I'm going to buy a notebook that I mostly need to cut 4K videos. Now I'm still unsure how much space to take up. Is a TB enough or more?
2tb and external
4K and notebook sound adventurous. In any case, I would take up any space that I can get, because 4K video material takes up a lot of space, and the video editing programs are usually not exactly small. It would also be helpful to pay attention to fast connections for external hard drives.
Depends on how much video you want to save. I would not start under 2 TB (external), if only because of the P / L ratio.
So you new Macbook Pro 16 "is easy.
sometimes even have 3 storylines
A desktop PC for the same price would probably still export videos in half the time and wouldn't have any problems with even more tracks.
Desktop and laptop are (completely) different
Not really, both are x86 machines. Only that some usually have decent performance and the others have clocked-down, small chips that have to be constantly careful not to overheat. Especially at Apple, where the look is more important than the cooling.
Lul NEVER had overheating problems…
OMEGALUL XD KEK Kappa123 mostly there are no problems, because the CPUs simply reduce the clock before they get too hot. In addition, Apple itself reduces the voltage of the CPU, also costs a little clock, reduces the overheating problem a little. Especially with constant workloads, such as video export, MacBooks, but also many other laptops, usually can't keep the CPU's boost clock due to a lack of cooling.
Only at Apple is it possible, especially in the 13 "models, to install CPUs that look relatively strong on paper, because for most Apple customers it is enough to write some great numbers on the data sheet. Only these CPUs can do it in such a compact case, its boost clock can't keep. Apple could also use somewhat more economical CPUs, which clocked a little lower and would even be cheaper, but could keep their clock (and would be on par with throttled, "stronger" models), but a) it doesn't look that great on the datasheet, b) they can't ask for that much more money, and c) people still buy it because more GHz = more better.
With the 16 "model it is not quite as blatant, but it is massively overpriced and a correspondingly expensive desktop would make it eat dust in every situation.
I agree with the first part aaaberr
a desktop can't carry around.
That is correct, but there are enough laptops that offer more performance than a MacBook Pro, or offer the same performance at a lower price.
Agree, but you have to consider that Apple has some "designed" components in it, your own operating system and compatibility with iPhone, ipod, ipad is the best…
but yes, they could be a little cheaper
design: who wants to carry a block around? You can do a lot in a little. It's a fact.
Almost every laptop manufacturer has to design their own motherboards, and the CPUs are from Intel and the GPUs from AMD, which you can get elsewhere. Or something better.
Windows now also has options for pairing smartphones and laptops.
Apple manages to put little in little and convince people that there's a lot in it and that it is something very special, and not just a badly cooled x86 computer in a stylish aluminum case.
