Jump to content

Video Editing computer


Nicolas MAILLET
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi 2 All,

i'm about to change my computer as i think my machine is just a bit slow to edit some footages coming from different cameras...

 

My actual machine is :

I7 3770K

16GB Corsair RAM

SSDs

GTX 580

 

 

I've seen the new AMD solutions : Ryzen 1800X and the future threadrippers. What about the motherboards coming with them and the support of the X399 chipset ? ... Intel won't react to AMD ? Prices will be revised for Intel ? i think putting 3500 euros max into a brand new computer.

But...

I've just overclocked for the first time my old 3770K and come to a stable 5.76 gHz performance ... I find it a bit strange no ? Is it possible ? How could i check the real frequency ?

In fact, i've reduced by 2 the time to encode a footage with complex timeline and lumetri colors from stock frequency... using premiere pro. Overclocking seems to be a good choice to wait for a better performer... but which one ? How could i benchmark my computer performance to see if a ryzen or a 7900X machine would do better ? is there any standard known footage to encode to see the time your machine gets the full encoding to compare it to a cpu database ?

 

598c634aaae0a_576Ghz3770K.thumb.JPG.606c97307363a4b01d231d49811015a6.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not impossible but that seems kind of high without nitrogen cooling :)  . Its some bug in how the windows calculates the frequency. Get the CPU-Z and that will tell you the correct frequency. 

For standardized testing, handbrake will give you a good approximation on speed for multithreaded rendering:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11170/the-amd-zen-and-ryzen-7-review-a-deep-dive-on-1800x-1700x-and-1700/20

My guess would be that your I7 3770K would give you similar encoding performance to the i5-7400 of the previous tests. 

But for actual performance nothing beats more realistic testing with Premiere (which I assume you are using from the picture) :

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CC-2017-1-2-CPU-Comparison-Skylake-X-Kaby-Lake-X-Broadwell-E-Kaby-Lake-Ryzen-7-969/

The Ryzen CPUs are great for multithreaded tasks but kind of suck for single threaded operations like stabilization. 

Here is are some tests for multithreaded performance in Premiere: https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Premiere-Pro-CC-2015-Multi-Core-Performance-Update1-806/

If you do upgrade, don't forget the GPU: https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CC-2017-NVIDIA-Titan-Xp-12GB-Performance-930/

and the storage: https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Premiere-Pro-CC-2015-4-Storage-Optimization-854/

and increase that RAM to 64GB :) 

EDIT: I see in another thread that you are also using Resolve in which case a very strong GPU will have a larger effect than the CPU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don Kotlos : you were right. CPU Z gives me 4.5 Ghz max... And it seems to be logical : 100 mhz x 45 multiplier i've put in the bios... I'm not an overclocker ... lol ...  I've just tried it to see how it would affect the rendering times in premiere pro...

 

I've seen that HT disactivated was giving a better performance than activated... 4 cores and 4 threads better than 4 cores and 8 threads. So i can deduce that premiere pro is not optimized for a multithreaded able processor... If i am not wrong.

 

I'll upgrade when threadripper would be out for several months to have some better feedback. I'm looking to have 128 GB of RAM, a NVME samsung SSD pcie evo 960 for the OS (120GB), another one for the adobe cache (250GB), another one to store the project files temporarily (500GB) , a 1060 OC 6GB.

Graphic cards are way too expensive to my tastes... don't know if a 1080 worth the price when i only edit on premiere pro, after effects and resolve. The other things i do are basic sound design and some photoshop... I think a 1060 6B is the right spot.  ? no ?   My GTX580 will be missed... Such a good graphic card.

But now i don't know which platform i'll choose... X399 or X299... AMD looks to have a great flagship CPU at the same price as the 7900X ...

 

Time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$3500 seems to be a good budget for a new computer.

Hard to tell what intel is going to do next but the Ryzen CPUs are very good for rendering stuff. Hard to beat at this price. And AMD finally came out with a design that doesn't turn your PC in a giant heater..

For your overclocking thing, I think 5.76 GHz seems a bit too much especially without watercooling. The right point to push your CPU is where the computer is still stable and doesn't overheat. The fact that your reduced your encoding time by a factor of 2 is already very very good honestly (borderline strange actually). Eventually CPU test software are good to get an idea but the ultimate judge is the real life experience. Encode two projects and compare. But be careful because sometime Adobe and the computer do "save" some stuff in cache, so doing the same rendering right after the first one will give you shorter time because some of the processing has been cached. Make sure to delete the cache files and re-start your computer between 2 tests.

I'm not sure that 128 GB of RAM is necessary unless you do a lot 3D stuff and/or a lot of effects. Personally I have 64 GB which is plenty, my computer rarely uses more than 40-50 GB at max even with multiple software opened. Also, get the cheap Crucial RAM, no need for fancy and expansive RAM with heatsink (completely useless to have heatsink on RAM). They perform the same.

I agree with the GPU thing, this is very important for some effects and grading stuff especially in playback mode otherwise you gonna have GPU bottleneck. Don't buy one of these premium card with excessive amount of DDR. That's useless, this is just a marketing thing, additional memory won't be used if the GPU is already a max capacity (kind of like having am oversized transmission on a car but with a under-powered engine, both must balance together).

I would say that the 1070/8GB is a good performer for the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is getting on my nerves right now with my computer is the live playback in after effects... Wayyyyyyyyyy tooooooooo loooonnnngggggg ... Impossible to work at 1/2 without having to wait...

In premiere pro, no problem as CUDA seems to work effortlessly.

Photoshop and other softs don't have any problem...

 

The biggest problem is After effects that takes so much time to work with... Complex 4K DCI projects with average 50 to 60 layers of little effects of objects to move. Is there anytip to edit faster with fluid live playbacks in after effects ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nicolas MAILLET said:

What is getting on my nerves right now with my computer is the live playback in after effects... Wayyyyyyyyyy tooooooooo loooonnnngggggg ... Impossible to work at 1/2 without having to wait...

In premiere pro, no problem as CUDA seems to work effortlessly.

Photoshop and other softs don't have any problem...

 

The biggest problem is After effects that takes so much time to work with... Complex 4K DCI projects with average 50 to 60 layers of little effects of objects to move. Is there anytip to edit faster with fluid live playbacks in after effects ?

Unfortunately after effects CC is one of the most inefficient programs out there... 

AE needs a GPU for better performance : https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-After-Effects-CC-2015-3-Pascal-GPU-Performance-846/ but that is any GPU so your 580 should be good enough. 

Also the multithreading efficiency sucks after 4 cores so you better optimize the frequency:

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-After-Effects-CC-2015-3-Multi-Core-Performance-843/

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/After-Effects-CC-2017-2-CPU-Comparison-Skylake-X-Kaby-Lake-X-Broadwell-E-Kaby-Lake-Ryzen-7-977/

Premiere uses the GPU but if you lower the resolution your 580 should be good : 

Resolve on the other hand can use as much GPU power as you have (FYI you need studio for multi GPUs) and not so much the CPU (4 cores should be plenty for encoding/decoding) :

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...