VIDEO EDITING - what should you look for in a new PC?

G

guylarge

Member
sony-vaio-rm1-video-editing-system.jpg


Hi guys, I know the other things to look for, but how much RAM, and which video card (how powerful?) should I get?

I need something that can handle HD and lots of After Effects -
what do you guys use / recommend,
thanks!
 
If you're running XP, there's a software limit of 4 GB of RAM (XP only recognizes 3 GB). I would say get as powerful a processor as possible, preferably high end quad-core, as expensive a graphic card as you can possibly afford, and plenty of storage.
 
Processor is nice, but there is a law of diminishing returns. If you buy smart you can save $1000+ today buying a processor that's clocked at 85% of the fastest out there, and then upgrade in a year to a faster processor for less. Just be sure that the socket is still in production.

After Effects will choke mostly on processor and on HDD throughput. Using a RAID 0 or 5 array will give you faster access times.
 
Go over to avadirect.com under custom desktops, i7 core and build a system on-line. You should be able to get this for around $1,600. You can choose software Raid 0 setup if you desire to add a 2nd 500 GB drive for about $87.00 more. By the way, these are all top-of-the line componets.

· ANTEC, NineHundredTwoBlackMid-Tower Case w/ Window, ATX, No PSU
· CORSAIR, CMPSU-750TX TX Series Power Supply, 750W, 80 PLUS®, 24-pin ATX12V EPS12V, Multi-GPU Ready
· eVGA, EVGA X58 SLI, LGA1366, Intel® X58, 6400 MT/s QPI, DDR3-1333MHz 12GB /6, PCIe x16 SLI CF /3, SATA 3 Gb/s RAID 5 /9, HDA, GbLAN /2, FW /2, ATX, Retail
· INTEL, Core™ i7-920 Quad-Core 2.66GHz, LGA1366, 6400 MT/s QPI, 8MB L3 Cache, 45nm, 130W, EM64T EIST VT XD, Retail
· VIGOR, Monsoon™ III LT CPU Cooling System, Socket 1366/775/771/939/754/AM2, Retail
· MUSHKIN, 6GB (3 x 2GB) Performance™ EM3-8500Series PC3-8500 DDR3 1066MHz CL7 (7-7-7-21) 1.5V SDRAM DIMM, Non-ECC
· SAPPHIRE, Radeon™ HD 4830 575MHz, 512MB GDDR3 1800MHz, PCIe x16 CrossFire, DVI /2, HDTV-Out, Retail
· WESTERN DIGITAL, 160GB WD RE, SATA 3 Gb/s, 7200 RPM, 16MB cache
· WESTERN DIGITAL, 500GB WD Caviar® Black™ (WD5001AALS), SATA 3 Gb/s, 7200 RPM, 32MB Cache
· RAID, No RAID, Independent HDD Drives
· LITE-ON, iHAS120 Black/White 20x DVD±RW Dual-Layer Burner, SATA, Retail
· ROSEWILL, RCR-102 Black 52-in-1 Card Reader/Writer Drive, 3.5" Bay, USB 2.0
· MICROSOFT, Digital Media Keyboard 3000, Keybiard, Black, USB, Retail
· LOGITECH, SBF-96 Optical Mouse 400dpi, Black, PS/2, OEM
· MICROSOFT, Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit Edition w/ SP1, OEM
· WARRANTY, Silver Warranty Package (3 Year Limited Parts, 3 Year Labor Warranty)​
 
Last edited:
I'm gonna get killed for this but you should look for an Apple on the side. The new Mac Pros are incredible and run Windows faster than most PCs. Built better and then you have the option of running FCS2 as well as any of the PC editing software. Great re-sale in comparison too.

Flame away!

Dan
 
hi, in regards to a Mac, do these new ones that can run windows run programs within windows as well as a PC? - Am I right in thinking its not emulation, but windows running
independentley? thanks
 
You can run a virtual machine using software like VMware Fusion or Parallels ($80), or you can use Boot Camp, which comes standard with Leopard. When you run Boot Camp, you are booting up Windows independently, just like a PC. With the virtual machine, you are running Windows within OS X.

You do NOT want to run a virtual machine if you are doing anything processor or RAM intensive, so you would be better off using Boot Camp if you go down this road.
 
Slightly OT, but just to answer part of OPs last question. I run windows under bootcamp and its incredibly stable and fast.

Its my understanding in the PC world (interestingly though mac programs such as FCP, Motion, Color etc have better performance on the Radeons) that the GeForce 8800 Ultra from NVIDIA is the one to beat these days. I know if I was on a PC, Id be running two of these with SLI.
 
guylarge said:
hi, in regards to a Mac, do these new ones that can run windows run programs within windows as well as a PC? - Am I right in thinking its not emulation, but windows running
independentley? thanks
Click to expand...

It's actually Windows running natively, so almost everything works exactly as it should. You may run into a rare hardware/software incompatibility of some kind, but you're not likely to. I wouldn't consider it much of an issue.

But do keep in mind -- going Mac is considerably more expensive than going with comparable PC hardware, especially if you research and assemble your own. (When I built my most recent machine, a comparable Mac Pro was almost three times as much.) If Windows is the environment you want to work in, you have to consider if it's worth the extra expense just to have the Mac OS, too. You can get better performance in Windows for much less.
 
If I was ONLY going to run Windows programs and I knew for a fact that I never wanted to move to FCS2, I would buy a PC.

I don't like PCs or Windows but yes, economically, unless you have some spare bucks, it wouldn't make much sense to run ONLY Windows on a Mac Pro. Unless you appreciate the fine craftsmanship, engineering and build quality of the Mac Pro. You get what you pay for as far as quality but good, fast PCs can be built really cheaply.

Dan
 
Quick notes here:

1. CPU. If you go PC, you might want to wait a couple of months for Intel's Core i7 platform to settle down in price. The new platform is specifically tailored to media applications and delivers great value for media encoding, etc.

2. Memory / platform. You have to figure out if you want to make the plunge into 64 bit computing, and the increased memory capacity available.

3. For a graphics card, go here for gaming benchmarks:

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/benchmarks,30.html

Obviously those aren't media encoding tests, but they should give you a good idea about the bang for the buck. Unfortunately, I don't have any benchmarks to show how much a good GPU helps with editing and After Effects. I don't have CS4, but it's supposed to use GPU hardware acceleration to help with previews.

4. Hard drives. RAID set-ups would be good, but ultimately up to you. Here's a great hard drive round-up:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/hdd-terabyte-1tb,2077-16.html

>>Also, if you want general computer buying guides, Tom's Hardware has a great monthly article on that:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-overclock,2117.html

The article basically lists three solid builds: one for $600, another for $1200, and another for $2500. Another great hardware site is hothardware.com

Personally, I'd wait a little while for the i7 to come down in price.
 
Eximious said:
Obviously those aren't media encoding tests, but they should give you a good idea about the bang for the buck. Unfortunately, I don't have any benchmarks to show how much a good GPU helps with editing and After Effects. I don't have CS4, but it's supposed to use GPU hardware acceleration to help with previews.
Click to expand...
AE has used OpenGL acceleration in some way since v7. It makes a HUGE difference in previewing complex shots like particle effects and 3d. I think most games have moved away from OpenGL lately, but I'm not sure since I haven't had a chance to play in a few years!
 
Interesting. I didn't realize Adobe's been using OpenGL acceleration since AE 7. This might make it easier for me to put together some benchmarks of my own...

Thanks for the nugget of knowledge ProfessorU!
 
If you can afford it buy www.boxxtech.com

They soley build and work for our industry. They design and support the fastest machines out there and they speak our language.

They are not cheap but a machine will holds its value for a very long time. I love MAC's and would love dump my avid for a FCP in a heart beat but the sole reason I stay on PC is BOXX computers.
 
JonathanLB said:
Yeah that's what I was going to say. I was going to say first off you should look for a REAL computer if you want to be taken seriously, not a kiddie piece of crap PC where they can't release a new OS that's any good even 7 years later. Seriously, get a REAL computer. It's not that hard.
Click to expand...

You bring up a good point: how much of a difference does your OS have on your programs' performance? Even with the age of bootcamp, there's still a dearth of good benchmarks pitting OS X vs. Windows XP and Vista SP1. Ultimately, I can't give you a universal, one-is-better-than-the-other answer. Here, check out this benchmark from CS3 beta:

http://www.overclock3d.net/news.php...obe_photoshop_cs3_beta_performance__osx_vs_xp

I'm sure each OS might edge each other out with various applications, but I certainly don't see an overwhelming performance advantage of one platform to the other. Certainly, it's harder to overclock on a Mac (you'd have to use 3rd party software) and I'm not sure how successful Mac overclockers have been. Though, if anything, Linux is much faster for many types of applications. Too bad we can't all make Linux our sole operating system!

Anyhow, feel free to link me up with some more benchmarks; just check the source and test configuration. This place is too cool to be bogged down by petty OS infighting.

For the record, I'm a PC guy, but my main NLE is Final Cut Pro.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top