Many thanks indeed for the help. Firstly, to answer Jim, my machine is an HP Workstation XW4100 Pentium4 2800 NVIDIA Quadro NVS with AGP8X.
I've been out all day, so I started an mpeg-2 render of 45 minutes-worth of HDV footage when I left the house this morning, and on returning just now, 11 hours later, the render was only 13% through and the remaining time estimate was 70 hours! Clearly I have a serious brick wall to work through here, so I'm very grateful for your help.
I've run the benchmark test and posted the results as instructed.
My system does not have Mercury Playback Engine GPU Acceleration, so I've followed the instructions to that effect.
I look forward with gratitude to your observations.
I have received your submission. It has been added and you are currently at rank # 853, around 25 times slower than a fast PC.
You can find your entry easily by clicking on the Date column twice to sort decendingly and then your entry will be at the top.
One project is chroma keying and general cleaning up on a 107-minute .mp4 file, which is requiring an average of approximately 15 minutes render time per minute of video (as opposed to my experience of between one and three minutes per minute with DV footage).
15 minutes render time per minute of footage translates to about 35-40 seconds per minute on a fast PC and that does not sound unreasonable to me. The problem you have is an outdated CPU and no CUDA enabled card, limited memory in an odd configuration (10 GB) and limited disk setup. It may be further complicated by a lack of tuning, not removing MSN, Sidebar, Games and other Windows crap, by not turning off Indexing and Compression on all you disks, by not setting Services that are not needed to manual, by letting processes like mDNSResponder and other Apple crap and JAVA Updater run in the background, etc.
First of all continued thanks for the support.
I must confess to being somewhat shocked and dismayed to read that my machine is rated as slow as that. 25 x sounds extreme.
It was actually following a thread discussion with your good self, Harm, that I purchased my that system three years ago, specifically for video editing. Has technology really moved on so much? I guess that's a stupid question; three years is a long time!
One of the HDV projects that I'm having trouble with I've managed to abandon, but the second, a 90-minute 3-camera multicam edit, I'm committed to finishing, so I take the liberty of asking one more question, please: Is there anything I can do to improve the performance of my current machine sufficiently to allow me to render HDV faster, or is my only realistic option to replace the machine? And if the latter, do you have any recommendations (at the lower end of the price spectrum, please!). Incidentally, I'm in the UK, should that make any difference.
My system is over two years old and it used to be in the top performers range. It has dropped down to rank # 26 now. But still one of the top performing 4 cores around.
Has technology really moved on so much? I guess that's a stupid question; three years is a long time!
Yes, it has.
Being in the UK makes your life miserable. Sorry to say but the UK prices for components are extravagant. Luckily there is Internet and you can order from anywhere in the world to get better prices. I got a camera recently that went for € 7,500+ in the UK and I got it from New Zealand (part of the Commonwealth) for less than € 4,500.
Still, there may be things you can do to extend the life of your system, without having to buy a new system. Consider these tuning tips which also apply to Win7: Adobe Forums: Guide for installing and tuning a Vista...
That p4 was realeased sometime around 2004-2005 most likely. So it's actually a 7-8 year old CPU. So for computer parts a 7 year old part is basically going to be totally big pain to have to use. It is also a single core CPU. Now days intel CPU's are quad-cores and are also clocked higher than 2.8Ghz. The workstation you listed is also a 32-bit workstation so it doesn't take advantage of cs5 (or a higher versions) 64-bit abilites. It also means you can't have more than 4Gb of RAM. (actually like 3Gb though)
The mobo on that workstation also doesn't have 3 Gbps or 6 Gbps sata connections which is rather limiting.
Here is a benchmark that will show you that a i7-2600k cpu is almost 10 times faster than your current CPU in almost every benchmark.
My recommendation would be to do a totally new edit system. There just simply isn't any way it would make since to keep trying to upgrade your current one. What would your budget be if you wanted to do a new build? IMO if it's a tight budget then you should go with a Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge CPU, but if it's big then you'll go with a Sandy Bridge-E, or a Xeon setup.
Thanks guys. Now that you put this into perspective I can certainly see that .. how can I put this? .... basically I'm trying to find the Higgs boson with a vacuum cleaner tube!! I can see that I clearly need to replace my PC.
I'm first and foremost a singer/performer in musical theatre. Editing is a sideline/hobby job from me and therefore I can't justify huge expense on an editing computer. Money is tight at the moment, however I do see that prices have come down considerably since I bought my dinosaur! If I could run to around £700 ($1,000) would you recommend that that would be sufficient and if so can you suggest a reputable UK supplier that I could start a dialogue with?
Harm Millaard wrote:
This is NOT a Pentium 4 CPU, so your remarks, as well as Jim's, are way off-line. Look at his submitted results and you will see we are talking about a Xeon 5430 CPU, which is indeed a few generations old, but fully capable of running in 64-bit mode. The OP made a typo when he mentioned P4.
Well I do apologize for not taking the extra time to check his benchmark results. I just simply read his post. A Xeon is obviously a much better CPU than a p4.
Aidan Bell wrote:
Thanks for pointing out the inaccuracies Harm, however I stand by my last post; I certainly accept that if I want to start editing HDV as well as old-faithful DV, I really do need to think about a new machine.
Sadly since I live in the USA I don't know of good places to shop in the UK for computer parts, since I mainly shop at newegg.com 90 percent of the time and they don't ship internationally. (That I know of)
Two new pieces of evidence have come to light!
Firstly I was in error; with apologies, my machine is actually more powerful than I first thought, it's an HP xw6600 Workstation, not XW4100 as I had yesterday thought.
Secondly, perhaps more importantly; I passed all the relevant files and project data of the 70-hour render project to a friend of mine who rendered it in three and a half hours flat on a machine with the following specs.
Intel Core i3 CUP 550 @ 3.20Ghz
Again, my (correct) specs are:
Intel Xeon CPU E5430 @ 2.66GHz
Is my colleague's machine really SO much better than mine as to be able to perform a render twenty times faster than me? Or do I perhaps indeed after all have a hardware issue slowing down my machine (which in all areas other than HDV rendering whizzes along beautifully).
I suspect that your system is ill-configured to show such results in comparison to an i3. If anything, I would expect your Xeon 5430 to be only marginally slower than an i3 or around equal, but certainly not a factor X slower. Have a look at Adobe Forums: Guide for installing and tuning a Vista... which also applies to Win7.