What's the Best CPU/System for video editing/encoding?

[Flyermax2k3]

Just curious here... I'm going to get a new computer in a couple weeks and I was wondering what the best CPU out for video encoding and editing would be. System may double as a server for a website, and a workstation for editing animation. Need something with serious CPU and video power. I want to go the Athlon 64 route but I'm not sure how well is stacks up to the P4 in video editing/encoding. I want to get a dual or quad CPU Opteron system but am not sure if I will, depending on the costs.
Should I get a professional-type video card (Nvidia Quadro or ATI Fire GL or something else altogether?) or should I just get an ATI Radeon 9800 AIW Pro?
Of course I will be gaming and programming and things like this on the system, but pretty much no matter what I buy is going to be more than enough to run any game or compile any source code in the blink of an eye.
Any idea how much a top-end system like this might cost to build myself? What if the only thing I had to buy for this system was a PSU, Mobo, CPU(s), RAM, and video card and everything else from my current system would be kept and the rest sold off to balance out the cost? Any guesstimates on prices would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance!

 

[myocardia]

With single processor systems, the P4C rules when it comes to video. Espcecially if the software is optimized for HT, which most video software these days seem to be. The Athlon64's regained alot of the difference between a P4 and an Athlon XP, but they still aren't as fast as the P4's. Now, they completely rule in gaming. If gaming is your primary focus, look no further than an A64. A fast P4C, a good motherboard, and a gigabyte of PC3200 memory will run you less than $500. An Athlon64 system is comparably priced. Now, a dual, or quad-Opteron system would blow both of them away, but at 3 to 4 times the price.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: myocardia
With single processor systems, the P4C rules when it comes to video. Espcecially if the software is optimized for HT, which most video software these days seem to be. The Athlon64's regained alot of the difference between a P4 and an Athlon XP, but they still aren't as fast as the P4's. Now, they completely rule in gaming. If gaming is your primary focus, look no further than an A64. A fast P4C, a good motherboard, and a gigabyte of PC3200 memory will run you less than $500. An Athlon64 system is comparably priced. Now, a dual, or quad-Opteron system would blow both of them away, but at 3 to 4 times the price.

Price isn't too much of a concern. I will be spending at least a couple grand for just the components I listed. Think I could get a dual Opteron system together for 2 grand? I can go higher, if necessary, but don't want to spend like 5 grand unless I have to.
Thanks!

 

[myocardia]

Yes, you can put together a dual-Opteron rig, with two of the fastest Opterons available, as long as you only want to put 1 gig of ram in it. The Opterons all require registered ram, which is alot more expensive than "normal" non-ECC ram. BTW, if you aren't going to be doing CAD, a 9800 Pro is all the video card you will need.

 

[Soulkeeper]

a gf2 could do cad, i think the P4 would probably be your best bet with HT and all
unless you want to spend a lot more

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Thanks for the responses guys. So, basically here's what I've gathered: for a dual CPU system undoubtedly an Opteron will be the fastest thing I can buy, but for a single CPU system I would be better off going with a P4 over an Athlon 64/FX?

 

[PetNorth]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Thanks for the responses guys. So, basically here's what I've gathered: for a dual CPU system undoubtedly an Opteron will be the fastest thing I can buy, but for a single CPU system I would be better off going with a P4 over an Athlon 64/FX?

For a dual system, yes, undoubtedly a Dual Opteron. Here you have some examples of video encoding with dual machines (Opteron 248, Opteron 246, Xeon 3.2, Athlon MP 2800+):

http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=487&pid=1806

http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=487&pid=1807

As you can see, Opteron basically smokes Xeon in video encoding.


And for a single CPU system, it depends of the program/codec you use. Some is better P4C; Some is better A64/FX. Here you have a video editing roundup:

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/intelamdcpuroundupvideo/index.html

So, in this Digit-Life roundup, P4 is better in three: VirtualDubMod/DivX; Mainconcept MPEG2 encoding and Cinema Craft MPEG2 encoding.

A64/FX is better in four: VirtualDubMod/XviD; VirtualDubMod/WMV9 VCM; Mainconcept MPEG1 encoding; and Canopus ProCoder MPEG2 encoding.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: PetNorth

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Thanks for the responses guys. So, basically here's what I've gathered: for a dual CPU system undoubtedly an Opteron will be the fastest thing I can buy, but for a single CPU system I would be better off going with a P4 over an Athlon 64/FX?

For a dual system, yes, undoubtedly a Dual Opteron. Here you have some examples of video encoding with dual machines (Opteron 248, Opteron 246, Xeon 3.2, Athlon MP 2800+):

http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=487&pid=1806

http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=487&pid=1807

As you can see, Opteron basically smokes Xeon in video encoding.


And for a single CPU system, it depends of the program/codec you use. Some is better P4C; Some is better A64/FX. Here you have a video editing roundup:

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/intelamdcpuroundupvideo/index.html

So, in this Digit-Life roundup, P4 is better in three: VirtualDubMod/DivX; Mainconcept MPEG2 encoding and Cinema Craft MPEG2 encoding.

A64/FX is better in four: VirtualDubMod/XviD; VirtualDubMod/WMV9 VCM; Mainconcept MPEG1 encoding; and Canopus ProCoder MPEG2 encoding.

Thanks for the links! That's *exactly* what I was looking for!

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Argh! Now I don't know what to do... If I go dual CPU I'll definitely go Opteron, but if I stay single CPU I'm not sure which to get... If I get a P4 should I go Northwoood or Prescott? No matter what CPU(s) I get I'll be overclocking, without a doubt. I want 64 bit support but it's hard to pass up on the P4's video encoding power + HT is always nice for multi-tasking. Also, if I get a P4 I won't have to buy new RAM like I would with the Opteron or A64/FX.
I'm so confused...

 

[aka1nas]

At this point prescott is not worth any price premium over northwood as it performs worse in many applications and the few it does better in are not much better. It also runs pretty hot. This will probably change in the upcoming months, but for now go northwood if you want to do a P4.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: aka1nas
At this point prescott is not worth any price premium over northwood as it performs worse in many applications and the few it does better in are not much better. It also runs pretty hot. This will probably change in the upcoming months, but for now go northwood if you want to do a P4.

Thanks! If I do go single-cpu I'm leaning strongly towards a Northwood 3.2 because of the awesome price/performance ratio compared to say an Athlon 64 FX 51 which is probably the only other CPU I'd consider in a single-CPU system.

 

[PetNorth]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: aka1nas
At this point prescott is not worth any price premium over northwood as it performs worse in many applications and the few it does better in are not much better. It also runs pretty hot. This will probably change in the upcoming months, but for now go northwood if you want to do a P4.

Thanks! If I do go single-cpu I'm leaning strongly towards a Northwood 3.2 because of the awesome price/performance ratio compared to say an Athlon 64 FX 51 which is probably the only other CPU I'd consider in a single-CPU system.

Keep in mind that in Digit-Life video encoding roundup isn't tested A64 3400+ that performs very similar to FX-51. So, as I said above, in single cpu, it depends of the program/codec you use to choose P4 or A64. This, today.

Of course, for the future, only A64 will give you 64bits capabilities, and in video encoding 64bits will have a big impact.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: PetNorth

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: aka1nas
At this point prescott is not worth any price premium over northwood as it performs worse in many applications and the few it does better in are not much better. It also runs pretty hot. This will probably change in the upcoming months, but for now go northwood if you want to do a P4.

Thanks! If I do go single-cpu I'm leaning strongly towards a Northwood 3.2 because of the awesome price/performance ratio compared to say an Athlon 64 FX 51 which is probably the only other CPU I'd consider in a single-CPU system.

Keep in mind that in Digit-Life video encoding roundup isn't tested A64 3400+ that performs very similar to FX-51. So, as I said above, in single cpu, it depends of the program/codec you use to choose P4 or A64. This, today.

Of course, for the future, only A64 will give you 64bits capabilities, and in video encoding 64bits will have a big impact.

I do want 64-bit capability, but there's still not enough support for it to me justify getting a 64-bit cpu based on that alone. I just look at it as an added bonus and a bit of insurance for the future.

 

[ludwigvan968]

I have exprience running some dual 246 chips, 3gig ram and the top of the line nvidia cards. These systems are really fast and for running programs like combustion and 3D studio max it does make a huge difference. Something else to think about is whether the programs you will be using will let you render farm. Currentlly the network I am working on we have about 17 of these workstations, so I use all of them to render at once or just use one, however this is just with programs that support render farming, so again, look at what the software you are going to be using requires. Also I recommend looking into a mirrored/stripped (or both) RAID because it always sucks to loose gigs of logged video. Really plan out your system. Another thing to think about is whether you are going to be doing online HD editing or just DV, if just DV things are a little more cookie cutter, however if you want HD capabilities you will have to do some major research to figure out what capture system you want to use to i/o your video. You will also have to look into what video monitors you will be using or are you going to edit off your monitor? If you are going to edit off your monitor you should look into getting a monitor with proper color correction, such as a Lacie or something similar (barco??). Well these are just some ramblings, but I hope it helps.

 

[Duvie]

If I had funs like that I would look at a true dual proessor setup like the opterons...price wise they are better then Xeons whereas in the desktop arena the A64's and FX are comparable to the p4cs.....

One thing to note is that xeons with HT in some apps will be seen as 2 physical cpus but 4 logical cpus...In apps like TMPGenc that is severely optimized for HT with an average of 22% speed increase I imagine could be very huge....I would assume if apps are HT optimized could really take advantage of this.....


Do the research....Like I said I think the opterons are better price for performance in this range.....Spend the extra money on better monitors, vid card with dual dvi capability....

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Duvie
If I had funs like that I would look at a true dual proessor setup like the opterons...price wise they are better then Xeons whereas in the desktop arena the A64's and FX are comparable to the p4cs.....

One thing to note is that xeons with HT in some apps will be seen as 2 physical cpus but 4 logical cpus...In apps like TMPGenc that is severely optimized for HT with an average of 22% speed increase I imagine could be very huge....I would assume if apps are HT optimized could really take advantage of this.....


Do the research....Like I said I think the opterons are better price for performance in this range.....Spend the extra money on better monitors, vid card with dual dvi capability....

Here are the programs I will be using on my system:
TMPGEnc
Mpeg Encoder
DVD Author
DVD Shrink
Lame
Photoshop
3d Studio Max
Visual Studio 6/Visual Studio .Net
Seti @ Home
A few games, generic office-type apps/web surfing, etc.

Based on those programs, what system would everyone recommend?

 

[Duvie]

Single CPU system = p4c 3.2ghz (no prescotts) also no P4ee chips as it has been discussed that the l3 cache will have little effect on these type of applications

The HT will work great in SETI...HT is optimized in TMPGenc, DVDshrink (deep analysis portion),3dstudio, Photoshop that I am for sure about...I haven't run the other apps lately to say what version does or if it does at all...


Dual cpu = dual opterons 244's or greater....Will do very well in seti and most of the programs...Again which apps are truly multithreaded may only be half of them or the ones I listed....

 

[lookin4dlz]

Well, the Prescott has now overtaken the Northwood in this arena!

Intel 3.2E vs. 3.2EE vs. 3.2C: Comparing Baseline Performance

The areas that most surprised us were Media Encoding and Workstation Performance. We expected P4EE to lead in these benchmarks, but instead, Prescott was the top performer.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: lookin4dlz
Well, the Prescott has now overtaken the Northwood in this arena!

Intel 3.2E vs. 3.2EE vs. 3.2C: Comparing Baseline Performance

The areas that most surprised us were Media Encoding and Workstation Performance. We expected P4EE to lead in these benchmarks, but instead, Prescott was the top performer.

Interesting stuff there... Too bad there was only one test of media encoding performance

That doesn't exactly prove Prescott is a media encoding powerhouse

 

[lookin4dlz]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Interesting stuff there... Too bad there was only one test of media encoding performance

That doesn't exactly prove Prescott is a media encoding powerhouse

You're right, but it's pointing in the right direction.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: lookin4dlz

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Interesting stuff there... Too bad there was only one test of media encoding performance

That doesn't exactly prove Prescott is a media encoding powerhouse

You're right, but it's pointing in the right direction.

One benchmark though? I dunno... I'd have to see quite a few more benchmarks than *one* to be convinced. Every review of the Prescott I've seen so far points towards it being slower at the same clockspeed than Northwood in *everything*. Not only that, but even if Prescott is better at media encoding than Northwood, most Prescotts still don't o/c as high as their Northwood counterparts. I'm sure this will change as yields on the .09 process get better, but for the next few months perhaps the Northwood will still be the P4 to buy if you ask me.
Anyway, thanks for the link.

 

[hytek369]

a pair a xeons is the way to go, although i love opterons

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: hytek369
a pair a xeons is the way to go, although i love opterons

Did you see then benches above ? The Opteron 246 beats the 3.2 Xenons in all but one test, and the 248 beats them in ALL tests (unless I missed one) The Opterons smoke the Xenons......

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: hytek369
a pair a xeons is the way to go, although i love opterons

Did you see then benches above ? The Opteron 246 beats the 3.2 Xenons in all but one test, and the 248 beats them in ALL tests (unless I missed one) The Opterons smoke the Xenons......

I've seen reviews that have shown the complete opposite so it goes both ways. I guess it just depends on who your source is. I wish I could get a definitive answer from someone who actually uses a s dual Xeon/dual Opteron system... If anybody knows someone that is and is willing to run a few benchies, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

 

[ntrights]

I would wait for the Prescott D0 Revision before making up my mind..