Would prefer to stay with windows platform but i am open to mac as well. What should i be looking for specs wise for video editing?
-
Icq 247-742-205 -
amd dual core 2 gig of ram two hard drives and you will be cool -
at least 2 gb ram, graphic card with much 2D power and as much processor power as you can afford, multiprocessor preferred.Comment
-
I'd go with Intel E6600 for a single chip (though dual cored) solution if you can't wait for the quad-core intel chips due out later this year. E6600 is the best for the money atm, constantly ties and occasionally beats AMD's flagship products. Get a minimum of 2gb of ram and a TB of HD space.
Comment
-
Actually, according to PCWorlds benchmarks it always beats AMD.Originally posted by notabookNICHE MONEY >> Ass Worship • Panties • Solo Teen • Pantyhose
Serving up exclusive fetish sites since 1997!Comment
-
my Athlon 64 X2 dual core 4600+ is decentComment
-
if you had the choice of doing it on a windows machien or an mac
what would ya go for?
im lookin now and that is what i cant decide betweenComment
-
wait a few months. quad core is coming outOriginally posted by TampaTokerComment
-
with a mac you are limited to final cut (unless you run windows on the mac) - more variety on a windows machineOriginally posted by ChrisComment
-
no reason to wait for the quad core, applications wont support it for some time.
dual core and core duo chips are nice and fast. i do all my editing on dual core 3.2's and 3.4's and i happen to think 2gb of ram is more than enough tho ive seen people suggest as much as 4gb - ive tried it and cant see any gain.. and i do a shitload of editing.
2x1gb dual channel ddr2 - corsair xms or kingston hyperx
i like the 10k rpm raptor hdd's
Average Latency: 2.99ms
Average Seek Time: 4.6ms
Average Write Time: 5.2ms
cheap motherboard can tank the entire thing.. i really like asus boards but its a matter of opinion.. get an intel chipset for sure. i have my 3.4's clocked to 3.8 and they run stable so a motherboard that overclocks easily might be a consideration.
aluminum case with a lot of fans, lian li is nice, superflower makes a nice one, i have 8 of theirs but having a hard time locating more atm.
500+w power suppy if your gonna have a bunch of drives - get a modular one so you dont have to keep cables in there if you dont need themComment
-
I've used both in realworld applications and usually they tie using similar system specs, but the AMD flagship product does manage to win occasionally. But since the E6600 is half the cost, it really is a no contest of who the winner is lol.Originally posted by Tat2JrComment
-
Originally posted by BitAudioVideo
agree about the ram - i got 4 gb in my machine and i've never seen windows using more than 2 gbComment
-
I disagree. CC programs will be among the first to take advantage quad core chips, it only makes sense for them to do as such. So I?d definitely wait for quad core since they are coming up soon if this computer is going to be used primarily for CC applications.Originally posted by BitAudioVideo
Aluminum case ? not necessary. CC computers will not be moved around very much and the only reason to get an aluminum case is for easier portability. Aluminum cases ability to dissipate heat are nearly negligible when compared to steel cases, so you are just wasting money on getting aluminum for a CC computer. As for airflow aye, I recommend for a dedicated heat machine at least 4 120mm fans although you could get by with less.Originally posted by BitAudioVideo
Modular PSU - no need to waste money on a modular unit. After you have tie-wrapped all the cables/hid them sufficiently there is no reason to pay extra bucks. It doesn?t help with airflow and is just a waste of money unless you can get the psu @ the same price I?d avoid it. I got a 700 watt OCZ Gamexstream for $120 bucks, cheapest modular equivalent is about $220.Originally posted by BitAudioVideoComment
-
Actually, there are more options than just Final cut for the mac, and even Imovie, which comes free with a mac, is better than most windows programs that cost $150 or more.Originally posted by MaDalton
Having 10 steaming piles of turd to choose from isn't better, in my opinion.
For what it's worth, most pro studio's use Apple and Final Cut. There has to be a good reason for that...Comment
-
Originally posted by notabook
Yup thats what I just put in new encoding box. The e6600 is without question best bang for the buck.
Here is TomsHardware chart on it.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.ht...=464&chart=185
For adobe premiere 2.0 test.
Here is the new encoding box I just built spec wise.
Duo e6600 intel 2.4ghz
Ocz gold ddr2 800 pc2 6400 ram 4GB
ASUS P5N32-SLI SE Deluxe Socket T (LGA 775) NVIDIA nForce4 SLI X16
Antec TRUEPOWERII TPII-550 ATX12V 550W Power Supply
and for main drive
Western Digital Raptor WD740ADFD 74GB 10,000 RPM 16MB Cache Serial ATA150 Hard Drive
eVGA 01G-P2-N592-AX Geforce 7950GX2 1GB 512-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Dual GPU Video Card
This thing kicks some booty.Comment
-
I have an Asus P5Ld2 motherboard (I always stick with Asus), a Pentium D 930 3ghz With 2gb of DDR2 PC5300 dual channel ram, a geforce 7800gt with 256mb ram, a Thermaltake Tsunami case with plenty of cooling and an OCZ 520watt Modstream power supply and it does the video thing smoothly.. editing.. rendering etc...Originally posted by BitAudioVideoLast edited by Yngwie; 09-30-2006, 07:58 PM.ICQ: 16544251 - Skype: gator37 @ eastlink.ca - email: yngwie @ isys.caComment
-
i think the quad is said to be about 30% faster on vegas. i dont know what he's rendering, but i edit a 30 min vid in premiere, go have a smoke and make a cup of coffee, read a few posts on gfy and the vid is done exporting.. maybe if he waits a couple months to get a quad he will save a few minutes encoding out his video.. personally, from a budget standpoint i wait till the processor is out a while before i throw down the money... then again i have 12 pc's inhouse and adding 12 more over the next month. a dual core 3.4 is $155 bucks.Originally posted by notabook
i pay $61 for a superflower sf-201 - 6 case fans - you can get a nice enermax for $38. its just an opinion ofcourse but i think an aluminum case is made better. smooth edges. better fit. less shit breaks. maybe ive bought shit steel cases in the past.Originally posted by notabook
ok, ill give you that oneOriginally posted by notabookComment
-
Originally posted by Yngwie
my asus boards run much better than my gigabytes or tyans. i have 4 of each and my next 12 will all be asus - i love the screwdrivers included with the mb too =]Comment
-
all of the computers that I've built had an asus motherboarOriginally posted by BitAudioVideo
1st one I built I foget the board model
2nd one was a CUSL2
3rd one was a P4P800 SE
3th one was and is a P5LD2
oddly enough though I never got this screwdriver you mentioned.ICQ: 16544251 - Skype: gator37 @ eastlink.ca - email: yngwie @ isys.caComment
-
Buy the Mac that costs the most
lol---'-,-{@ Sassy Grrrl @}-'-,---
Comment
-
The real answer is wait a short amount of time for the first of the quad core (dual core twice) machines... and if you have no preference in editing software, go mac and be happy
AlexComment
-
Originally posted by BitAudioVideo
A core 2 Quadro running at around the same speed of an E6600 (2.4GHz) will render a single HDTV image in around 52 seconds, compared the E6600 itself rendering the same image in about 1:38. The Quad cored chips have a performance increase of 70% or more when the same clocked chips are compared to each other, they seem to be a monster when it comes to HD material.
From THW:
3d rendering (3D Studio Max 8): 100% performance increase
Video editing (Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0): 80% performance increase
HD video encoding (H.264): 70% performance increase
Video encoding (WME 9): 63% performance increase
Video encoding (DivX 6.2): 27% performance increase
Image editing (Adobe Cs2): 24% performance increase
File comp. (Winrar): 10% performance increase
All I can say is? WOW. Quad cored personal computing is out within a few months and it is going to push the limits even further. Fucking awesome is all I have to say. I do take your budget concerns to heart though as I'm all about saving the bucks as well. The E6600 was very well priced when it was released though, I'm hoping they have a similar version for the quad launch.
Steel is stronger than aluminum, so I?d have to disagree with that aluminum cases are less prone to breakage. Though honestly for me it comes down to price. The SF-201 is looks to be a pretty good sweet deal for the money, especially considering it comes with six fans (albeit 80mm so the noise factor is slightly higher than I like). For me it?s *always* price first and foremost, and at that price it?s more than welcome.Originally posted by BitAudioVideoComment
-
not to threadjack...
i may look at a steel superflower case for my next batch because the 201 is out of stock.. they make a SF-561 that is steel and same style as the 201 (altho 5x8cm and 1x12cm rather than 6x8cm) the noise isnt an issue, theres no way that room will ever be quiet =]
there any stats for on2vp6 encoding? 2 pass best quality is dogass slowComment
-
Originally posted by RawAlexThe real answer is wait a short amount of time for the first of the quad core (dual core twice) machines... and if you have no preference in editing software, go mac and be happy
Alex
“If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”Comment
-
I have not seen any yet, but jesus christ are you ever right. Fucking on2vp6 and vp7 makes x264 encoding seem fast =\Originally posted by BitAudioVideoComment
-
i just did 50 2-3 hour dvds - all 2 pass with flix8 - cleaner is even slower
640x480 1000k
512x384 768k
320x240 384k
i nearly shot myself
im waiting for you to buy a quad4 and tell me =]Comment
-
Bah! Just got through building my e6600, I'm not upgrading again for at least two years. I just had to build it, got a fantastic deal on a 7900GTX a month ago (got it new for 300 bucks, couldn't pass it up). I'm sure the quad-cores will manage to make me lactate thoughOriginally posted by BitAudioVideo
Comment
-
e6600 looks pretty good, I just ordered dual xeon 5130's.. I wonder if I wasted my money...They were pretty pricey compared to the core duo, especially since the clockspeed is slower. 5140 and 5150 were way too pricey for me. As far as I know the woodcrest (5100-series) is the 'same' that Apple uses?
Then again I'm getting 2 dualcore processors, so they should speed up the rendering time..and the frontside bus seems to be faster than e6600.. not sure if it's worth the extra money though. Gotta hope so...and I'm off.Comment
-
I would like to see a comparison showing the Opteron and Xeon vs the X2's and 6x00's. Just about every comparison I've ever seen will show the first two against each other (server class chips) and the last two against each other (desktop class chips) but they rarely ever show the server class vs. the desktop class machines.
Then consider that you can have mutli-core multi-processor chip server machines but they never do a direct comparison.
At a minimum I would like to see a comparison of a dual-processor Opteron 265/2210 (which is dual core, so two chips and two processors each) vs the Intel E6700/5000V series processors. The Intel 5000 processors are dual-core Xeon's and dual-processor also.
Even more interested would be to throw in a 4-way and an 8-way Opteron board. The 8-way board has four more chips on top of the 4-way board.
Dave.
DelanyDecolleur.com :: Satin and Nylon Nude Glamour ModelComment
-
re intel uOriginally posted by notabook
amd ftw, forget about the past couple months intel spin. they're still way ahead in bang for buckComment
-
Uh, considering the intel core 2 duo mid-range chip, the E6600 ($318), ties and occasionally beats AMD's flagship product, the X62 ($680), I'd retool your thinking there fanboi.Originally posted by xroachre intel u
amd ftw, forget about the past couple months intel spin. they're still way ahead in bang for buckComment
-
..especially since now intel seems to use less power too than amd....and I'm off.Comment
-
amd dual core is good enough for me.. of course with atleast 2GB RAM 256-512mb video cardEmail: [email protected] | Skype: ross.alcazarComment
-
^^ he's right.Originally posted by MaDaltonComment
-
Im a huge AMD fan, but the numbers dont lie here. Intel crushed them this time. The e6600 is a monster.Originally posted by xroachre intel u
amd ftw, forget about the past couple months intel spin. they're still way ahead in bang for buckComment
-
I use a opteron 165 @ 3GhzOriginally posted by dsatchell
I was just looking over the link posted above and it appears pretty close to the 6600. The only benchmark tests I've done to compare so far is the 3DMark06. At tom's hardware the 6600 scored 2136
My opteron always scores in the 2030-2050 range.
They're booth around the same price so it will be interesting to see how it does in other tests. I'll run some of the tests listed there later this evening when I have some free time.
Of course a 6600 overclocked @ 3Ghz will likely smoke it. If I remember correctly my 165 scored around 17XX on the cpu test of 3DMark06 before overclocking.264-543-302Comment
-
3dmark 2006? You saying thats the overall score, or the cpu score?Originally posted by Martin3Comment
-
The cpu test.Originally posted by stickyfingerz264-543-302Comment
-
-
ahh ok.Originally posted by Martin3
Comment
Comment