Best system specs for the a video editing PC? - GoFuckYourself.com

stev0 · 09-22-2006, 09:35 PM

I'm wondering what components make the most difference in a video editing PC...

I've got an amd64 4000+ laptop with 1 gig of ram and an ATI X600 128mb in it and it edits/renders videos faster than my AMD 3000+ desktop with 1 gig ram and a nvidia geforce 6800 256mb.

Is the CPU the main factor here? or does the video card come into play much?

I dont know whether to build on the desktop (adding ram and what not) or just build a new one from scratch with a dual core CPU and a ton of ram. With all these new processors out lately (pentium d's, opteron's, etc) im not too sure what the benifits and disadvantages of each type are.

I'm tired of having to wait while i chop through 700mb divx and mov files.

squishypimp · 09-22-2006, 09:37 PM

go dual dual core xeon with a shit load of ram and fast sata drives.

get a dual output vid card and get an expensive one.

CheeseFrog · 09-22-2006, 09:37 PM

I'm pretty sure the CPU is what carries the load when you're rendering video. The GPU handles it when playing back.

stev0 · 09-22-2006, 09:38 PM

also.. would the cache on the cpu matter? i'm looking at a bunch of them on this site http://www.memoryexpress.com/index.p..._menu=197&SID=

seems they range from 128k cache to 4 megs.

stev0 · 09-22-2006, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squishypimp

go dual dual core xeon with a shit load of ram and fast sata drives.

get a dual output vid card and get an expensive one.

Would the dual core xeon 3.2ghz would be better than the dual core pentium d 3.6ghz?

woj · 09-22-2006, 09:41 PM

video card will make very little difference, CPU + memory are most important

NoWhErE · 09-22-2006, 09:41 PM

I hear a Texas Instruments Calculator R0x0rz Y0uR S0x0rZ when it comes to rendering

donross · 09-22-2006, 09:44 PM

higher the processor and higher RAM makes video editing fast rendering... you laptop has a high processor with amd 4000+(i think its 2.4GHz speed) then your cpu with has 3000+ (2.0Ghz speed)

Well Dunn · 09-22-2006, 09:46 PM

someone here had an awesome mac farm setup for vide rendering, it was fucking hot, wish I had the pic.

stev0 · 09-22-2006, 09:47 PM

So...

Dual xeon 3.2ghz with 4 gigs of ram sound good? or would bumping it up to 8 gigs of ram make a big difference?

My biggest problem is when scrolling through videos with the slide bar in ulead video studio... on some formats it's really choppy and annoying to find clips. I want it to be completely smooth, if possible ;)

munki · 09-22-2006, 09:47 PM

notabook · 09-22-2006, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stev0

So...

Dual xeon 3.2ghz with 4 gigs of ram sound good? or would bumping it up to 8 gigs of ram make a big difference?

4GB should be sufficient for the majority of video editing. AS for the chip, I would go with the quad-core Intel chip (content creation on quad-core should kick complete ass) when it comes out later this year.

cess · 09-22-2006, 11:11 PM

Tyan Thunder n4250QE (S4985)
http://www.tyan.com/products/html/thundern4250qe.html

I haven't seen a quad core yet for the new Xeon (771).

BitAudioVideo · 09-22-2006, 11:24 PM

using dual core 3.4s 2x2mb l2 (newegg has em for $155 right now)
dual channel ddr2. i personally find that 1gb is plenty for my encode machines - some of mine only have 512 but i have 2gb on my editing boxes.

faster ram is better than more ram

u can use an 8mb pci video card on an encode box and it wont make a shit of difference.

128mb is more than enough for an encode machine, any 1/2 way decent card.

i dont use ulead but it may have a similar feature as premiere... premiere has some settings for scratch disc.. it helps to have source on 1 drive, output on a different drive, and scratch on another seperate drive

your editing from a divx file? that will dragass anyhow - probably wouldnt have the lag issue if you were editing from dv-avi

stev0 · 09-23-2006, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rich219inc

using dual core 3.4s 2x2mb l2 (newegg has em for $155 right now)
dual channel ddr2. i personally find that 1gb is plenty for my encode machines - some of mine only have 512 but i have 2gb on my editing boxes.

faster ram is better than more ram

u can use an 8mb pci video card on an encode box and it wont make a shit of difference.

128mb is more than enough for an encode machine, any 1/2 way decent card.

i dont use ulead but it may have a similar feature as premiere... premiere has some settings for scratch disc.. it helps to have source on 1 drive, output on a different drive, and scratch on another seperate drive

your editing from a divx file? that will dragass anyhow - probably wouldnt have the lag issue if you were editing from dv-avi

Ya, editing from dv-avi is totally smooth.. mpeg isn't bad either. Alot of my source files come in divx though (it's still the best quality video out there for the files that small). I imagine a 1 hour dv-avi file would be insanely huge if i converted it first.

Dvae · 09-23-2006, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Well Dunn

someone here had an awesome mac farm setup for vide rendering, it was fucking hot, wish I had the pic.

Are you talking about this one?

Thread is here:
http://www.gfy.com/showthread.php?t=...ghlight=cooled

Dvae · 09-23-2006, 03:14 AM

The new Mac Pro puts them all to shame.

http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html

BitAudioVideo · 09-23-2006, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dvae

The new Mac Pro puts them all to shame.

http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html

you mean now that it uses an intel chip? =]

BitAudioVideo · 09-23-2006, 05:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stev0

Ya, editing from dv-avi is totally smooth.. mpeg isn't bad either. Alot of my source files come in divx though (it's still the best quality video out there for the files that small). I imagine a 1 hour dv-avi file would be insanely huge if i converted it first.

dv-avi is about 12gb/hour - this is avi ripped right off a mini-dv tape. not to be confused with uncompressed/ms-avi which is larger, and a rendered avi (huffy for example) which would be larger also.

you wouldnt probably want to convert the divx first because it wont be lossless. i just demand the original source material =]

BitAudioVideo · 09-23-2006, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Well Dunn

someone here had an awesome mac farm setup for vide rendering, it was fucking hot, wish I had the pic.

your talking about this one that belongs to Brad G.

mines not as pretty...

Dvae · 09-23-2006, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rich219inc

you mean now that it uses an intel chip? =]

Hey, never had a problem with Intel. Microsucks is the company I love to hate.
Lets face it IBM/Motorola were not keeping up so it was inevitable.

Like the TV commercial says, now that Apple uses Intel the true power of their chips has been unleashed.

.

09-22-2006, 09:35 PM	#1
stev0 Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Calgary, Alberta Posts: 6,801	Best system specs for the a video editing PC? I'm wondering what components make the most difference in a video editing PC... I've got an amd64 4000+ laptop with 1 gig of ram and an ATI X600 128mb in it and it edits/renders videos faster than my AMD 3000+ desktop with 1 gig ram and a nvidia geforce 6800 256mb. Is the CPU the main factor here? or does the video card come into play much? I dont know whether to build on the desktop (adding ram and what not) or just build a new one from scratch with a dual core CPU and a ton of ram. With all these new processors out lately (pentium d's, opteron's, etc) im not too sure what the benifits and disadvantages of each type are. I'm tired of having to wait while i chop through 700mb divx and mov files.

09-22-2006, 09:37 PM	#2
squishypimp PostMaster General Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 10,781	go dual dual core xeon with a shit load of ram and fast sata drives. get a dual output vid card and get an expensive one. __________________ Signature For Sale

09-22-2006, 09:37 PM	#3
CheeseFrog Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: AZ Posts: 1,724	I'm pretty sure the CPU is what carries the load when you're rendering video. The GPU handles it when playing back. __________________ Cary \| AIM: cheesefrog \| ICQ: 4287002

09-22-2006, 09:41 PM	#6
woj <&(©¿©)&> Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 47,882	video card will make very little difference, CPU + memory are most important __________________ Custom Software Development, email: woj#at#wojfun#.#com to discuss details or skype: wojl2000 or gchat: wojfun or telegram: wojl2000 Affiliate program tools: Hosted Galleries Manager Banner Manager Video Manager Wordpress Affiliate Plugin Pic/Movie of the Day Fansign Generator Zip Manager

09-22-2006, 09:41 PM	#7
NoWhErE Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 10,388	I hear a Texas Instruments Calculator R0x0rz Y0uR S0x0rZ when it comes to rendering __________________ skype: lordofthecameltoe

09-22-2006, 09:38 PM	#4
stev0 Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Calgary, Alberta Posts: 6,801	also.. would the cache on the cpu matter? i'm looking at a bunch of them on this site http://www.memoryexpress.com/index.p..._menu=197&SID= seems they range from 128k cache to 4 megs.

09-22-2006, 09:44 PM	#8
donross Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,295	higher the processor and higher RAM makes video editing fast rendering... you laptop has a high processor with amd 4000+(i think its 2.4GHz speed) then your cpu with has 3000+ (2.0Ghz speed) __________________ Email: [email protected] \| Skype: ross.alcazar

09-22-2006, 09:46 PM	#9
Well Dunn Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,026	someone here had an awesome mac farm setup for vide rendering, it was fucking hot, wish I had the pic. __________________ ICQ: 471859252 Mailers! ICQ me I want your traffic!!!! We will pay daily, weekly, monthly, WHATEVER! Just contact me and we will get you paid!

09-22-2006, 09:47 PM	#10
stev0 Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Calgary, Alberta Posts: 6,801	So... Dual xeon 3.2ghz with 4 gigs of ram sound good? or would bumping it up to 8 gigs of ram make a big difference? My biggest problem is when scrolling through videos with the slide bar in ulead video studio... on some formats it's really choppy and annoying to find clips. I want it to be completely smooth, if possible ;)

09-22-2006, 09:47 PM	#11
munki Do Fun Shit. Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OC Posts: 13,393	__________________ “I have the simplest tastes. I am always satisfied with the best.” -Oscar Wilde

09-22-2006, 11:11 PM	#13
cess Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 2,921	Tyan Thunder n4250QE (S4985) http://www.tyan.com/products/html/thundern4250qe.html I haven't seen a quad core yet for the new Xeon (771).

09-22-2006, 11:24 PM	#14
BitAudioVideo Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: USA, Georgia Posts: 1,246	using dual core 3.4s 2x2mb l2 (newegg has em for $155 right now) dual channel ddr2. i personally find that 1gb is plenty for my encode machines - some of mine only have 512 but i have 2gb on my editing boxes. faster ram is better than more ram u can use an 8mb pci video card on an encode box and it wont make a shit of difference. 128mb is more than enough for an encode machine, any 1/2 way decent card. i dont use ulead but it may have a similar feature as premiere... premiere has some settings for scratch disc.. it helps to have source on 1 drive, output on a different drive, and scratch on another seperate drive your editing from a divx file? that will dragass anyhow - probably wouldnt have the lag issue if you were editing from dv-avi __________________ Hi-Quality Encoding - Bulk Orders - On Time! http://bitaudiovideo.com icq 50476697 - aim n3r0xXx

09-23-2006, 03:14 AM	#17
Dvae Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: US Posts: 5,326	The new Mac Pro puts them all to shame. http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html __________________ . . Arguing with a troll is a lot like wrestling in the mud with a pig, after a couple of hours you realize the pig likes it.