Eduardoraz
New member
I'm about to build a new computer and was wondering which possessor would be best for AVCHD editing and editing HD video in general. Would more cores be better? or will the intel out preform the amd anyway? Thanks!
AMD FX 8120 vs Intel Core i7 2600K for Premiere pro AVCHD editing
- Thread starter Eduardoraz
- Start date
JeganRX
Well-known member
A lot of people will blindly tell you to go Intel, and though I'd agree with them, it's important to gain an understanding through benchmarks.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/7
There's many numbers here in the whole review, but this page has x264 encoding benchmarks, which should give you an idea for video performance. Keep in mind that x264 is a highly optimized encoder, so it's a pretty reliable benchmark.
- Almost 30fps difference between the 2600k and the 8120 in encoding first pass. Second pass is basically equal between the two, due to more multicore processing. Consider this though: What took 8 cores to do on the AMD, was done with 4 (albeit hyper-threaded) on the Intel.
- Power consumption, especially during heavy load (again while using x264) is a fair bit higher on the AMD, so consider this for your electricity bills.
- The Intel costs more up front.
- Your overall performance with Intel processors is higher across the board.
In my opinion, if cost is an issue, go with the 2500k instead, which loses hyper-threading, but maintains nearly the same performance in most cases for almost $100 less. You can often find the 2500k for $199 in Microcenter during sales if you have one near you, or on Newegg.com occasionally.
The AMD would definitely serve you well, that's for sure, but speaking strictly in terms of speed, the i7 would be a better choice. As a final note, Intel's Sandy Bridge and now Ivy Bridge CPUs have specialized H.264 decoding called QuickSync. It's not perfect (it doesn't decode things out of H.264 High Profile Level 4.1), but it could be a very efficient decoder for playback and such.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/7
There's many numbers here in the whole review, but this page has x264 encoding benchmarks, which should give you an idea for video performance. Keep in mind that x264 is a highly optimized encoder, so it's a pretty reliable benchmark.
- Almost 30fps difference between the 2600k and the 8120 in encoding first pass. Second pass is basically equal between the two, due to more multicore processing. Consider this though: What took 8 cores to do on the AMD, was done with 4 (albeit hyper-threaded) on the Intel.
- Power consumption, especially during heavy load (again while using x264) is a fair bit higher on the AMD, so consider this for your electricity bills.
- The Intel costs more up front.
- Your overall performance with Intel processors is higher across the board.
In my opinion, if cost is an issue, go with the 2500k instead, which loses hyper-threading, but maintains nearly the same performance in most cases for almost $100 less. You can often find the 2500k for $199 in Microcenter during sales if you have one near you, or on Newegg.com occasionally.
The AMD would definitely serve you well, that's for sure, but speaking strictly in terms of speed, the i7 would be a better choice. As a final note, Intel's Sandy Bridge and now Ivy Bridge CPUs have specialized H.264 decoding called QuickSync. It's not perfect (it doesn't decode things out of H.264 High Profile Level 4.1), but it could be a very efficient decoder for playback and such.
Eduardoraz, maybe you want to look at GPU acceleration for Premier Pro? I found this showing that CS5 has GPU acceleration, I can only imagine that Adobe have put more effort into this for CS6
Also I think the power consumption, of the cpu, is neither here or there, I would weigh it up in terms of cost of man hours against electricity, I have feeling man hours (time spent waiting for encoding etc) easily outweighs the cost electricity. if you are really worried about the cost of electricity look at getting an ivy bridge chip that is a smaller die size and uses less power. Personally I would by the i7, even if it is hyper threaded. No point worrying about the cpu if you have inefficient power supply, so you should buy a 80+ efficient or better, power supply.
Just my 2 pence worth.
Satpal
Also I think the power consumption, of the cpu, is neither here or there, I would weigh it up in terms of cost of man hours against electricity, I have feeling man hours (time spent waiting for encoding etc) easily outweighs the cost electricity. if you are really worried about the cost of electricity look at getting an ivy bridge chip that is a smaller die size and uses less power. Personally I would by the i7, even if it is hyper threaded. No point worrying about the cpu if you have inefficient power supply, so you should buy a 80+ efficient or better, power supply.
Just my 2 pence worth.
Satpal