Hey all,
I've been pouring through these forums as I ready myself for a new computer for video editing -- thanks to everyone who has been contributing.
But I've been struck by the seemingly wide gap between what many here recommend (Gary/Videoguys, Scott/ADK, Harm/Master of the Universe, etc.), and the professional-level workstations offered by the likes of Dell and HP.
Based on the suggestions here, none of those machines are worth even considering -- the new Xeon processors they offer are ostensibly not as good at the i7 3930 processors that were out last year and the graphics cards they offer (e.g., Quadro) are way overpriced, and perform worse than gamer cards (e.g., GTX). And despite the apparent difference in quality, the options suggested here aren't offered at all on any Dell or HP machine I can find.
But given the reportedly close relationship between HP, Adobe, and nVidia, one would think that the workstations offered would be pretty well optimized.
So what gives? Are these companies and their engineers really so in the dark they can't figure out how to create fast systems to offer to professionals? Are they just trying to gouge the consumers by offereing slower machines? Or are the real-world differences between the machines suggested here and, say, the HP Z420, just not that dramatic to someone who isn't running benchmark tests and trying to squeeze every drop of power/speed from their machine?
Thanks!
Martin
