This resulted in a massive improvement in speed, lowering export times to just 1 minute 41 seconds, or twice as fast.Ī more intense test is with the HEVC (H.265) footage. Using the same settings in Resolve it seems to be able to use more of the computer’s processing power, though it does kick on the fans. On the MacBook using Compressor you are maxing out the GPU and using a small portion of the CPU the one minute project took 3 minutes and 54 seconds. Final Cut doesn’t easily give us all the same numbers, but it seems to be the same as Resolve’s performance.Įxport is always where the biggest challenge is for laptops and video editing. The 30 fps footage is getting a few drop frames, bringing it down to ~27 fps with one LUT or ~21 fps with two LUTs.

Now using 4K H.264 footage on a 4K timeline we are going to look at the playback performance. Resolve used about the same in terms of graphics but less of the CPU and took 2 minutes for the same task. Opening up his benchmark tests you are likely familiar if you have seen Yuryev’s other videos, his first comparison is with stabilization.įinal Cut uses almost all of the graphics but a minimal part of the CPU to perform the task in 46 seconds. Just an FYI, he had a 2019 model, but if you are shopping today the 2020 version was just announced.

Yuryev also chose to do these tests on a machine where efficiency can make a huge difference – a 13” MacBook Pro with integrated graphics. If you want to know, Max Yuryev put together his own comparison between FCPX and Resolve to see which offers better performance for different video editing tasks. Right? In 2020 things might be changing a bit as other editors, such as DaVinci Resolve from Blackmagic Design, are quickly catching up when it comes to software optimization. When using a Mac, Final Cut Pro X is obviously the most efficient NLE.

Davinci resolve 16 2020