Desktop for video editing

[Brian Stirling]

I'll be in the market for a new desktop to do video editing and I'm talking 4K video here. Specifically, I'll be working with Adobe Premiere Pro CC and working on 4K video -- quite a bit of it.

So, I'm looking for a reasonably priced desktop box with higher end cpu and graphics board that's compatible with APP so that the gpu will speed up rendering etc.

My thought is to get a near top end cpu though probably not the very top owing to the price. I also expect that 16GB would be the sweet spot though even more RAM would be desirable. I've used SSD for my main OS drive for years now and imagine a 512GB-1TB SSD would be best.

Because the the very high data requirements of 4K video I will need 4TB HD's for storage, but when working on the video I think I'd need to move/copy the raw video files to an SSD to improve performance. I'm not sure I'd want to use the primary OS drive (C drive) for that storage but the SSD based C drive would be a good place for the scratch drives APP uses.

Lastly, I have a 30 inch 4K display and the desktop video card would need to support 4K displays. I'm not a gamer so the card need not be a flagship gamer card -- what it needs to be is compatible with APP and provide good acceleration of rendering. Ideally, it should support dual 4K displays. My concern, though, is that not a lot of software is optimized for 4K displays and I need to see if APP is good with 4K displays.

So, is there any off the shelf boxes that have the kind of power to handle video editing but isn't break the bank expensive? I'm OK with upgrading the HD's to SSD and adding RAM and often times the PC vendors low ball the RAM and HD/SSD and then charge a huge premium for upgrades of RAM and drives -- I can handle those upgrades.

The only other thing is USB... I'm thinking USB-C would be desirable but I'm not sure when it will become well supported by external HD vendors etc.


Brian

 

[giantpandaman2]

This is an either build-it-yourself box if you want to save money or getting a professional level workstation for $3k+ (probably much more). Boutiques don't cater to the video editing crowd so I'd suggest going with one of the bigger companies if you don't want to put it together yourself.

 

[Kaido]

What's your budget range?

 

[Brian Stirling]

Still trying to work up a budget but it aint going to be $3K that's for sure.

1. I don't need the display(s) just the box.

2. Having 32GB RAM would be nice but I think 16GB will suffice.

3. A good graphics card that's been used for video work but maybe not the be all and end all gamer boards.

4. A motherboard that permits overclocking of a good but not quite flagship Intel uP.

5. A large SSD is a must but buying an SSD preinstalled usually means an ass reaming so I might be tempted to go with a base HD and then add the SSD -- probably a 1TB.

6. The real gotya is the storage drive. I'm about ready to order a 4TB portable to take into the field and honestly you need 2X for redundancy and 4TB probably wont last long with 4K video eating over 30GB/hour. I can live with a regular HD for bulk storage, but come editing time all the files to be edited need to be on an SSD and on the internal buss and there's no way around that.

So, I guess I could build a box myself, but I haven't done that in more than a decade. In fact, I haven't much used a desktop in more than a decade, but for serious video editing laptops won't cut it.

So, my ballpark price range is $1K-$2K and hopefully closer to $1K.


Brian

 

[Kaido]

Personally I would skip overclocking. If you're going to be transcoding video, you're going to want something that will (1) be stable and (2) run cool.

 

[Kaido]

I'll just throw this out there as an easy option - the BRIX GTX760: ($870)

http://www.amazon.com/Gigabyte-i7-4710HQ-Barebone-Components-GB-BXi7G3-760/dp/B00OJZVGFU/

Small & somewhat noisy, but packs a quad-core i7 laptop CPU & a 2GB GTX760 inside. Up to 16 gigs of RAM ($70), plus up to a 1TB mSATA drive ($335) & up to a 2TB 2.5" SATA drive ($700). Also USB 3.0, so you could slap on a dual-4TB USB RAID drive: ($350)

http://www.amazon.com/Book-Desktop-External-Drive-WDBLWE0080JCH-NESN/dp/B00KU686D2/

Runs Windows 7, 8.1, or 10 ($100 to $130 depending on if you want Home or Pro). That whole setup is kissing $2,500 though. But it's small, portable, has a coupe internal SSD's for high-speed local data access, etc.

 

[EliteRetard]

https://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-pro/system-requirements.html

Looks like it supports AMD and Nvidia. However, many of the supported AMD cards are newer and faster (at least as far as the low cost consumer cards go).

Looking around it seems not to effectively utilize many cores, starting to taper off after 4 cores and more than 6 cores is only worthwhile for serious professionals. I'd almost suggest Skylake, except it's massively overpriced. A Haswell-E is cheaper with more cores and more cache so that's what I'd go with.

Looking at the info I'd say it should be possible to get a good system just under $2k. I'll put together a build list here in a bit as one possible solution.

 

[EliteRetard]

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/GxbtP6

CPU: Intel Core i7-5930K 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($554.99 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: Corsair H110 94.0 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler ($104.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: ASRock X99 Extreme4 ATX LGA2011-3 Motherboard ($143.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: Patriot Viper 4 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 CAS 16-16-16-36 1.35v ($184.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 1TB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($346.49 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: XFX Radeon R9 290X 4GB Double Dissipation Video Card ($313.98 @ Newegg)
Case: Corsair Vengeance C70 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case ($104.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: EVGA 850W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($74.99 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM (64-bit) ($89.88 @ OutletPC)

Total: $1919.28

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-01-09 13:54 EST-0500

There are 3 choices for CPU. The 5930k which I included, it's the fastest overclockable CPU you can afford. The server grade alternative is the Xeon E5-1650 v3, it's nearly identical to the 5930k, except it can't OC and runs 100MHz faster. If you decide not to OC then the Xeon chip may be the better choice. The third option is about $200 less than these others and it's the 5820k. It's nearly identical as well, only supporting fewer PCI-E lanes which doesn't matter in this case (unless you plan to use more than 2 PCI-E devices).

The 5820k is the lowest clocked of the 3, but I included a high end water cooler, and a mild OC will make the 5820k and 5930k basically equal (minus the PCI-E lanes). Personally I don't think a mild OC will affect stability especially with a good cooler as I have selected. Up to you to decide which CPU is best and if you will risk a minuscule chance of instability by overclocking. One other thing I should mention, all of these CPUs are due to be replaced in a few months (3-6) with new Broadwell-E CPUs. They will potentially work in the same MOBO, but there's no guarantee until the MOBO maker announces a BIOS and official support.

As I just mentioned, I have selected a good high end water cooler that has been tested as one of the quietest. You'll need a very good cooler for these high end chips even if you don't OC. You could save ~40-50$ with a high end air cooler vs the water cooling, but I think the extra money is very well worthwhile. One concern besides performance is the massive weight of air coolers that will be hanging off the MOBO, no such issue with this water cooler. Because this water cooler is a 280mm model it limits your case choices, and I have selected a case that supports this cooler.

I don't have much to say about the MOBO, I have selected the best value MOBO in my opinion (at this current time). You can spend $50-75 more for the exact same features and quality in a different brand, but in my experience AsRock has been a good reliable choice...so I see no reason to spend extra for a more "premium" name badge.

The RAM is an important choice. Intel officially only supports 2133MHz, so I don't know what the maximum stable speed you will be able to get...but you want the fastest possible RAM with the lowest latency. I found these patriot sticks were an excellent value, boasting very high speed and low latency at a good sale price. I opted to get 32GB to fill the quad channel of the X99 platform to offer you the most bandwidth possible. They should run well if you have to "underclock" them...you may also be able to get lower latency if you do (ex: 2.6GHz CAS 15).

As for the SSD, I chose a very well known, good performing, reliable 1TB 2.5" SATA drive. It's not the fastest SSD around, but has very good bang for the buck, and the fastest PCI-E x4 drives top out at 512GB (for about the same price as this 1TB).

The next component is important as well, it's the GPU you will use for acceleration. Here I chose the fastest certified consumer GPU and that's the 290x. There are a lot of actual workstation options, but they are much more expensive, and I don't know which if any can provide the same performance for the money as the 290x.

The only problem with the 290x is that the cheapest I could find is $300, the same price as the refreshed 390 cards. I don't see the 390 cards on the certified list, however they are based on the same GPU so they may work...but I didn't want to risk a compatibility issue. In the past the 290 cards were running closer to $200, and if you can find one for that price go for it. One other option just under $200 is the 280x, it's close to same compute performance as the 290x (something like 80%)...it's older than the 290x, but both are old and due to be replaced in ~6 months.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review/18

As far as PSU this one is a bit overkill, but it's very well rated and highly efficient so there should be little power loss with the larger capacity. It's also on sale for a great price, and it does give you the headroom to add another GPU or whatnot. Here's a review:
http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story6&reid=451

As far as cases go, I'd normally say pick what you want...but because I chose a high end water cooler you need a case that will hold it. I chose the (currently) cheapest good quality case that supported this cooler. You can search for H110 support if you'd like to find a different case, or if you decide on a different cooler option (such as air) you will have a much wider array of choices.

For the OS I just went with the newest 64 bit from MS, which is Win10.

Now if you'd like to save more money and go with a more budget build here's one option that's $500 less with a 5820k, 280x, 16GB, an air cooler, and a cheaper case. Total is about $1,400:
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/JtdnYJ

 

[EliteRetard]

I'll just throw this out there as an easy option - the BRIX GTX760: ($870)

http://www.amazon.com/Gigabyte-i7-4710HQ-Barebone-Components-GB-BXi7G3-760/dp/B00OJZVGFU/

Small & somewhat noisy, but packs a quad-core i7 laptop CPU & a 2GB GTX760 inside. Up to 16 gigs of RAM ($70), plus up to a 1TB mSATA drive ($335) & up to a 2TB 2.5" SATA drive ($700). Also USB 3.0, so you could slap on a dual-4TB USB RAID drive: ($350)

http://www.amazon.com/Book-Desktop-External-Drive-WDBLWE0080JCH-NESN/dp/B00KU686D2/

Runs Windows 7, 8.1, or 10 ($100 to $130 depending on if you want Home or Pro). That whole setup is kissing $2,500 though. But it's small, portable, has a coupe internal SSD's for high-speed local data access, etc.

I just want to say this is a terrible option. This unit is known to have serious thermal throttling issues, the mix of mobile and low end parts will also perform much lower than a standard desktop.

 

[Kaido]

I just want to say this is a terrible option. This unit is known to have serious thermal throttling issues, the mix of mobile and low end parts will also perform much lower than a standard desktop.

Add in lack of CPU & GPU upgradability as well! But, it's small & easy to build, and portable if you need it to be. Although a higher-end laptop might be a better choice at that point.

 

[EliteRetard]

Add in lack of CPU & GPU upgradability as well! But, it's small & easy to build, and portable if you need it to be. Although a higher-end laptop might be a better choice at that point.

Yeah, a workstation laptop would beat that thing... If you need something smaller than a regular desktop, you can go ITX. Even X99 has ITX options. I've built high end systems in the tiny SG05, and there's a newer SG13 revision that's even better. The fact that you can get 8 cores and high end xfire (295x2) in less than a cubic foot is quite amazing.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Add in lack of CPU & GPU upgradability as well! But, it's small & easy to build, and portable if you need it to be. Although a higher-end laptop might be a better choice at that point.

I have a pretty decent laptop but I want something more powerful and upgradeable. A prebuilt would be nice if it had the guts but I'm not afraid of a home build as I've done that before.

My thought is that if a really high end box is, say, $4k a box that's $2K isn't half the speed overall it's probably better than that. If you go with nothing but top of the line components it's going to cost serious money so I figure to take a step or two back from that edge and go with something closer to the best bang for the buck.

I good GPU is important for rendering etc and a good SSD is essential as well. The CPU is important but maybe not as important as SSD and GPU.

Having 32GB of RAM would be desirable and there are some systems with as much as 64GB but the better bang for your buck sweet spot is more like 16GB with the option to add more.

I don't know that I'd want to overclock but being able to is a plus.


Brian

 

[Kaido]

I have a pretty decent laptop but I want something more powerful and upgradeable. A prebuilt would be nice if it had the guts but I'm not afraid of a home build as I've done that before.

My thought is that if a really high end box is, say, $4k a box that's $2K isn't half the speed overall it's probably better than that. If you go with nothing but top of the line components it's going to cost serious money so I figure to take a step or two back from that edge and go with something closer to the best bang for the buck.

I good GPU is important for rendering etc and a good SSD is essential as well. The CPU is important but maybe not as important as SSD and GPU.

Having 32GB of RAM would be desirable and there are some systems with as much as 64GB but the better bang for your buck sweet spot is more like 16GB with the option to add more.

I don't know that I'd want to overclock but being able to is a plus.


Brian

I pre-ordered an Oculus Rift and a VirZoom VR exercise bike, which needs a powerful computer to run off of. My plan is to build a portable Mini-ITX system when they get close to shipping. This is my current case choice:

http://www.corsair.com/en-us/graphite-series-380t-portable-mini-itx-case

It has a nice carrying handle if you need to take it with you:

Great airflow & pops apart easily to let you work on it:

Unless things change drastically by May, my current plan is to get a quality modular power supply & couple that with:

1. Gigabyte G1 Mini-ITX board
2. 3.4ghz i7-6700 CPU
3. 32GB RAM
4. 512gb Samsung 950 SSD stick
5. 6GB eVGA 980Ti

Because it supports a full-sized GPU & PSU, installation is simple:

1. Install the PSU
2. Install the CPU, RAM, and SSD onto the motherboard
3. Install the motherboard in the case
4. Install the video card

Then slap on whichever version of Windows you like & voila, a compact, portable PC. The case also has a pair of 2.5" drive bays (useful for SSD's, which now go up to 2TB) & a pair of 3.5" drive bays (which now go up to 8TB, which is useful for archiving footage). Easy to build & upgradable, to an extent. So that's something to consider if you're interested at all in building your own rig.

 

[giantpandaman2]

I have a pretty decent laptop but I want something more powerful and upgradeable. A prebuilt would be nice if it had the guts but I'm not afraid of a home build as I've done that before.

My thought is that if a really high end box is, say, $4k a box that's $2K isn't half the speed overall it's probably better than that. If you go with nothing but top of the line components it's going to cost serious money so I figure to take a step or two back from that edge and go with something closer to the best bang for the buck.

I good GPU is important for rendering etc and a good SSD is essential as well. The CPU is important but maybe not as important as SSD and GPU.

Having 32GB of RAM would be desirable and there are some systems with as much as 64GB but the better bang for your buck sweet spot is more like 16GB with the option to add more.

I don't know that I'd want to overclock but being able to is a plus.


Brian

Given you're trying to save money you should probably make a thread in General Hardware and build it yourself. As soon as you said "1 TB SSD" you're not looking in the $1000 range in prebuilts.

Elite's build is a good start. There's no reason to go SFF given the power that you want. A big case allows for good cooling and lots of HDD's as you get more and more stuff.

Saying you want closer to $1000 just doesn't make sense if you're doing 4k video. RAM is cheap right now, so I wouldn't skimp on that. A the very least get 2x8 for a total of 16 so you have the possibility of moving up to 4x8 for 32 GB. Having your HDD thrash is going to slow everything far more than even a weak CPU or Video Card.

Even with Elite's $2k build you'd still need a lot of HDD. The only real saving you can do is get a weaker video card and upgrade as prices drop or get less HDD/SSD space and then expand as you need. Don't skimp on the PSU or CPU either. Again, you should really throw this in General Hardware so you can get the more knowledgeable HW people on it.

 

[NAC]

I have edited 4k video on my i5 machine with 8 gigs of ram. Not a lot, yet, because I just got a 4k camera. But it works. You don't necessarily need a lot of horsepower to edit, most video editing programs have methods to reduce load: like reduce the preview quality or work with proxy videos. Rendering, however will take more time with a slower machine - but in general you start a render and go have lunch or go to sleep, or do something. You can still use the PC when rendering, but you wont want to do anything CPU intensive. My PC may take twice as long to render as a 6 core newer PC, but that really doesn't matter since I'm in the other room anyway.

The GPU can help with previews and rendering, but I think your money is better spent on CPU and memory. You absolutely need hard drive space and backups. So perhaps a 5 TB internal and external to start. Depending on what the content is, I would get another external for a third backup. I do daily backups onto one external, and then regularly backup to another drive which is kept offsite except when I'm copying to it. The first backup is in case a HD fails. The second backup is in case of a fire, theft, or you stupidly delete something from both of the other two drives. If you buy a lesser CPU or less memory, you may just have to wait a mili-second more when doing tasks or minutes more for a render to finish. If you skimp on backup, you may just lose everything.

You don't need to copy the video to an SSD to work with it. And it would become a pain to move the content you are working with to and from the SSD. And basically dangerous because you could delete something. Video is linear - and regular hard drives are fast reading linear data.

I build my machines, and this is what I would build at the sweet spot of price / performance:
5820k CPU
4*8 gigs ram (you could save $70 and get only 2*8)
960 GPU: it will have display ports for a more monitors if/when you add them, and built in H.265 decoder for future use. (you could save $100 and get a bare bones cards, but I would worry about having 2*4k monitors in the future)
250 gig SSD for windows and apps
5tb 7200 internal HHD for data (5tb seems to be the lowest $$ per TB now)
2 * 5tb external HHD for 2 backups. (you could save $120 and just get one)
Add in a 500 watt power supply, case and cooling for about $1500.

 

[Brian Stirling]

The more I look at it and the more 4K video I've worked on with a high spec laptop the more I'm convinced going cheap isn't going to work for 4K video. So, much as I'd like to save some money here I think I'm going to have to up my budget above the $1K-$1.5K I'd planned.

So, I'll look at what I can swing and my new price point will likely have to be more like $2.5K. Adding up the incidentals like: case, power supply, keyboard and mouse, flash card reader, and optical drive and that kind of puts a big limit on the main components when you can't borrow from an older system.

That said and starting with the CPU a 6-core 5820 appears the best bet and a bunch cheaper than the 8-core version. Still, we're at about four bills for the CPU alone.

I see no way around SSD unless you have all day so that alone drives up the price by quite a bit. It looks like 32GB RAM is a better bet and not the biggest price delta at that.

A 750W PS appears the best bet and a decent full tower case should provide room to grow (add HD's).

The GPU is a big decision as it can make a big difference but the prices can go well beyond $1K for a single board and some folks have more than one.

The CPU choice will effect the motherboard choice and looking to be future proof with USB 3.1.

So, still looking but now I've adjusted my sights.


Brian

 

[EliteRetard]

Did you get a look at the two potential builds I linked earlier?
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/GxbtP6 (was $1900)
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/JtdnYJ (was $1400)
The prices have change since I posted them, but it's just a simple matter of finding another equivalent part on sale.

As I mentioned in my post above, both the CPU and GPU are due for replacement in a few months. I don't know what your time frame is, but if you can wait you'll end up with a free performance boost. Normally an update isn't worth mentioning, but with this kind of a budget it may be a worthwhile consideration.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Did you get a look at the two potential builds I linked earlier?
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/GxbtP6 (was $1900)
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/JtdnYJ (was $1400)
The prices have change since I posted them, but it's just a simple matter of finding another equivalent part on sale.

As I mentioned in my post above, both the CPU and GPU are due for replacement in a few months. I don't know what your time frame is, but if you can wait you'll end up with a free performance boost. Normally an update isn't worth mentioning, but with this kind of a budget it may be a worthwhile consideration.

Yeah, actually the components in your first build is pretty similar to the system I'll probably get.

What I've sketched up at this point is...

$125 -> Thermaltake Core V71 case
$385 -> Intel Core i7-5820K CPU
$330 -> ASUS x99-Pro/USB3.1 motherboard
$255 -> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB 2x16GB RAM
$340 -> Samsung SSD 850 1TB
$649 -> ECGA GeFrce GTX 980 Ti GPU
$104 -> Corsair Hydro Series H100i GTX water cooler
$93 -> Thermaltake Touchpower TPD-0750M power supply
$53 -> Atech Flash Technology PRO-77U flash reader
$46 -> LG 14x SARA Blu-ray rewriter
$50 -> Microsoft Wireless Desktop 2000 Keyboard and Mouse
$199 -> Windows 10 Pro (needed for 32GB RAM)


I'll have to add some bulk HD's at some point but for now I can copy the files I need to the SSD from the externals I now have and edit from the SSD. Going forward I'll need about 8TB of HD storage, but I can live without the internal HD's and just copy from the externals for now.

Quite a change from what I was originally planning, but it became apparent that 4K isn't easy and I expect to be working on quite a bit of it. I'd planned on the bulk of the capital being on the capture side and thought I could get away with a mid-line system for editing -- a few weeks working with my high end laptop made it clear that the power needed was just going to cost more than I planned.

The big hitter is the GPU and although you can install several cards at >$1K each the most often recommended card is the 980 Ti.


Brian

 

[EliteRetard]

Any specific reason to choose the Asus MOBO? It's much more expensive than other options.

Same with the RAM, any particular reason? I don't know what speed or CAS you're looking at.

And again for the GPU, why a 980ti? It's much more expensive than the AMD options, and isn't listed as recommended for the program you use. The AMD options are also faster in double precision (FP64) work. If you want a high end compute card from Nvidia the oldest Titan is on the recommended list. If you're going to ignore the recommended list, there's the slightly better Titan Black (not the newest Titan X). These two old Titans have 1/3 FP32 for double precision, the newest Titan X and 980ti only have 1/32 FP32. Edit: I should mention, probably the only way you'll get one of the old Titans is used...I'd say somewhere in the $400's.

And as for Windows, you seem confused. Win 10 Home can address up to 128GB RAM. Unless you need some other specific feature from Win 10 Pro it's a waste of money.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Any specific reason to choose the Asus MOBO? It's much more expensive than other options.

Same with the RAM, any particular reason? I don't know what speed or CAS you're looking at.

And again for the GPU, why a 980ti? It's much more expensive than the AMD options, and isn't listed as recommended for the program you use. The AMD options are also faster in double precision (FP64) work. If you want a high end compute card from Nvidia the oldest Titan is on the recommended list. If you're going to ignore the recommended list, there's the slightly better Titan Black (not the newest Titan X). These two old Titans have 1/3 FP32 for double precision, the newest Titan X and 980ti only have 1/32 FP32. Edit: I should mention, probably the only way you'll get one of the old Titans is used...I'd say somewhere in the $400's.

And as for Windows, you seem confused. Win 10 Home can address up to 128GB RAM. Unless you need some other specific feature from Win 10 Pro it's a waste of money.

The reason I looked at the ASUS MB is that it's USB 3.1 compatible making it more future proof. Additionally, since almost all of my video capture will be out in the field in order to get that video onto the PC I'd need to transfer it so having a faster connection could mean something if we're talking a couple hundred GB's. USB 3.1 is not quite 2x as fast as 3.0.

The 980Ti is one that's commonly listed by folks that do video editing and is about as fast as you can get with a single board. But, the Radeon R9 is a bunch cheaper so maybe that's a reasonable trade-off.

I though I read someplace that you needed Win10 Pro to handle 32GB, but it looks like you're right and Win10 Home 64bit can handle 128GB -- more than enough. I just checked and didn't see anything else that PRO offered that I particularly need so that's $100 right there.

So, if I go with the Radeon R9 and Win 10 Home 64bit that would bring me comfortably under $2.5K. Probably not ready to order for a week or so.

Wait one...

Look what I just found on an Adobe linked tweaker forum...

General advise
No AMD
For the moment ONLY nVidia GeForce cards are advised. CS6 does not support AMD cards and AMD is still considered the 'New kid on the block' as far as CC goes. AMD is still in its infancy, the drivers and Adobe support is still too new to effectively compete with nVidia's CUDA acceleration, which has been proven in the past years and have stable drivers from nVidia and stable support from Adobe. nVidia CUDA support is a mature technology with a proven track record. Add to that the recent price increases of AMD cards and they have effectively outpriced themselves in the competition with nVidia


So, I'll have to look into the GPU's a bit more it looks like...


Brian

 

[tenks]

For the moment ONLY nVidia GeForce cards are advised. CS6 does not support AMD cards and AMD is still considered the 'New kid on the block' as far as CC goes. AMD is still in its infancy, the drivers and Adobe support is still too new to effectively compete with nVidia's CUDA acceleration, which has been proven in the past years and have stable drivers from nVidia and stable support from Adobe. nVidia CUDA support is a mature technology with a proven track record. Add to that the recent price increases of AMD cards and they have effectively outpriced themselves in the competition with nVidia
[/COLOR][/B]

So, I'll have to look into the GPU's a bit more it looks like...


Brian

AMD works fine on Premiere Pro, just doesn't hardware accelerate as fast as Nvidia GPUs. Adobe Premiere is based on the Mercury Playback Engine which was designed around CUDA GPU Acceleration, ie Nvidia GPU's. Adobe use OpenCL based HW acceleration when using AMD cards, which is still better than software only.

On that note, if you're building a new rig for Video editng and are using Premiere Pro, DEFIANTLY get an nvdia gpu.

 

[EliteRetard]

Ah yes, USB 10Gb/s... The MOBO I originally suggest for being a good value actually has a bundle with a USB 3.1 card:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157600

Or you could buy your own add in card for a different MOBO. They run $25-50.

My issue with the 980ti is that it's not a compute card. None of Nvidias current cards are built for professional applications, and are actually much slower than their older cards that were. The old Titan had 1.5 TFLOPs and Titan Black had 1.7 TFLOPs the newest Titan X and 980ti have about 0.2 TFLOPs.

For comparison the 290x has 0.7 TFLOPs, and the cheaper 280x actually has about 1.0 TFLOPs. I had suggested the 290x because it was on the recommended list, and is newer and usually faster than the 280x (only slightly behind in FP64) and is readily available at retail. There were other considerations I made as well, relative and total costs and the fact that these cards are being replaced soon.

However, all that said I'll admit that I don't know exactly what/how your software runs. If people who do use this software are recommending a 980ti then maybe it's OK. I'll have to try to find benchmarks of this specific program. Even if Nvidias currently weaker FP64 performance is not an issue, I would not suggest the 980ti. It's to expensive to close to end of life, cheaper Nvidia cards have better value.

 

[Brian Stirling]

AMD works fine on Premiere Pro, just doesn't hardware accelerate as fast as Nvidia GPUs. Adobe Premiere is based on the Mercury Playback Engine which was designed around CUDA GPU Acceleration, ie Nvidia GPU's. Adobe use OpenCL based HW acceleration when using AMD cards, which is still better than software only.

On that note, if you're building a new rig for Video editng and are using Premiere Pro, DEFIANTLY get an nvdia gpu.

There are lots of video editing programs out there but Premiere Pro is one of the best and as a long time Photoshop user I'm familiar with the way Adobe does things. I don't like everything about them, quite the contrary, but for me Premiere Pro is the way to go.

I'm not sure what deal Nvidia and Adobe have that ties them together so closely but not having to fight compatibility issues is high on my lists of things that swing the decision.

The 980Ti board is apparently just about the standard for users of Premiere Pro and you pay for that.

As I said I'm not going to place any orders for a week or so and hope to have greater clarification before then.


Brian

 

[EliteRetard]

I've found one benchmark so far, but it's interesting enough to post now:

This chart doesn't include newer Nvidia cards, but what matters here is the performance of AMD vs Nvidia. We can see that the fastest single card is the old Nvidia Titan with 1.7TFLOPs FP64. But we can also see the second fastest card is an AMD Firepro Card, the W9000. Looking that up, it's the same Tahiti card as the 280x with the same 1TFLOP FP64.

The Titan has 70% more FP64 performance available, but performs only 56% faster. This tells me that AMD is not running into any sort of efficiency problem. If the Titan were more than 70% faster, we could assume that AMD was not able to fully or efficiently utilize the resources on their cards...but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Obviously this is just a single benchmark, and is missing several other key data points. I'll keep digging, but this initial finding suggest AMD isn't some terrible option.

Edit: Oh I also want to quickly point out that the 280x is a $200 card brand new and is still available. The old Titan used still seems to go for $400. As long as you don't mind used, in this case you do get roughly as much extra performance as you pay for. A Titan Black will even be a tad faster and also runs in the $400 range.

OK now back to my hunt for benchmarks...

 

[EliteRetard]

Just found this, from back in 20012:
http://blogs.adobe.com/premierepro/2012/05/opencl-and-premiere-pro-cs6.html

Says that even back then there were only 4 things AMD couldn't do that Nvidia could.
I don't know how much has changed since then, whether AMD now has full support or if it somehow got worse.