P67 vs Z68: video encoding

[Starbuck1975]

I was in the process of putting together a P67 build list when I started to discover articles on Intel's new Z68 chipset.

One of the motivating factors for my new build, beyond gaming, is to perform video encoding. Specifically, I use Sony Vegas Studio for making home movies. I am building a system to essentially reduce the workload time, as Sony Vegas Studio performs at a crawl on my current build.

However, on a Z68 article I read, it mentions that the three major media encoding applications that can take advantage of Quick Sync are MediaConverter, MediaEspresso, and Badaboom.

Perhaps I am not understanding the term encoding, but would creation of home movies on Sony Vegas Studio benefit from Quick Sync on the Z68 chipset?

Also, I believe the benefit of the Z68 chipset is GPU virtualization, but the Z68 Mobos on newegg show them as not having an onboard GPU. Is GPU virtualization different than onboard GPU?

 

[Zap]

I don't think that software takes advantage of Quick Sync at this time. Now, just in case it gets supported in the future, why not get Z68? Just going from your A64 x2 3800+ to Sandy Bridge should give you a big boost. Paying a couple bucks extra for the possibility of using Quick Sync sounds like it would be worthwhile.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Thanks Zap. Interestingly enough, the Z68 boards available today, for the feature set I need, are going for around the same price as a comperable P67 Mobo.

The only other thing holding me back is that the best reviewed Z68 board right now, in terms of price/performance, is the ASRock Z68 Extreme4. I've never had an ASRock build, so not confident on their reliability as a manufacturer. I tend to hold onto systems for a very long time, so reliability and longevity are important to me...I've heard ASRock uses cheap components.

 

[dac7nco]

The only other thing holding me back is that the best reviewed Z68 board right now, in terms of price/performance, is the ASRock Z68 Extreme4. I've never had an ASRock build, so not confident on their reliability as a manufacturer. I tend to hold onto systems for a very long time, so reliability and longevity are important to me...I've heard ASRock uses cheap components.

In the past few years, ASRock had "grown-up" by leaps and bounds. They provide a lot of extras, on stable boards, at great prices compared to GB and ASUS (ASUS being their parent company). They also have an excellent UEFI, IMO, second only to MSI. The first (and only) ASRock board I've used for myself is #1 on my SIG, and my main workstation. The XEON and ECC memory were drop-in compatible, and It's been running for over a year without a glitch, with a healthy OC.

I've upgraded a few machines with their Extreme4/6 series boards, which I sell based on their stability and awesome connectivity options (front USB/SSD caddy, lots of SATA).

Daimon

 

[Starbuck1975]

One other quick question. I noticed that the z68 boards feature SSD caching. What does this mean exactly? Does it mean that if you have an SSD, you can get SSD like performance from your mechanical drives, or is it an emulator of sorts that pulls SSD like performance from a mechanical drive without the need for an SSD?

 

[Starbuck1975]

Ive done a little more research on the z68 chipset. So the SSD Caching still requires an SSD, although you can get away with using a smaller sized one rather than a larger one for use as a boot drive. Not sure the tech is mature enough, or if its even worth the configuration headaches, for the capability. Nice idea in principle, but I am never an early adopter of such things.

As for the Quick Sync, I am not sure I really need it.

Seems like an interesting chipset, but perhaps not worth the price premium. I know ASRock has a $130 price point Z68, but its feature set in terms of headers and connectors is somewhat limited.

I may just stick with the P67 route. Thoughts?

 

[Zap]

SSD caching basically turns a small SSD into a huge cache for your HDD. It is proven that it speeds up HDD performance. It may not be as good as just having an SSD instead of a HDD, but it can save some money. The great thing about it is that you can easily add it to an existing HDD setup. This means you can build your system with a HDD, and then in the future when funds allow or there's a hot deal, you can add the SSD cache to your existing Windows install.

The SSD caching can work with any volume from 20-64GB. You can also partition the SSD so it uses part of it as cache and the rest as a normal drive letter, so there's some flexibility. You would preferably want to use a drive which has decent write speeds, for instance the new Intel 20GB that is made specifically for SSD caching, or a small Sandforce based drive.

The other thing with Z68 is that if you ever are in a situation where you are without a graphics card (say, if you had to RMA it or you sold it in anticipation for an upgrade) then you won't be without a computer to use.

 

[dac7nco]

There are a lot more P67 boards to choose from. If you don't need Quicksync, get a P67 board. SSD caching is a nice idea, but IMO hybrid storage has no place on the desktop, especially with a 64GB limit. I have a Tylersburg rig I use for video, but if Quicksync gets more application support I will ditch it in a heartbeat. Quicksync is the selling point of Z68, not SSD caching, and to me it's a pretty great selling point.

Daimon

Edit: I'd definitely take an ASRock P67/Z68 board over all but The ASUS P67WS.