If building a system for video editing, Intel or AMD?

yacoub

Golden Member
May 24, 2005
1,991
14
81
It seems like the important items would be to have a fast processor (preferably dual-core if you expect to do other things while encoding/converting/etc), a lot of RAM, a speedy harddrive, and a quality soundcard.

So that sounds like dual-core Intel 955X-based system with 2GB of RAM (DDR or DDR2?) and 10k 74GB Raptor SATA drives.

Your thoughts?
 

aplefka

Lifer
Feb 29, 2004
12,014
2
0
Intel is good at encoding supposedly. I've never read or seen anything to prove this, but that's what I've heard.

AMD - Gaming
Intel - Editing

If you're willing to shell out that much cash, then go for it, and go for DDR2.
 

yacoub

Golden Member
May 24, 2005
1,991
14
81
Actually looking at last month's comparison the 4400+ AMD X2 chip blasts past everything else in Multitasking Content Creation (which includes Photoshop, Premiere, Director MX, DreamWeaver MX, Windows Media Encoder 9, Lightwave 3D, and Wavelab 4.0).

That tells me the AMD solution that is comparably priced to the 840 Intel dual-core chip actually outperforms it by a fair amount (see first graph here http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2397&p=15 ).

More is shown here: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2397&p=17
 

bob4432

Lifer
Sep 6, 2003
11,727
46
91
about 1.25 years ago i built a moderate video editing rig for the work i was doing, the rig in my sig, and chose intel because at that time they were better than amd at encoding, but am not sure about that anymore. what i found is that if the applications were smp/smt aware everything was excellent, but if there were not, i could not get cpu utilization over 50% because the os sees the ht p4s as 2 cpus. this was costly as i chose some software that unknowing to me and apparently the tech support of the company, it was not smt/smp aware.

other than that i chose to use most of the adobe suite for my needs, which turned out to be overkill as most stuff i do is just basic fades, no crazy weird video changes. i use ps for making any stills and you need atleast ps cs for a program that can stretch the pixel aspect ratio of a still for use in a 16:9 video and have it look good when played on widescreen display.

the 74GB raptor will be good for a system drive, but you will need a couple large sataII drives (if that chipset supports sataII, even if it doesn't get the sataII for future stuff as they are backward compatible with sataI) - say 250GB each because raw uncompressed DV video is large ~12GB/hour and i am sure hd stuff is much larger. but if you are using 1394/firewire to capture from a camera, the video is only coming in @ ~3.5MB/s so that is really no big deal.

as far as ram, i got away with 1GB, but again i am not really sure what you are doing as far as special effects, etc.

if i were to build this machine today, i would wait for the x2s to come down a bit and go that route w/ 2x1GB DDR, large sataII hdds and a 74GB raptor for a definate speed boost for the os/applications - i chose scsi for my system drive but that is me.

also you will need a dvd-burner - nec3520

sound card - depends on what you are doing

video card - not much needed unless you plan to game on this rig also

good quality(xclio, enermax, antec, ocz, fortron, etc) 500W ps as this machine will be stressed for hours at a time.

also when formatting use ntfs becase fat32 has a ~4GB limit on files size

after reviewing/reflecting a bit, you can easily build a nice machine for a decent price since you can get a nf4ultra board, a x2 cpu(personally i would hold out a bit for prices to drop, if you can), the ram is pretty cheap now since you don't need any special o/cing ram and hdds are pretty cheap too.
 

kitkat22

Golden Member
Feb 10, 2005
1,464
1,333
136
I would tend to agree with the last statement. I think we have locked ourselves into thinking that AMD is just for gaming, I think AMD is trying to disprove that considering their latest performance numbers. They went from being excellent in a few areas to being excellent in all aspects. Granted, there will always be situations where one or the other is better, but I don't think that is point. I just think it is commendable that AMD has shifted their focus into the overall processor than the gaming platform.
 

bob4432

Lifer
Sep 6, 2003
11,727
46
91
Originally posted by: yacoub
Actually looking at last month's comparison the 4400+ AMD X2 chip blasts past everything else in Multitasking Content Creation (which includes Photoshop, Premiere, Director MX, DreamWeaver MX, Windows Media Encoder 9, Lightwave 3D, and Wavelab 4.0).

That tells me the AMD solution that is comparably priced to the 840 Intel dual-core chip actually outperforms it by a fair amount (see first graph here http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2397&p=15 ).

More is shown here: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2397&p=17

although the gains are not too large, it is nice that amd is finally taking over the encoding arena also :D
 

fatty4ksu

Golden Member
Mar 5, 2005
1,282
0
0
IF you want to spend 600 hundie on a CPU, then AMD win in encoding.

You can get a sweet 3.0 Ghz dual-core Intel CPU for 350 and have results at or above the X2.
 

bob4432

Lifer
Sep 6, 2003
11,727
46
91
Originally posted by: fatty4ksu
IF you want to spend 600 hundie on a CPU, then AMD win in encoding.

You can get a sweet 3.0 Ghz dual-core Intel CPU for 350 and have results at or above the X2.

thus the reason i suggest waiting a bit. what board/chipset do you need to run the dual core p4s?
 

bob4432

Lifer
Sep 6, 2003
11,727
46
91
Originally posted by: yacoub
bob thanks for all your advice, that's helpful!

no probs, and again i am assuming prosumer/consumer DV(720x480) editing, but video editing is video editing, just different sizes of files :)
 

yacoub

Golden Member
May 24, 2005
1,991
14
81
At the most it would be one of the Sony VX-2xxx models, so yeah. Btw, has anyone else put out a miniDV of similar specs and performanc to the Sony VX-2000/2100 that competes or bests it? I'd be interested in reading reviews of such cameras.

(The DCR-HC1000 is most likely the one though.)
 

bob4432

Lifer
Sep 6, 2003
11,727
46
91
Originally posted by: yacoub
At the most it would be one of the Sony VX-2xxx models, so yeah. Btw, has anyone else put out a miniDV of similar specs and performanc to the Sony VX-2000/2100 that competes or bests it? I'd be interested in reading reviews of such cameras.

you are probably not going to get that answer here, not a bunch of peeps that have really high end mini dv cameras around here. i know the canon canon xl2 is nice, but not sure how it compares to the sony you stated.

my ex-brother in law had a professional business shooting videos and other semi high end work and he used the xl1(this was a couple of years ago, not sure what he uses now as i have not talked to him in about that time), or a news camera he had access to since his other job was as a news cameraman.
 

teutonicknight

Senior member
Jan 10, 2003
243
0
0
At around $2000, look at:

Gl2
DVC-30
PDX

All are all cheaper than the VX2100, but come with 1/4 CCDs. The VX2100 is kind of an odd camera because it has 1/3 in CCD's at a price where cameras usally have 1/4in CCDs

It really depends on how you use your camera:

VX2100
-Good value (1/3in CCD's at a price where you usally get 1/4in CCDs)
-Good low light

Gl2
-Good optics
-Shares a lot of features from the XL1 (not very relevent anymore)

DVC-30
-Very Good image control
-Because it shares features from the DVX-100a (gamma control, etc)
-Optional XLR

PDX
-Pro Audio (the only cam I mentioned that has XLR included)
-DVCAM

Good places to look for reviews
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/ (decent)
http://www.dv.com (better reviews, but not as many)


__________


Even though I have a AMD, I would say get a dual-core Intel. The more processing power is definatly used in Pro apps, and gives a sizable speed increase. Not to mention better multitasking.


BTW: What apps are you using?