I also re-ran the tests using the latest version of ffWorks (v3) and a version of FFmpeg optimized for Apple silicon CPUs both of which were released after initial publication. So, I added test results from a 2018 Mac mini with an i7 CPU. UPDATE: A criticism I received after initially publishing this was that the Intel i5 CPU is significantly slower than an i7 or i9. However, I have not had any problem when using FFmpeg to read ProRes files and convert them into other formats for YouTube, my website or other social media. For this reason, they caution against using any software running FFmpeg for creating ProRes files. However, Apple has said that FFmpeg has reverse-engineered, rather than licensed, its ProRes implementation. Why did I choose ffWorks? Because, like Handbrake, its compression engine is FFmpeg, which is widely used in media software. However, none of the compressed files it created could be opened. NOTE: I originally wanted to use Handbrake for this test.

Here, too, I would expect compression speeds to be similar.ĮXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Regardless of the software you prefer to use, the M1 MacBook Pro makes encoding into any video format MUCH faster! Also, we will discover that compression speed is not dependent upon how hard the CPUs are working, how fast the hard disk transfers data or, in Intel systems, which CPU you are using. As well, Adobe Premiere Pro uses the same compression engine for its exports that’s in Adobe Media Encoder.

NOTE: Apple Final Cut Pro and Compressor use the same compression engine I would expect compression speeds to be similar.

This is one of those articles that takes forever to create, yet can be understood in less than a minute. In this article, I compare the compression speed of Apple Compressor, Adobe Media Encoder (AME) and ffWorks (FFmpeg) on a new M1 MacBook Pro vs.

Handbrake for m1 mac