective.

My intended use is to use a video editor to work with movies. The plan
is to use Quicktime or SnagIt (if TechSmith has gotten it to work
better, anyways) to record video and audio, and a network chat program
to record player discussions. Then toss it at an editor that is easier
to use than iMovie (more pain than it's worth).

I don't need high performance video until it's time to save. Exporting
on iMovie wants the GPU, so I suspect something similar will happen in
editing. But it does not bother me if it takes 2 hours more to process
a 30 minute video if it saves me 8 hours of editing headache.

So, I don't need _real time_ GPU access. Batched access is fine.
_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users

Reply via email to