Buying a new PC for HD video editing.
OK guys, so I now have the HV20.
My next step is buying a PC to edit high def footage and export back to MiniDV tape via the cam for archiving.
I need a PC that can do this with relatively decent export times from video editing software.
Obviously, the more powerful the system, the better; but like most things the law of diminishing returns (bang for the buck) comes into effect.
I'm thinking of an Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8GHz based system, with 1 or 2 gigs of ram.
Using a system like this one:
How long would it take to export 1 hour of HDV quality MPEG2 codec footage?
Initially, I wanted to maybe go with a more powerful Core 2 Duo 2.2 Ghz system, but the price of the system gets quite expensive.
Are Core 2 Duo ideal for HD video editing and exporting, or should I go withn Athlon 64 X2?
Would an Athlon 64 X2 4800+ 2.4Ghz like this one: http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/pro...0086428&catid=
be a better bet than than the Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz?
Since comparing Ghz between different processors and Intel vs. AMD is like comparing apples and oranges, I was hoping that some people here who have been editing HD footage on their PC's would have some useful advice.
What kind of export times am I looking at using these different PC's?
Sorry, just to add:
Obviously a dedicated graphics card is a must, rather than an shared on-board one. Just want to make it clear that whichever PC I buy, it will have a dedicated graphics card (even if the Intel system I linked above has shared on-board graphics.)
Not sure about MPEG2 but I've been exporting to AVI CineForm 20 minutes usually takes about 30 minutes on my C2D 2.4GHz with 1 Gig of ram in Vegas (Vegas actually uses both cores, so make sure your encoding package can take advantage of both cores). I just ordered another gig of ram and I might get a Core 2 Quad if I really get into video stuff more. My time is worth more than the $500's for the processor.
Definately stick with the Intel processor. There are many features that give them a competitive advantage here. I don't know if you have ever been over to the mac world yet or not......but for the little extra money and the machine it is definately worth it for the video editing IMO. Especially now that they are running the C2D's in their systems........can you say.....IMAC??
Originally Posted by zyad
If you shop around, there are good deals out there for an entry level one.
If you want to talk more Intel.....let me know.
I'm thinking of upgrading my computer. I also have a Dell 9200. It do DV-AVI editing fine but chop on editing m2t. If I will be spending $500 on AspectHD.. maybe I should spend $1000 for a higher-end PC editing m2t.
I am thinking of getting one of the Dell Precision workstation with Dual Core Xeon processors. They won't be cheap.
RAM RAM RAM, the more the better. It is always the first thing I run out of (I have 1 gig atm)
I have Dell Precision Dual Xeon Workstation at home with 3GB Memory and Avid Studio Complete. I use for commercial video production.
Dell 9200 that I use as a Home Theatre Computer with TV recording, all my music and videos on it.
I have a Dell Latitude C840 and Dell LatitudeD630 Laptop for mobile.
Precison Workstation at Work.
6 months ago I bought a New Macbook for $599 just for S and G, and to see what all the commotion is about.
1 Month ago I bought a Macbook Pro and Final Cut Studio 2.
"As God as My Witness", I never ever edit on a PC again.
Sorry guys, no Macs for me. It has to be PC.
I guess the consensus here is that Interl Core 2 Duo is the way to go.
But how much faster is the 2.2 Ghz faster vs. 1.8 Ghz when it comes to video encoding (assuming both have the same amount of RAM)?
How about bus speed?
If you can wait until the end of July, Intel is dropping many of their chip prices drastically. The 2.4ghz Core 2 Quad will be $266 and that is when I plan to overhaul my PC (basically buying a whole new system while using a few old pieces from my current PC).
Here is what I plan on getting:
Also, I would guess about 15% faster rendering between 1.8 and 2.2
Check out these CPU charts to see the differences:
Last edited by Luthyr; 2007 June 13th at 23:34.
2007 June 13th, 23:42
Yes I can wait until the end of July.
What if at the time I decide to go with Intel Core 2 Quad? Will software like the present version of Vegas use all the processors on that one, or will it be a waste of hardware?
2007 June 14th, 01:19
I am using Dell Dimension with Core2Duo. It works okay but choke a bit while editing m2t in Premiere
2007 June 14th, 08:48
A lot of software doesn't currently take advantage of it, but many video editing & 3D modeling applications take full advantage of it, as well as a few games. From what I could find, Vegas does take advantage of multi-core processors.
Originally Posted by zyad
Here is a list I found:
Games Supporting 4+ Cores:
THQ Supreme Commander
Remedy Alan Wake
Valve Half-Life 2: Episode 2
Epic Unreal Engine 3
Ubisoft Splinter Cell: Double Agent
Multimedia Applications Supporting 4+ Cores:
Autodesk 3DSMAX 8 and 3DSMAX 9
Adobe After Effects 7/8
Adobe Premiere Pro 2/3.0
Adobe Encore DVD 2.+
Adobe Photoshop CS2
Maxon Cinema 4D v10 (TBD)
Pinnacle Studio dv 10
Quicktime Pro 7.1
XMPEG with DIVX 6.2
DVD Shrink 3.2
Pov Ray 3.7 Beta
Sony Vegas 7.0
Steinberg- Yamaha Cubase v4.5
List is about 7 months old.
2007 June 14th, 10:58
So if an application (in this case Vegas) supports Multi-Core processors, that includes Core 2 Quads? Not just Core 2 Duos?
2007 June 14th, 11:44
That's what I would assume. From reading around elsewhere too, the rendering time improves quite a lot. This chart here shows the difference in Premiere (which I assume Vegas will take about the same advantage) from Core 2 Duo & Core 2 Quad:
It's a pretty substantial difference (the difference from it taking an hour vs 35 minutes).