Hi Baz, Harm, and the other experts:
I almost finished all the wiring. (After that e-mail exchange with the ASUS MOBO support in my previous post, I called the phone support. They gave much better help than the 'Live Chat' service.)
Now, however, I have two - a bit more important - questions than the 3-pin fan vs. the 4-pin fan
.
1.I need (actually I want) four more SATA internal connectors(two for use now, and the other two to use later). I found a 'SATA II PCIe' expansion card at Fry's from SIIG with 2 internal SATA connectors for $39.99. The box also says that this card works with Windows 7 (among others). However, all the cards with four connectors that I have found so far say that they are 'RAID controllers'(e.g. Koutech IO-PSA421 PCI-X SATA II Controller Card for $49.99 at NewEgg). Can I use this (or other) 'RAID controller' cards just for extra SATA connectors (without using their RAID capabilities)? (I still would like to use the ICH10R Intel chip on my MOBO for RAID control) I assume that a RAID controller card for $300 - $400 or more is better than the ICH10R, but I do not need the RAID capability. Also, these 4x RAID cards do not mention Windows 7. Do I need one which explicitly states that it is certified for Windows 7?
2.Does an expansion card with four internal USBa female connectors exists? Interestingly, the Lian Li case has 4 front panel USBa female connectors and each of them ends in a male USBa connector inside the case (with quite thick cables). I have a 10-1 pin USB header free, but it takes only 2 USB connectors (AFAIK). So, an expansion card with two 10-1 pin USB headers (and converter cables from USBa to header connectors) would also solve my problem but I haven't found those items either. Is there a simpler solution (other than just not to use the front panel USB connectors
)?
I would appreciate any help.
Thanks,
Laci.
Hi Baz, Thanks for your reply. I will buy the Koutech card. Please, confirm: The Intel ICH10R south bridge is better than this card for RAID control but not better than an expensive (> $500) card. Also, my solution for Lian Li strange front USB connector arrangement is a simple card with one internal USB (there are many cards like this combined with external USB or other connectors) and an internal USB hub. Thanks again, Laci.
I have been doing a TON of research for several months (Harm has been a HUGE help) and I was really hoping to get some feedback on this system I am about to order. I will be using CS5 Premiere and After Effects, AVCHD video, no overclocking or RAID, and hope to take advantage of CUDA and Mercury playback engine…
(1)Intel Core i7-930 Bloomfield 2.8GHz LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Desktop Processor BX80601930 $284.99
(1) GIGABYTE GA-X58A-UD3R LGA 1366 Intel X58 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard $209.99
(1) GIGABYTE GV-N460OC-1GI GeForce GTX 460 (Fermi) 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card $219.99
(2) G.SKILL PI Series 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL7T-6GBPI $309.98
(1) CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX 750W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 Power Supply $109.99
(1) COOLER MASTER HAF 932 RC-932-KKN1-GP Black Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case $129.98
(1) Scythe SCMG-2100 Sleeve CPU Cooler $39.99
(3) SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive $224.97 (three separate discs for media, exports and proj files, and scratch/media/page file)
(1) Western Digital VelociRaptor WD3000HLFS 300GB
10000 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive $179.99 (OS and Programs…higher 10,000 RPM speed)
(1) ASUS VH242H Black 23.6" 5ms HDMI Full 1080P Widescreen LCD Monitor $189.99
(1) Rosewill RCR-AK-IM5002 USB2.0 75 in 1 internal Card Reader w/ 3 ports USB2.0 Hub / eSATA port / Extra silver face plate / SATA Power $21.99
Total $1,931.84
Thank you for any feedback whatsoever!
BVJ
Ben, I would strongly suggest going with 3 each 4 GB modules rather than your 6 each 2GB modules. Even if you have to get slightly less timing. It then allows you down stream to upgrade without removing any of the 2 GB modules. Take a look for instance at this NewEgg kit for instance. As matter of fact this 12 GB kit is less $50 expensive than what you have picked out.
If you can get into a Mircrocenter Store some place close to you you can get your i7-930 for $200 (plus local tax). It has to be picked up in the store to get that price.
Thanks Bill! Just in time - I was about to order this card. (Apparently, others are having similar problems
...) I never heard of the PCI-x standard. I could use two "ASUS U3S6 True USB 3.0 & True SATA 6Gbps PCIe x4 Expansion Cards" http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/675535-REG/ASUS_U3S6_U3S6_True_U SB_3_0.html(and they are SATA III and USB 3.0 cards, $23.00 each!). However, this would use up my two remaining PCIe slots.
I am still searching for an internal 4x PCIe SATA II (or SATA III) expansion card - in a reasonable price range. I do not expect it for 2 x $23.00, but certainly would like something under $200.... Any suggestion?
Have you heard of the "SYBA SY-PEX40008 PCI Express SATA II Controller Card" (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816124027)? My only concern is that it does not explicitly states Windows 7 as required OpSys. (Sent e-mail to support - they might even reply...) Also, NewEgg is out of it. Thanks again, Laci. P.S. I actually started assembling the computer about 10 days ago - still gathering experience with hardware.
Laci, Take a look at this one from Adaptec 1405.
Hi Bill, This is probably a very good card (although it got only 'two eggs' on NewEgg - but again, this is the average of two people's opinion
). I guess it is still a good card but it seems to me that it needs special connector cables. (It may come in the box?) At $150 it is not too expensive ($125 open box), but the SYBA (http://www.amazon.com/Syba-Express-Ports-Controller-SY-PEX40008/dp/B00 2R0DZWQ) is only ~$60, and (for me, superficially) looks good for the job (only for extra ports and not for RAID). What would be the shortcomings of this card? I really appreciate your help. This is basically the last item I am trying to decide on before I can start the even more exciting part (OpSys installation, fine tuning, etc.) So, I can go with your suggestion but I would like to know what those cables are in the product description, and also, that it is certified for Windows 7. I will try to contact the manufacturer tomorrow, but if you have the answer (and a few minutes) I would greatly appreciate your input (which would be more unbiased that the manufacturer's
). Thanks again, Laci.
I was interested in your potential list of computers and saw a big jump from $2100 to $8,000. I thought I might add another choice for around $4,200. Our computers are all Dell Alienware Aurora's. I never see much mention of them for video editing. We think they are a great low cost choice. That said, I am glad we are all different. So, no argument from me whatever you happen to prefer.
We are not, definitely not, experts in hardware or software. But we do have 4 relatively new computers all running CS5. So we have some benchmark data other people maybe can't produce simply because they don't have more than one computer.
All our editing is in Premier and is AVCHD. Plus we use After Effects quite a bit. So those two are the only programs of interest to us for comparisons.
All 4 computers are Dell Alienware Auroras. All purchased within the past 5 months. Please don't scold us because we have C:/ two drives raid 0 and D: one drive. We do all our work from D. I can't see where we are slowed down by disk speed for our computer intensive work. I may be proven wrong. We have had " 0 " issues with the four computers. We like them now. Time will tell. I liked my first wife at first also.
Three of the computers have the i7 920 processors and 12 mb of ram. None overclocked. Two of those have quadro 3800 cards and one has a 295.
I know all of this has been a little boring so far.
The fourth computer is new, which is why I am writing this post. This is our first day using it. It has a i7 980 3.3 ghz. We paid Dell to overclock this computer to 3.73 ghz. I am not smart enough to know if they did. The bios says 3.3 ghz. It makes me dizzy to try to understand voltage, etc. so maybe it is 3.7. I just don't know. This computer has 24 gb ram. Nvidia 460.
So our benchmark rendering:
Premier with Mercury playback enabled - 60 minuts vs. 17 minutes
without - 90 vs. 20
After Effects: 122 minutes vs. 76 minutes
On the Premier rendering we saw all 8 and 12 threads at near 100% and ram usage about the same at 8 gb for both computers. I learned in this forum from someone that the rendering is faster with Mercury PB. We all read on Adobe propaganda it helped our playback. But it is faster in render also. It does help speed. What a great surprise. What we don't know is how much the 460 card helped speed over the 3800. From the data it actually appears the 3800 aids in speed more than the Fermi 460. Interesting isn't it. I don't know what conclusion to draw.
The After Effects result is about what we guessed we would see for speed improvement. We did use 20gb of ram with the 980 processor.
That is about the limit of our scientific ability. Please don't get much more technical with us.
I am thankful for all the incredible information we glean here. You have saved us several times. I am only hoping to give a little back.
Good luck, all.
Devys,
Great to hear you are so satisfied with all your four systems. What would interest me is how those four systems fare on the PPBM5 Benchmark because that will show how your systems perform in comparison to others.
Please do the tests and e-mail the results to Bill as instructed and PM them to me as well.
I have been reading your forums for months now and they are all awsome. I work at a computer store so i have done a few bulids but i'm looking at getting away from mac for my next editing system. I would like to get your ideas on this set up. (I DO INTEND TO OVERCLOCK)
i am a little turn on the kind of memory so please help i will be getting this system this month. I do know the power suplly is a little low but i would upgrade when i add another video card.
again im not to sure on the memory the people i work with say the cas dosent really matter that much and they all say kingston.
it will be runnign win 7 pro 64 bit and adobe master coll.
building a gaming box or NLE system?
whats with the Xeon? no point to it, its the exact same as a 930. and its more money add to that you can buy a 950 for less $
whats with the rampage board? over priced for no benefit
liquid cooling? complete waste of money overclocking or not...
the OCZ SSD PCIe card again total waste. if you insist on an SSD for an OS
then get a Mushkin Callisto 120
Scott
ADK
xeon give more for oc or so i was told. i was looking at the 950 maybe i should just go with that. the board is one of the best raited boards for overclocking. the cooling i got it brand new for free so thats why. and is there any real gain from ssd besides money saved and trim?
I just invested money in a Callisto just to see if the newer generation of SSD's would help with our PPBM5 benchmark, I have several different boot disks and I am getting the exact same scores as I get with my old standby WD 150 GB Velociraptor. Thanks Scott, for the comment on the OCZ SSD card, I was wondering if it had any value.
Hey Bill,
if you recall the original posts i did of all the drive benchmakrs etc where i showed SSD/Raptor/regular Sata showed no gains
and also using a seperate temp file (pagefile) drive showed no gains with Sata/SSD/Raptor.
in other words SSD is rather pointless other than faster boot times, snappier windows experiance (semi) i have seen where it does help the temp files a tad but it may be more windows based than adobe based.
Scott
ADK
i do like my Callisto however :-)
Not questioning the results, but it does seem that an SSD should provide a performance advantage. I see non-Premiere related benchmarks indicating faster boot times and copy speeds. I wonder if these other general advantages SSD's provide to a system should be viewed as offsetting the lack of advantage directly related to Premiere Pro CS5 performance. Are they a worthwhile investment considering the general advantages? They are expensive, so I'm thinking it may be a "Money to burn" luxury at this time.
I also notice that on the PPBM5 results spreadsheet that the 980X's are right up there with the dual Xeon's. A dual Xeon-based editing system has to be MUCH more expensive than one based upon the 980X. I understand that with the Xeon, you can use ECC memory. My question is, are there any advantages to spending the money on a dual Xeon system besides the advantage of loading up on more memory? I remember several years ago, the Adobe roadshow team would do live demos on a Xeon-based system because they felt that it reduced the incidence of crashes during their presentations. Now with Win7 64, CS5 etc. are there still stability advantages to using a Xeon-based system?
BTW... Re - I would love to see a top-end Mac Pro using FInal Cut compared with one of the top performing PC's on the PPBM5 chart.
.
i have more numbers i have not posted on my site but i know Eric posted the ppmb #s like the 3.33GHz and 3.33GHz OCed to 4GHz Dual Xeons
also 2.66 OCed to i think it was 3.8GHz
anyway unless going up to the 2.9GHz and higher (or OCing) Dual Xeons are a complete waste.
the 970/980s beat them.
as far as SSDs in both the ppbm5 test and our tests there was little to no improvement.
yes faster boot and snappier windows experiance but little to nothing for Adobe.
as far as Apple and Final cut well its presently embarressing for Apple.
i would rather Eric commented.
Scott
ADK
Eric, at ADK, saved me probably $1-2K by talking me out of going with dual Xeons. With the Front Side Bus now history with today's current CPUs, I think the performance advantage to dual processors has greatly diminished, especially when taking the financial hit into account.
Scott Wrote:
as far as Apple and Final cut well its presently embarressing for Apple. i would rather Eric commented.
Eric, please let us know of any recent performance data related to a top-end Mac using Final Cut Pro vs a top performing 980x Premiere Pro CS5 based computer with a GTX 480, MPE turned on.
I had an Avid/ Final Cut video editor friend over my house the other day. I was helping him configure a new PC video editing system. I showed him the video DAVTechTable - Sneak Peek/Mercury Playback Engine. He sat there in disbelief. He never heard of The Mercury Playback Engine. He was considering a Mac Pro & Final Cut and considered a PC for video editing to be sort of an unfortunate compromise due to budget. The MPE video changed his thinking.
I'm just surprised that there aren't yet any top-end Mac/Final Cut Pro vs 980X PC PrPro CS5 (Mercury On) comparisons to be found anywhere.
Eric:
Are you able to do a side by side in your lab?
I believe that our PPBM5 benchmark could possibly be used to run two of the four tests (MPEG2-DVD and H.264 BR encoding) on a Mac. The only negative possibility here is if we might have used an video effect that is not available on the Mac.
The data gathering script of course would not work but I am assuming that on a Mac there is a similar file to the PC file "AMEEncodingLog.txt" which could tell us the time that these two tests take to perform.
The third of our four tests is a disk intensive test producing an AVI file which of course is not a native Mac format and therefore not a comparable entity.
The fourth test is Rendering the Timeline which produces 12 files with MPE Hardware Acceration or 88 files with Software MPE, here our VBS script searches for the first time and the last modified time. I am sure that someone could write a Java script or some Unix type script to get that information.
If anyone has access to a Mac it would be interesting to at least have partial data.
I have a Mac Pro Dual Xeon coming through the queue soon. The client bought Adobe and they also have Final Cut but I don't know if they are going to have us preinstall that. Either way I can test it with Adobe to compare. However to answer your question, Final Cut will not perform as well as Adobe since it's 32 Bit and Adobe is 64Bit now. Until that changes if at all anytime soon, there really is not a need to test the 2 for a comparison between Final Cut and Adobe. Add to this the multi-threading issues with OSX and Apple's Pro Res Codec in Final Cut and the performance is not even close. I will atleast be able to give you a comparison between platforms using Adobe. I will post them as soon as we get the Mac Pro and I get it up to test.
The other point to make on this is the Xeon has it's place depending on your workflow and material you deal with. If the editor works animation, generated material, or most of their work in AE or Fusion then the Xeon becomes the optimal solution. If the editor works with R3D material in 2K or higher then the Xeon is the optimal choice. If most of the work is video with other HD codecs then the 970 or 980 system is the better choice for the investment.
Eric
ADK
Just come across this staggeringly useful site having spent several days researching new PC for my CS5 Premium Pro. Meanwhile, I ended up with the idea of getting PC as below:
COOLERMASTER SILEO 500 QUIET MID TOWER CASE
Intel® Core™i7 Quad Core Processor i7-950 (3.06GHz) 4.8GTs/8MB Cache
ASUS® P6X58D-E: DDR3, USB 3.0, SATA 6.0GB/s, 3-Way SLI
12GB SAMSUNG DDR3 TRI-DDR3 1333MHz (3 x 4GB)
1280MB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX470 GDDR5 PCI EXPRESS - DirectX® 11
2 x 1TB SERIAL ATA 3-Gb/s HARD DRIVE WITH 16MB CACHE (7,200rpm
RAID 0 (STRIPED VOLUME - 2 x same size & model HDD / SSD
24x DUAL LAYER DVD WRITER ±R/±RW/RAM
INTERNAL 52 IN 1 CARD READER (XD, MS, CF, SD, etc) + 1 x USB 2.0 PORT
CORSAIR 750W PSU (TX750) 80+ ULTRA QUIET
TITAN FENRIR EXTREME DIRECT TOUCH COPPER CPU COOLER
Sound Blaster® X-Fi™ Xtreme Audio
ONBOARD 10/100/1000 GIGABIT LAN PORT
6 x USB 2.0 PORTS @ BACK PANEL (MIN 2 FRONT PORTS)
I’d be most grateful for your views – including the need for the Sound Blaster® X-Fi™ Xtreme Audio (just use on board) , whether 2x1TB WD CAVIAR BLACK WD1002FAEX would be better (some doubt on this group over Raid use) and a third Disc for OS..... have plenty of external discs for Archiving and Backup......Also running Win 7 64.
Regards
Barry
Just come across this staggeringly useful site having spent several days researching new PC for my CS5 Premium Pro. Meanwhile, I ended up with the idea of getting PC as below:
COOLERMASTER SILEO 500 QUIET MID TOWER CASE
Intel® Core™i7 Quad Core Processor i7-950 (3.06GHz) 4.8GTs/8MB Cache
ASUS® P6X58D-E: DDR3, USB 3.0, SATA 6.0GB/s, 3-Way SLI
12GB SAMSUNG DDR3 TRI-DDR3 1333MHz (3 x 4GB)
1280MB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX470 GDDR5 PCI EXPRESS - DirectX® 11
2 x 1TB SERIAL ATA 3-Gb/s HARD DRIVE WITH 16MB CACHE (7,200rpm
RAID 0 (STRIPED VOLUME - 2 x same size & model HDD / SSD
24x DUAL LAYER DVD WRITER ±R/±RW/RAM
INTERNAL 52 IN 1 CARD READER (XD, MS, CF, SD, etc) + 1 x USB 2.0 PORT
CORSAIR 750W PSU (TX750) 80+ ULTRA QUIET
TITAN FENRIR EXTREME DIRECT TOUCH COPPER CPU COOLER
Sound Blaster® X-Fi™ Xtreme Audio
ONBOARD 10/100/1000 GIGABIT LAN PORT
6 x USB 2.0 PORTS @ BACK PANEL (MIN 2 FRONT PORTS)
I’d be most grateful for your views – including the need for the Sound Blaster® X-Fi™ Xtreme Audio (just use on board) , whether 2x1TB WD CAVIAR BLACK WD1002FAEX would be better (some doubt on this group over Raid use) and a third Disc for OS..... have plenty of external discs for Archiving and Backup......Also running Win 7 64.
Regards
Barry
Eric Wrote:
"However to answer your question, Final Cut will not perform as well as Adobe since it's 32 Bit and Adobe is 64Bit now. Until that changes if at all anytime soon, there really is not a need to test the 2 for a comparison between Final Cut and Adobe. Add to this the multi-threading issues with OSX and Apple's Pro Res Codec in Final Cut and the performance is not even close."
Related to the Mac Pro, I personally like the design and attention to detail. The Mac Pro's are kind of a "Swiss Army Knife" configuration though. In other words, they are suitable as a multi-purpose computer. E.G. servers, video editing, 3d, etc. I think Apple should build upon the Mac Pro line and offer separate models optimized for performance within the different categories.
Comparing the performance of Final Cut on a top end Mac Pro to Premiere CS5 on a 980X based PC system with a GTX 480, Mercury Playback Engine on, will accomplish two things in my opinion:
1.) Provide solid data to those in the market for a high end video editing system. In other words would the Mac vs PC benchmarks show that a $12,000 Mac Pro is 2x slower in common video editing tasks than a 980x based PC costing $4,000?
2.) As a performance comparison becomes widely circulated, Apple may decide that it's time to make some needed changes. Competition is good.
North America
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Asia Pacific