jcs

It's very fast. Maybe a second for all those clips vs 10 for the mp4s. Although that's complicated by the mp4 files only importing the audio.

Adobe's .MXF importer is probably more optimized since it's for the higher-end professional cameras (and must handle 8-12-bit (perhaps as high as 16-bit?)).

When PP CC was heavily leaking memory, the more one had the better (time required before having to restart). Perhaps best to monitor memory usage and see how one's projects are doing before adding more DRAM (same for VRAM, which would require a card swap). I put 64GB in the new box thinking I need a ton more DRAM (and is so cheap now). However after Adobe and Nvidia fixed their software, the 24GB box is working OK again.
Have you done tests with drives? While I have a 2TB M.2 drive in the new machine (3.5GB/s read), I can edit smoothly off the internal 4T 7200, and on the 2010 MacPro, can edit without issue on external 5400RPM USB3 WD drives. Perhaps drive speed is more of an issue when cutting between multiple clips frequently (music video, short commercial, etc.)? The max bitrate for the 4K files for the C300 II and 1DX II are still under 1MB/s, so that's a lot of video streams which can be read before bandwidth is an issue.

1) Have you tried the rewrap to mxf?
2) Don't have your project media on a platter drive (if at all possible). SSD or raid. Complete a project then store it on the platter. 
3) Generally speaking each logical core should have access to its own required memory, which for 4k is 4GB. 
4) Each 4k screen you drive should have 4GB of video card memory, ie. running 2 x 4K screens = 8GB video memory
I'm on i7-4770K, 32GB. Will try a test now.

Looks like Acid and SoundForge are now part of Magix software? SoundForge+Acid+Spectral Layers Pro could replace Audition on Windows. Agree rolling Pr/AE/Au into one app is the long term right answer.

Check out Affinity Designer to replace Illustrator: https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/designer/

@Axel how do you like Affinity Photo? Why do you still use Photoshop and not just Affinity Photo? I also use Illustrator and Acrobat from time to time... Two more apps to replace (Affinity has Designer to replace Illustrator?).

@Kisaha, to start working with Ambisonics, get http://www.reaper.tv/ and http://www.ambisonictoolkit.net/. You can place mono and stereo recordings in 3D space, then render them out to stereo, binaural 3D (for use with headphones, using an HRTF to convert to stereo will localize the sound in 3D- left/right/up/down/front/back vs. simple stereo or 5.1/7.1 etc. (which are planar 3D- no elevation)).
Putting together single full-sized mics to get an Ambisonic recording might be challenging (physically). The best way at the moment is with 4 bare mic capsules arranged in a tetrahedron. This will capture "A" format (4 channels). The Sennheiser plugin converts this A format to "B" format (still 4 channels) which can then be manipulated by Ambisonic processing- placing the recorded source in any 3D location, simulate any kind of mic and mic direction, etc.
You can also get pretty cool 3D like results with a mid-side recording. This is typically a shotgun/hypercardioid and a figure 8 mic. Use http://www.voxengo.com/product/msed/ to adjust the sound field of a mid-side recording in post. With speakers and headphones, some of my mid-side recordings sound ultra-real in 3D, meaning you'll turn around thinking something recorded just happened in real life. I experimented with mid-side using directional mics and a cheap ribbon mic (figure 8) and it sounded really good, so I purchased an Audio Technica BP-4029 which works well on camera too. In post you can get a tight shotgun, wide stereo, or anything in-between, and it can sound very 3D/real. The Ambeo and all tetrahedral mics (4 capsules) are the 3D extension of mid-side mics with two capsules. More info here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambisonics

Back in December when I had to shell out cash to build a new machine to handle 4K I was in the same boat- really disappointed that the software was so slow and buggy. I slowly learned what made it crash (such as using Matte Soften in Ultra Key!), and they've slowly fixed it. I haven't gotten any nesting crashes lately, though sometimes I need to restart due to nesting bugs. Fortunately a restart fixes the bugs so far. I use Audition too, and also use Logic and Reaper (used to use SoundForge on Windows, and Pro tools long ago on OSX). For low-level waveform editing, what can Audition be replaced with? (don't say Audacity lol; not going back to Pro tools). What to replace Photoshop with? Especially what you can do with Camera Raw (I use it heavily for raw stills and also as a filter)? AE gets used from time to time too. Kinda hard to 100% bail on Adobe subscription until there are more options for replacement apps.

Check out Affinity Designer to replace Illustrator: https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/designer/

It's not so simple to say good bye to Premiere CC because of two simple facts:
There is a bunch of very useful and well done third party plugins for Premiere, not existing for another kind of software than Premiere Familiarity - most people are already used to the GUIs and workflows. Getting the same abilities for another software takes time and efforts (and at the end of the day, every piece of software has its weeknesses and flaws) In my eyes, there is no "holy grail" in this market...

Bought a book for Affinity. Found, that almost everything is covered. No one should subscribe to PS if he doesn't already know it, he should start with Affinity. Some things work better (for me) like refining masks. However, there is one thing I don't like: updating changes is slow. I mainly use PS for raw stills. ACR has a page with HSL sliders (don't know the name off the cuff) where I practically "grade" my whole image. Didn't find that particular tool in Affinity Develop. But who knows, perhaps this is just the famous quest for the blue button ...

Avid publish recommended specs: http://www.avid.com/media-composer/specifications
But you could get away with less. I've personally never had much issue.
Given you can get a (admittedly crippled) version for free, I'd definitely recommend anyone download it and give it a go. There is a learning curve, but stick with it...
Avid also tend to listen to their users (for the most part), which is a good thing.
Unfortunately, I don't think the market for NLEs provides enough money to make it as most would want....

Back in December when I had to shell out cash to build a new machine to handle 4K I was in the same boat- really disappointed that the software was so slow and buggy. I slowly learned what made it crash (such as using Matte Soften in Ultra Key!), and they've slowly fixed it. I haven't gotten any nesting crashes lately, though sometimes I need to restart due to nesting bugs. Fortunately a restart fixes the bugs so far. I use Audition too, and also use Logic and Reaper (used to use SoundForge on Windows, and Pro tools long ago on OSX). For low-level waveform editing, what can Audition be replaced with? (don't say Audacity lol; not going back to Pro tools). What to replace Photoshop with? Especially what you can do with Camera Raw (I use it heavily for raw stills and also as a filter)? AE gets used from time to time too. Kinda hard to 100% bail on Adobe subscription until there are more options for replacement apps.

@Neumann Films I spent over $5K on a new computer to edit C300 II 4K footage smoothly in PP CC. I knew back then (December) that the 'old' 2010 12-Core Mac Pro with GTX 980ti was more than powerful enough (way more than powerful enough) to easily edit multiple 4K streams in real-time, let alone just one. I knew it was Adobe's software holding back performance since FCPX ran rings around PP CC for 4K footage in real-time on the same hardware. Now four months later, PP CC can edit 1-2 4K streams well enough that the new machine purchase could have been avoided, saving $5+K. The new machine is still useful, as it is much faster, however it's no longer required to do basic 4K edits.
The latest release may have also increased rendering export speed (didn't notice until recently, 2x real-time 1080p on the old machine). It also looks like they may have improved Ultra Key (fine hair detail seems to look better).
@SuperSet since the GH5 footage edits fine when rewrapped into MXF (don't transcode! waste of time and quality loss; solution posted on this site for PC users), the GH5 fix for Adobe is trivial as far as code changes. However, the QA process takes a long time for something as big, monolithic, and ancient as Adobe's code base. I've done everything in software from development to executive management. It's absolutely not up to developers what gets done. It's up to executive management (who are typically given filtered info from middle management). Unless the executives are code-savvy and technical (surprisingly rare in tech companies, believe it or not), getting things fixed and the right features added is sometimes very difficult for large companies. What other large company is doing better? Apple? Microsoft? Google's software is terrible, lol, not even a contender. Why? Internal politics and they are making so much money from Big Data sales it doesn't really matter.
I too used to get into a 'rant state' with software vendors (probably the most with Microsoft in the past), now I just figure out (and share) solutions to work around the issues since there really aren't any other options.
Adobe's code base is so old it's very hard to work on it. They really need an all-new ground up rewrite (as was done with FCPX). The challenges are many. First, great software architects are very few. Most of them aren't working for big companies, being smart enough to know they can make way more money in a startup (of which they are part or sole owner). Only when there's a truly drop-in replacement which can compete with Premiere will Adobe be forced to make big changes due to lost revenue.  Resolve could do that someday, but they are currently far away in performance let alone feature parity. FCPX on OSX is decent, but still a ways off in features (especially color grading without add-ons; even so still prefer Lumetri in PP CC).
For now, use the MXF rewrap tools for GH5 footage- no loss in quality and as fast as a file copy. The issue is with Adobe's format importer. The MXF code path can handle the GH5's (industry standard, nothing new here) 10-bit H.264 (the MP4/MOV importer code path cannot; probably a simple 'one-liner' code change to fix it by the way (perhaps as simple as a switch to handle the FOURCC format type for the video stream). It might even be possible to drop on the appropriate DLL (and perhaps a config file) from the prior release to fix it...

@Neumann Films I spent over $5K on a new computer to edit C300 II 4K footage smoothly in PP CC. I knew back then (December) that the 'old' 2010 12-Core Mac Pro with GTX 980ti was more than powerful enough (way more than powerful enough) to easily edit multiple 4K streams in real-time, let alone just one. I knew it was Adobe's software holding back performance since FCPX ran rings around PP CC for 4K footage in real-time on the same hardware. Now four months later, PP CC can edit 1-2 4K streams well enough that the new machine purchase could have been avoided, saving $5+K. The new machine is still useful, as it is much faster, however it's no longer required to do basic 4K edits.
The latest release may have also increased rendering export speed (didn't notice until recently, 2x real-time 1080p on the old machine). It also looks like they may have improved Ultra Key (fine hair detail seems to look better).
@SuperSet since the GH5 footage edits fine when rewrapped into MXF (don't transcode! waste of time and quality loss; solution posted on this site for PC users), the GH5 fix for Adobe is trivial as far as code changes. However, the QA process takes a long time for something as big, monolithic, and ancient as Adobe's code base. I've done everything in software from development to executive management. It's absolutely not up to developers what gets done. It's up to executive management (who are typically given filtered info from middle management). Unless the executives are code-savvy and technical (surprisingly rare in tech companies, believe it or not), getting things fixed and the right features added is sometimes very difficult for large companies. What other large company is doing better? Apple? Microsoft? Google's software is terrible, lol, not even a contender. Why? Internal politics and they are making so much money from Big Data sales it doesn't really matter.
I too used to get into a 'rant state' with software vendors (probably the most with Microsoft in the past), now I just figure out (and share) solutions to work around the issues since there really aren't any other options.
Adobe's code base is so old it's very hard to work on it. They really need an all-new ground up rewrite (as was done with FCPX). The challenges are many. First, great software architects are very few. Most of them aren't working for big companies, being smart enough to know they can make way more money in a startup (of which they are part or sole owner). Only when there's a truly drop-in replacement which can compete with Premiere will Adobe be forced to make big changes due to lost revenue.  Resolve could do that someday, but they are currently far away in performance let alone feature parity. FCPX on OSX is decent, but still a ways off in features (especially color grading without add-ons; even so still prefer Lumetri in PP CC).
For now, use the MXF rewrap tools for GH5 footage- no loss in quality and as fast as a file copy. The issue is with Adobe's format importer. The MXF code path can handle the GH5's (industry standard, nothing new here) 10-bit H.264 (the MP4/MOV importer code path cannot; probably a simple 'one-liner' code change to fix it by the way (perhaps as simple as a switch to handle the FOURCC format type for the video stream). It might even be possible to drop on the appropriate DLL (and perhaps a config file) from the prior release to fix it...

Noone is talking about the next Varicam Mini Light Micro (my trademark!) that is about to released in Autumn. This is the most exciting news so far, an advanced S35 video camera with the internals of the GH5 (I hope) and most of the goodies of the FS5/C100 form factor.
I hope that will push Canon (probably not) to reconsider the updates for the C100markIII...and Canon just announced the CN-E 70-200, which in the end, is going to be a big deal for many (and me included, in case of a worthy C100iii).
The Sound Devices announcements are exciting too, I just can't believe people in sound forums complain about some lack in features and build quality, like Sound Devices line up starts and finishes with these cute entry level models. People want a combination of these and 633 for the price of MixPre3!!! Just can't believe how people thing (same goes for GH5 complainers and in other circumstances). We just can't jump from G to P, with the price of D!
DJI Ronin 2 and a few huge monitors here and there. It seems that companies are announcing products whenever through the year. 

Given the decent lowlight performance and high quality noise reduction in the C300 II and 1DX II, the C100 III, with a flip out screen, very low RS, native Canon AF support, and of course, Canon color, perhaps there's not really a letdown the A7S III won't be released any time soon. Probably 8-bit 420 for 4K to differentiate from C300 II 422 10-bit (would think they'd need to release a FW update for the C300 II for 4K60 to offer 4K60 in the C100 III (differentiator would be 10-bit 422 vs. 8-bit 420)).

Given the decent lowlight performance and high quality noise reduction in the C300 II and 1DX II, the C100 III, with a flip out screen, very low RS, native Canon AF support, and of course, Canon color, perhaps there's not really a letdown the A7S III won't be released any time soon. Probably 8-bit 420 for 4K to differentiate from C300 II 422 10-bit (would think they'd need to release a FW update for the C300 II for 4K60 to offer 4K60 in the C100 III (differentiator would be 10-bit 422 vs. 8-bit 420)).

Yes. There was a leak. I am not saying anything and I didn't post this. I may or may not have heard something tonight at a party  
It may or may not have been a reputable source but from what I was told it sounds like the perfect camera. We will see tomorrow 

C300 II 10-bit IPB and ALL-I 4K and 1080p play ok in the latest release (MXF container). Haven't checked since last release; 12-bit 1080p played ok but slower.
I think I read somewhere that rewrapping GH5 to .mxf without transcoding will work (fast as a file copy and lossless).

The Mix Pre 6 ($900) looks like a nice upgrade from the Zoom F4 ($650): https://www.sounddevices.com/products/recorders/mixpre-6 (MicPre-3 only has 3 inputs- can't use for 4-channel Ambisonic 3D recording, which is what I use the F4 for). The extra $250 is for the analog limiters (amazing!), build quality, and excellent sounding preamps (not just quiet- also a very full sound; though couldn't find a review for the new Kashmir preamps).

The new affordable Sound Device offerings look appealing to me also.
Speaking of NAB news, is there a favorite site for summaries, etc?

Editing PCs are a rather extreme niche of a niche, but the good news is there is a MASSIVE overlap between what makes a good gaming PC and what makes a good editing PC. 

Thus reading how to build guides for the optimal gaming PC at the moment for a given budget, often gets you 90% of the way to figuring out a good and close to optimal build for an editing PC. 

Sense :). I don't care if anybody agrees, just telling what I think based on my knowledge.
Overclocking is not disaster, but increasing risk of failure from for example 0.1% to 1%, which is significant, but not observed often (but still 99% of overclockers will say it's all ok).
Overclocking:
- increases risk of CPU, Motherboard failure and shortens their life time.
- increases rate of memory errors, some of them resulting in OS instability (part of Windows blue screens in old days or sudden restarts).
 
Look here (in other articles from other years you have different motherboards):
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/954-2/cartes-meres.html
Failure rate of motherboards for overclockers is many times higher in comparison to regular motherboards (despite higher price, golden pins, radiators and others). It is not because these motherboards are worse than their cheaper alternatives, they are just usually working with overclocked CPU/Memory. If you look in other articles from other months/years you can find tens of such examples.
 
I don't have time for other arguments, just do a research if you are interested. (If that's an argument :)- I'm not complete layman, have some background to judge facts - MSc in Physics and MSc in Computer Science [both on Polytechnic - more hardware related]).
 
But please avoid arguments like: My 3 PCs are working great, so i'm sure it's safe. Probably 95% or something Overclocked PC-s are working quite well, but it's not what I'm talking about.
Judge facts like this only based on statistics data, because we are talking about risk, which is statistics itself.