AE CS3 System

scotman

scotman

Well-known member
I know this question has been asked a hundred times over and over. I recently moved to the UK, was given a CS3 AE and Premiere. I have a system that can handle them, but I want to be able to Run Real Time. I dont know if i need to go Matrox, or Avid, the XP64 bit processor. I was looking at the new Dell H2 system, but for 6500 bucks I figured I could probably build something for myself cheaper. Can someone share with me piece by piece the best system needed. I only edit SD in Premiere. I have a DVX100. I can spend up to 3000-4000 bucks. (someone is giving me the money to do this). Thanks for listening to this question, ONE more time
 
i am pretty saavy with cpu stuff, but..

1. is it diffucult and advised to overclock your system...
2. i guess i do want to the capabilities to run HD in the near future and dont want to do this again.
3. Will AE CS3 take advantage of XP 64 bit or do I need Vista 64bit.
Thanks for the quicky response..
 
For 3-4k you should be able to buy a PC or Mac that will handle HD. Overclocking is overratted. IMO, if the tech heads spent their time refining their craft instead of their machines they would become faster editors/motion designers.

…I want to be able to Run Real Time.
Click to expand...
It's unclear what you're asking for here. For the simple stuff all NLE's play back in real time. AE isn't designed to work in real time. A $500K Flame doesn't run everything in real time. What does run real time mean?
 
i mean when i am editing clips that i capture in AE i will be able to preview them in real time without waiting for super long renders. even in Premiere. I want to add some effects, click enter, and have it playback without lag. if thats even possible.

I guess I just want a SUPER FAST COMPUTER, that wont be sluggish and give me flexibility. right now, im working on a Dell Notebook with 2.2 Duo Core Processor. 2 gig rams, etc.

I heard or read that AE CS3 will run really quickly with a 64 bit processor in a quad system cause it will be like running 8 systems of the same application
 
well notebooks are a lot slower than normal PC- even if they have a same quality processor, and RAM
 
scotman said:
i mean when i am editing clips that i capture in AE i will be able to preview them in real time without waiting for super long renders. even in Premiere. I want to add some effects, click enter, and have it playback without lag. if thats even possible.
Click to expand...
AE isn't capable of capturing video. Premiere captures video. The number and complexity of the effects determine playback. For example blurs are processor intensive, meaning if you have a heavy blur you'll likely need to render the effect for real time play back. The same applies to stacking up a bunch of effects, expect to render.

heard or read that AE CS3 will run really quickly with a 64 bit processor in a quad system cause it will be like running 8 systems of the same application
Click to expand...
I don't believe CS3 is a 64 bit app. AE does take advantage of multi cores by ditributing the rendering across the processors. I think it runs multiple intances of AE, I'm not positive about this check AE's site for more info. The botton line is that on a dual quad core (8 core) it smokes. However, for optimal performance the recommendation is to have 2 gigs of RAM per core, 16 gigs. The cost of the 8 core plus the additional cost of the RAM quickly exceeds your $4000 budget.

Honestly I don't think you need to buy the fastest machine available. It sounds like you're still getting your feet wet. Your budget is more than enough to purchase a decent machine to get started. Having the super fast hardware is a small part of the speed equation. The experience of the motion designer can add a significant amount of speed to the workflow. In After Effects for example: Knowing when to use a PSD vs an EPS. Knowing when pre-rendering will be more efficient. Achieving the same effect in 2D space vs 3D space. All these decisions effect render times, yet have nothing to do with the speed of the hardware.
 
AE is not 64 bit, and from what I've heard apps have problems with any flavor of 64 bit Windows...mostly issues with drivers and such.

You can capture via Premiere Pro only if you have the Production Premium package.

If you're expecting real-time performance from AE, you're dreaming. You can buy the fastest machine available and you're still waiting on a RAM preview to see your work.

Any recent system will be handle to HD with a decent processor. You'll need lots of RAM to work in AE, and a fast RAID array to edit in realtime.

If you don't want to deal with building a box you can pick one up from Boxx, which usually come ready to rock for production work.

I agree with milksac though, if you don't know how to use AE then you're in for a world of hurt when it comes to being able to work fast. Precomping, pre-rendering, building comps correctly...all this comes in to play, especially when working at HD.
 
Got it. Thanks guys. I guess my aim is a little too high. But lets forget real time and what about just a kick butt system.. am i better off going dell, or building it myself. later
 
scotman said:
am i better off going dell, or building it myself.
Click to expand...
There's no right or wrong answer for this - it's a matter of personal preference. Like working on cars, some people enjoy getting under the hood and making it all work. Others don't have the time or experience to fix their own car so they pay a mechanic instead. Regarding buying off the shelf I would take a look at HP's stock as well.
 
The HP 8400 (or whatever number they are up to) workstations and Dell Precision 690's are both kick butt reliable systems (he says typing from a 690). If you know what you are doing and willing to be your own tech support then building it yourself is certainly a viable solution. We went Dell as the cost savings to build was only a few hundred dollars and we could get an onsite 24/7 tech with the Dell (we cant deal with downtime). We chose this over the HP just because we have a bunch of Dell's and their tech support has served us well on the rare occasions we've used it. We also run a Matrox RTX2 with it which is a nice little toy, although it wont do much for AE (at least I dont think it does...)
 
I build edit stations on a day to day basis using HP Chassis from the xw8400 series, run fast, quiet, reasonable price - Everything you could ask for.
 
milksac said:
The botton line is that on a dual quad core (8 core) it smokes. However, for optimal performance the recommendation is to have 2 gigs of RAM per core, 16 gigs.
Click to expand...

I'm not exactly sure how this works. If AE doesn't run properly (or at least isn't designed to run) in a 64-bit environment, then how is 16 gigs beneficial? A 32-bit OS can't even address more than 4 gigs of RAM, and even if you have 4 gigs you only really have around 3.2 gigs of useable RAM (and that's IF you can get a command switch to work that allows use of more than 2 gigs per app.)

Am I missing something here?
 
AE launches other instances of the program in the background to render frames simultaneously. It is advised that for each core, i.e. each instance of AE running, you need 2gb of ram. So, if you have 8 cores you would have 8 instances of AE open each needing 2 gigs of ram, below the 32 bit limit, to run effectively.
 
I just built another computer for my son
AMD x2 6000
2 gigs of ddr2
PCI E 8800gts video card
150Gb 10,000 rpm sata hard drive
Liquid cooled everything for overclocking

It was built for gaming, but I bet my editing in AE would feel like lightning compared to my computer.

He spent $1500 No problems whatsoever, and I never have to put up with all the 3rd party software Dell burns in.

We looked at similar systems for no less than $3000 I will never buy a computer pre-built.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top