Skip navigation
clearance15perc
Currently Being Moderated

Spec workstation for CS 6 video editing

May 25, 2012 5:51 PM

Tags: #after #effects #premiere_pro #cs6 #mac_to_pc #specs #workstation #after_effects_cs6 #premiere_cs6

Hello Adobe forum!

 

I'm switching from Mac to PC and need help picking out my workstation. I plan on doing heavy editing on Premiere Pro (6) as well as a healthy amount of work in After effects (6), and my budget hovers around $3000. I will not be doing any assembling myself (gotta go with a turnkey/custom company).

 

Overall, are these general specs good enough for my needs? Is there anything I need to upgrade? What am I missing?

 

CPU: Intel® Core™ i7-3930K Six-Core 3.20 GHz

Liquid Cooling Kit 360MM w/ Triple Fan

Motherboard: (SLI/CrossFireX) ASUS P9X79 Intel X79 Chipset

Memory: 32GB (4GBx8) DDR3/1333MHz Quad Channel Memory

Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 1.2GB

Power Supply: 1,000 Watts

OS/Boot Hard Drive: 120GB Corsair Force GT Series SATA-III 6.0 Gb/s SSD

Other Hard Drives: 4x 1TB SATA-III 6.0Gb/s 32MB Cache 7200RPM HDD (Raid 01)

Optical Drive: Blu-Ray Rewriter

LCD Monitor: 2x 24" Widescreen 1920x1080 ASUS VS247H-P LCD

 

Thanks so much for your help!

 

-J

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 6:24 PM   in reply to clearance15perc

    If you really want a great video editing computer assembled, tested and fully supported go to ADK and get a total turnkey real Adobe NLE computer, talk to Eric or Scott.   There are holes in your specs

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 7:12 PM   in reply to clearance15perc

    As Bill stated, there are a few holes in the specs of your planned editing PC. Especially in the disk configuration: A RAID 01 is a pair of striped disks that are mirrored to another striped pair. This gives you the speed of a two-disk aid0 but with four disks and the total capacity of only two disks. So, you'd end up with a four-disk setup with only 2TB total capacity.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 8:06 PM   in reply to RjL190365

    If you are doing this heavy editing professionally, I suggest an external raid array of at least 8TB configured to raid 5. Anyone working for in the biz  will tell you when you are working on client supervised projects with deadlines, the insurance raid 5 gives you is the way to go for fast reliable restoration of media files. If you are just doing stuff for family and friends then raid 0 is fine.

     

    And if you are considering getting a turnkey system, you might also want to shop around and look into Puget Systems. Another solid contender.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 8:50 PM   in reply to Bill Gehrke

    I'm curious what other 'holes' are here besides the disk setup?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 10:25 PM   in reply to db2012_02

    The other major hole is that the OP did not specify a case. After all, it is not recommended to run a PC with no tower case whatsoever. And some cases are too cramped on the inside to accommodate all of the components in your planned build (for example, the case that the builder provides might be too cramped from front to rear to even fit a GTX 570 unless two or more hard drives are completely removed from the system). Furthermore, some cases have very poor airflow, causing the internal components of the PC to run significantly hotter than they should.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 2:55 AM   in reply to clearance15perc

    Actually, RAID 10 has basically the same effect as RAID 01. Only this time, each pair of drives are mirrored first, then the two mirrored pairs are striped together. So, you'll still get the usable capacity from only two disks either way.

     

    If RAID 01 is called a "mirror of striped arrays", then RAID 10 is a "stripe of mirrored arrays".

     

    In other words, any RAID with a "1" in it will automatically steal half of your disks in capacity, so that you'd get only 2TB total usable capacity out of four 1TB disks.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 11:37 PM   in reply to lasvideo

    If you are doing this heavy editing professionally, I suggest an external raid array of at least 8TB configured to raid 5. Anyone working for in the biz  will tell you when you are working on client supervised projects with deadlines, the insurance raid 5 gives you is the way to go for fast reliable restoration of media files. If you are just doing stuff for family and friends then raid 0 is fine.

     

    And if you are considering getting a turnkey system, you might also want to shop around and look into Puget Systems. Another solid contender.

     

    External raid arrays are very slow in comparison to internal PCIe arrays, unless you spend huge amounts of $$$, because affordable external arrays lack the backbone and connect over a single eSATA connection or worse. For a comparison and some background, read Adobe Forums: Raid Performance and Rebuild Issues but also read the articles linked to in that thread.

     

    As to Puget, they may have better prices, but do they have the expertise with Adobe CS6 and video editing in general that ADK has and do they have the same level of service? I doubt that.

     

    I do agree the best approach is to use a dedicated raid controller and a parity raid (better 3 than 5), but then internally.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 11:45 PM   in reply to clearance15perc

    Liquid Cooling Kit 360MM w/ Triple Fan

     

    Why? Your choice of memory indicates that you are not an extreme overclocker, so why the hassle and cost of a liquid cooling set with a three fan radiator, that generates the same amount of noise as three fans and does not cool better than a good third party cooler, all on air.

     

    Maybe this article will give you some ideas: PPBM6 Planning a new system

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 12:14 AM   in reply to clearance15perc

    I will still be able to re-configure my disks to RAID 10 simply enough, correct?

     

    With only four disks (plus System disk), you're better off not using RAID at all.  Split up the load, like this:

     

    C: Windows & Programs

    D: Projects

    E: Scratch

    F: Media

    G: Exports

     

    (But DO get an external for Media backup if you're not using a tape-based camera.)

     

    Other than that, it's a pretty kick-*** system, dude!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 7:12 AM   in reply to Jim Simon

    Jim,

     

    I generally agree - if the disks are of a very modern (e.g. single 1TB platter) design. However, some older-design 1TB hard disks are too slow (sequential-speed-wise) to handle HD video material, especially since nearly all NLEs (including Premiere) decompress video on the fly during editing (and then holds that decompressed content in the media cache). The slow disks can make a high-end i7 system perform nearly as slowly as a pedestrian i5 quad-core system overall.

     

    If those 1TB disks are of such an older design (or are just plain slow in sequential performance in non-RAID setups), the OP may want to configure the disks as two aid0 (RAID 0) volumes or one 2-disk aid0 volume (to be used primarily by the media cache files) plus two separate non-RAID volumes. That way, the OP will have all 4TB available as opposed to the OP's originally planned setup of four 1TB drives configured as either RAID 01 or RAID 10 (which is far from ideal since all four 1TB drives combined are treated together as one single 2TB disk for all practical purposes).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 6:21 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Harm, I wouldn't call 800MB/sec. slow. It seems quite adequate for Red and Epic as well as prosumer media.Granted I did pay $5,000 for it.

     

    As to Puget, their level of service is exemplary. They are young, motivated and smart.

     

    Right now ADK is learning about CS6 PrP and AE along with the rest of us. As much as I respect and admire Eric, I cant in good conscience do business with Scott. It is unfortunate, but thats life. I dont care for his combative style with customers.

     

    I never needed Apple when I had issues with my FCP installation. I will be fine with my PC as well. A majority of us editors find the answers we need through forums like this and professional contacts (i.e. Adobe due to my beta testing relationship).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 7:16 AM   in reply to lasvideo

    Harm, I wouldn't call 800MB/sec. slow. It seems quite adequate for Red and Epic as well as prosumer media.Granted I did pay $5,000 for it.

     

    That is what I meant with huge amounts of $$$.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 8:17 AM   in reply to clearance15perc

    Another couple of holes!

     

    If I were spending money for a new setup I would go for the latest generation Graphics Card.  The GTX 670 uses less power (170 watts vs 219 watts maximum) therefore it will be less noisy, it is higher performance in MPE than the GTX 570, it has more video memory (2 GB vs. 1.2 GB) and it is the new faster PCIe v 3.0 interface.  Of course it does cost more but it will have a much longer lifetime. 

     

    Also on your motherboard "Motherboard: (SLI/CrossFireX) ASUS P9X79 Intel X79 Chipset".  I hope you are not specifing that motherboard for the (SLI/CrossfireX) capability as Premiere Pro does not operate with that mode.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 11:16 AM   in reply to RjL190365

    I generally agree - if the disks are of a very modern

     

    Given that it's a new system, chances are the disks will be fairly modern.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 2:08 PM   in reply to clearance15perc

    There is no advantage or no known disadvantage to using a card that is not on the list as long as it is a CUDA card and has 1GB or more video memory  I have the following cards and tested all. 

    GPU's.jpg

    You are new to the forum so you have not seen many conversations here about using various cards.  All you have to do to use in Premiere, for MPE hardware acceleration, any CUDA card not on Adobe's "certified" list is to add one simple line to the Adobe file "cuda_supported_cards.txt"  Check out the "hack" in these forums.

     

    On your motherboard that one will work fine, just do not install a secord GPU card and hook it up as SLI.  (you can install a second card just not in SLI mode).  What video media do you plan on handling?

     

    You might want to see Harm and my (currently) 882 PPBM5 benchmark results/configurations for ideas of what is good or not so good in hardware configurations.

     

    Message was edited by: Bill Gehrke

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 2:46 PM   in reply to clearance15perc

    There have been a couple users reporting that the 680 works just fine with the hack.

     

    The 690 might be overkill.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2012 3:34 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    I agree with Jim, the 690 is a dual GPU card and you could run into problems.  No dual GPU cards have ever been certified by Adobe.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2012 8:10 AM   in reply to lasvideo

    Anyone who says they are doing the industry (or this forum) a service by shredding other extremely qualified voices, thereby proclaiming themselves the "definitive experts" , is simply something to laugh at.

     

    You can always buy something such as a Z800 which may be discounted with the new Z820's coming , and bypass the absurd ego of system builders who claim everyone else is clueless if you dont fall into line with their "science". 

     

    Once funds become available, upgrade the Z800 with more RAM, etc..make it what you want over time.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2012 9:11 AM   in reply to FloridaG

    Yeah sure,

     

    Once funds become available, upgrade the Z800 with more RAM, etc..make it what you want over time.

     

    Upgrade to 96 GB memory at HP prices on a dual Xeon X5660 system, and you will at best end up with a system that is way slower than an old i7-920 @ 3.7 GHz and the HP is many times more expensive. The best Z800 with 96 GB ranks only # 59 in the Benchmark Results. All the HP Z800's are at the bottom of the BFTB rankings.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2012 12:21 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Harm, you got me curious!  96 GB of ECC RAM for the Z800  from HP is a measlely $6,920 upgrade.  Must be pocket change for DanielsHP-Z800-Memory.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2012 3:14 PM   in reply to FloridaG

    Daniels, this forum attracts a wide range of folks. From professional editors to hobbyists to computer builders to students. And among those there are folks that see themselves as experts, and many are. The folks I pay attention to are the wants that are here to share information in a respectfull way.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2012 5:40 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Harm Millaard wrote:

     

    Upgrade to 96 GB memory at HP prices on a dual Xeon X5660 system, and you will at best end up with a system that is way slower than an old i7-920 @ 3.7 GHz and the HP is many times more expensive. The best Z800 with 96 GB ranks only # 59 in the Benchmark Results. All the HP Z800's are at the bottom of the BFTB rankings.

     

    I've worked professionally on several HP workstations and I can say they are generally very fast and reliable.  As much "bang for the buck" as a home system?  No, probably not.  But when you're in an edit suite that charges anywhere from $300 to $500 an hour you'll sacrifice a bit of speed for reliability.  That, and HP's tech support is pretty good (and will send someone to fix your PC on site). Not everyone is qualified to be their own IT guy.  As far as 96GB of HP ram goes, I doubt anyone in their right mind would invest in that.  64GB of Crucial could be had for substantially less.

     

    On the other hand, as someone who just built my own PC rig, I feel somewhat entitled to my "absurd ego"

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2012 5:43 PM   in reply to lasvideo

    I agree, that was the whole point I'm trying to make. There is plenty of good hardware out there, which is why its SOOO tiring to hear if you don't buy system X from "expert" X, that you are in immenent danger of a terrible experience. Bunk.

     

     

    Bill, who asked about adding 96GB RAM to a Z800? how would 96GB RAM help Premiere?, and why would you buy it from HP? 

     

    The HP boxes are solid, well built machines that can be run 24/7, ready to go.  And I promise if you don't buy an HP, some HP salesperson wont come around here telling you that what you did buy was inferior.

     

     

     

    I work in the industry for a living (and was a VAR in the early 2000's), on call 24/7. In that sense the priorities are as such:

    1. Is the system stable.

    2. With rare exception, can the computer work as fast as you can cut? Who cares about eeking out 10% more speed by a destructive overclock if the computer is only using 30-40% resources.

    3. Saving even a $1000/machine is useless if I am constantly having to deal with technical issues, missed deadlines (aka show didn't make it to air).

     

    So thats my job, make it all smooth enough and fast enough so that editors have storytelling tools that work as fast as they think. It doesn't take dual overclocked Xeon's with 96GB RAM to do this, especially with programs like PP which run amazing even on the pedestrian laptop I'm typing on right now, a vanilla HP ProBook 6550b i5/8GB.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2012 7:15 PM   in reply to clearance15perc

    clearance15perc wrote:

     

    So theoretically, would the GTX 670 and/or 690 work with this trick/hack?

     

    I'm working with entirely DSLRs, nothing 4k. 

     

    I'm running a GTX680 using the hack and so far it seems to run great. I was playing with some DSLR footage, looping it on the timeline as I added and tweaked multiple effects in full resolution, without any hiccups. There are a few issues with the card that are likely driver related which is to be expected from a brand new card (running brand new software), but overall it seems to be handling Mercury Playback swimmingly.  As an added bonus, the 680 was just cleared to work with After Effects and I can attest that it handles the new ray-tracing engine with ease.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2012 7:21 PM   in reply to clearance15perc

    Oh, and one other thing about the 680 vs 570 is that it can also run a triple monitor setup wheras the 500 series cards are limited to two.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 25, 2012 4:23 PM   in reply to Evil Edison

    "the 680 was just cleared to work with After Effects.."

    Where can this information be confirmed?  Does it work with ray tracing?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 25, 2012 4:37 PM   in reply to AudoWarp

    I can confirm it from personal use.  Definitely works with ray tracing.  As far as official confirmation, I think it was the last update where they introduced it.  It was in the notes.

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points