15 Replies Latest reply on Jun 7, 2012 9:44 AM by Bill Gehrke

    Building a rig for AE and Premiere

    this is the pope

      Hello everyone,

       

      Most of my work is in motion graphics and editing and I've been doing all of it on an old 2009 Macbook Pro. Time to get back in the game. The guy putting the rig together gave me the following combo but I'm afraid it clocked at double my budget:

       

      • CPU : Intel Core i7 3770K -Ivy Bridge 4 x 3.5GHz (3.9GHz Turbo-boost) - 4MB L2  / 8MB L3 
      • mobo : ASUS Sabertooth Z77 -
      • memory : CORSAIR Vengeance - 16GB (2 x 8GB) / DDR3 1866 / Dual Channel Kit  - Timing 9-10-9-27 / Voltage 1.5V - Vengeance heat spreader
      • GPU : ASUS GTX 670 DirectCU II - 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 
      • SSD : 2 x SAMSUNG 830 Series SSD - SATA III 128GB Solid State Drive (1 for OS and another as a scratch disk)
      • HDD : 2 x Western Digital Caviar Black  1TB / 7200 RPM / 64MB Cache
      • PSU : ENERMAX Platimax EPM600AWT - 600W Maximum Power
      • case : LIAN LI PC-A05FNB
      • monitor : HP ZR24ws - S-IPS LCD Monitor

       

      This came out to $4,800. My budget was half of that (am I being ridiculous?) and I was wondering where I could make some meaningful changes and still have something that AE and Premiere would be happy with.

       

      One thing that the vendor advised against was going up to 32GB without ECC saying that it will increase latency and slow down the system as a whole. Is it really worth depriving AE of an extra 16GB of RAM?

       

      Finally, I read somewhere that Harm Millaard was advising against using Micron controller memory for the systems. Doesn't the Corsair memory use Micron?

       

      Thanks for all your help.

        • 1. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
          Chuck A. McIntyre Level 3

          Hope you didn't write him a check!!!

          • 2. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
            Bill Gehrke Adobe Community Professional & MVP

            Go to this site ADK and configure yourself a guaranteed great i7 hex core Adobe tuned system with double the memory absolutely great support for slightly over $3000.  Forget the SSD's they are not essential or that advantageous over good old reliable disk drives.  They will even slightly overclock it if you want.

             

            Monitor is extra on the above rough price

             

            Message was edited by: Bill Gehrke

            • 3. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
              this is the pope Level 1

              Thanks everyone!

               

              I think I need to clarify that I am in Lebanon and I'm sure the shipping to here is upping the cost as well.

               

              A few more questions:

              1. Will there be a marked difference between the i7-3770K and the 3930K?
              2. Is there no latency issue with going to 32GB RAM?
              3. Is the GTX 670 overkill? Would a GTX570 1280MB card offer comparable results on AE and PP?
              4. So are SSDs out until they get more reliable?
              5. Is 600W enough for a system like that?

               

              Cheers

              • 4. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                Harm Millaard Level 7

                1. Yes

                2. No issue

                3. No but only minor gains over a 570

                4. Yes

                5. No

                • 5. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                  RjL190365 Level 4

                  Harm Millaard wrote:

                  5. No

                  Actually, the trend these days is lower power draw for the newer components. A GTX 680, in fact, consumes less wattage than the GTX 580 (note the TDP: The GTX 580 has a TDP of 244W while the GTX 680 has a TDP of only 195W). And while a 600W PSU is still marginal for an i7-3930K based PC with such a higher-end GPU (because hexa-core LGA 2011 CPUs themselves are still power pigs), a good-quality (as opposed to a piece-of-junk quality) 600W PSU would easily handle an otherwise identical PC powered by an i7-3770K CPU instead of an i7-3930K CPU (although even the 3770K-based PC would become a bit too close for the 600W PSU's comfort if the CPU is more than modestly overclocked and that PC is equipped with more than three disks).

                   

                  And your power requirements assume that power draw would only increase as overall performance for all PCs increases. In that case, at this rate in a few years we would need a 1500W PSU just for a bare-bones PC with an entry-level CPU, entry-level onboard graphics and a single disk. That is exactly what the component manufacturers want to avoid.

                  • 6. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                    Harm Millaard Level 7

                    I just checked the requirements I have for a new PSU (you didn't reply to my question about that BTW) and it looks like this:

                     

                    PSU-requirement.png

                     

                    and this is with only 20 3.5" HDD's, not the intended 28 and with limited fans, so effectively the wattage needed is more.

                     

                    Even if you have a very good PSU, 600W should be installed in a system that does not require more than 480W, because you want to keep the utilization at or below 80%. This means that with 195W for the video card, 237W for an overclocked i7-3930K and 52W for the mobo, which amounts to 484W, you will not have the reserve in the PSU for memory, disks, fans, USB or FW devices, DVD or BD-R burners. I have a hard time imagining a system that runs comfortably without memory or without disks and fans.

                    • 7. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                      RjL190365 Level 4

                      On the other hand, going with an oversized PSU will result in a utilization well below 20% almost all of the time. Such an extremely light load will result in a PSU drawing more wattage from the wall than necessary. After all, a 1200W PSU that's outputting only 100W to 150W 99% of the time would definitely be a waste of money. So, usage also has to be figured in.

                       

                      In addition, even the eXtreme calculator is extremely inaccurate: It assumes that a PSU is only able to handle 60% to 75% of its labeled capacity without blowing itself up - a common failing with all of the online PSU calculators in existence. I tried a higher-wattage (850W) PSU of equal quality in my auxiliary rig, only to have the average power draw from the wall increase substantially at idle compared to that system's current 520W PSU (with either PSU, power draw from the AC wall outlet was about equal when they were outputting the maximum draw from the PC itself). And there is now an extremely wide range of wattages a given system produces now that EIST is standard on all Intel CPUs - and that some PSUs use the exact same amount of wattage from the wall at 10% load as they do at 20% load (this results in an efficiency of only 42.5% at 10% load, based on an 85% efficiency rating at 20% load). That design wastes more power than is needed when such light loads are applied. The only way to remedy this at present would be to completely disable EIST and all power-saving features so that the CPU would be running at full speed all of the time. To me, at least for that auxiliary PC, the 850W PSU would have been a waste of money (had I kept it), especially given that it is performing only Internet duties 95% of the time.

                       

                      With that said, what I stated for the 600W PSU and an i7-3930K is true only if the CPU isn't overclocked, and the system has no more than two disks and no more than two case fans. If on the other hand that i7-3930K is overclocked even moderately, and is equipped with five total disks and three or more large, high-airflow case fans (as a hobbyist editing PC would typically be configured as), then figure on needing a 750W or even an 850W PSU for that particular PC.

                       

                      Message was edited by: RjL190365

                      • 8. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                        Dani.F

                        Hello,

                        I am the guy that is putting the system together for the person that started this discussion.

                        I would like to explain in details why I chose those components, and correct some points discussed here.

                        First please note that we are in Beirut Lebanon, and importing the goods from U.S.A, so the prices are different, and we are not so lucky to get the same prices you get.

                        Another note is that we are not planning to overclock any component in the system, as this will put our component in a higher risk of failure, and shorten their life, and we don’t have immediate replacement of the components.

                         

                        • I chose the 3.5Ghz quad core Intel Core i7 3770K ivy-bridge over the six core 3.2Ghz Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E:
                        • - The 3770K is a lot cheaper than the 3930K
                        • - 3770K have a TDP of 77W / 3930K have a TDP of 130W. That’s a huge difference in power consumption, and heat dissipation.
                        • - The 3770K is clocked at 3.5Ghz while the 3930K is clocked at a lower 3.2Ghz frequencies. The adobe after effects likes the higher frequency more than the increase of core count. Some benchmarks on this:

                        (forget about the premiere benchmark, because it doesn't uses mercury engine, thus cuda cores are not used, they were testing only CPU power)

                         

                        http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-benchmark-core-i7-3770k,3181-15.html

                        in this test, the 6 core 3.2Ghz is the slowest, and the quad core ivy bridge 3.5Ghz is at the top of the list.

                         

                        also same result on this site, and they are comparing it with the more powerful 6 core cpu. (middle of the page)

                        http://www.decryptedtech.com/~decryp5/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=641%3Aintels-iv y-bridge-cpu-hits-the-market-we-check-out-the-core-i7-3770k&Itemid=150&limitstart=5

                         

                        • I am using the ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77:
                        • - 5 years manufacturer warranty.
                        • - Choke, Cap. & MOSFET; Certified by Military-standard

                         

                        • Using the CORSAIR Vengeance CMZ16GX3M2A1866C9:
                        • - Good timing for an 8GB module, 9-10-9-27, while using high frequency: 1866Mhz.
                        • - I am using only two modules, because its unbuffered memory. And because of that the memory controller of the CPU works directly with the memory chip on the module. An 8GB module have twice the memory chip count of a 4GB module.

                        So increasing the quantity of modules on a system that doesn’t use registered memory, stresses the memory controller a lot, and sometimes instead of getting better performance, you get less.

                        Registered memory have a buffer chip on each module that reads the memory chips, and then works with the memory controller directly. Eliminating the chance to overload the memory controller.

                        Example for that:

                        1. - Using 4 registered 8GB memory modules: memory controller integrated in the CPU is working only with 4 chips.
                        2. - Using 4 unbuffered 8GB memory modules: memory controller is working with at least 64 memory chips.

                        Unfortunately, registered memory is only used with Intel Xeon and AMD Opteron.

                         

                        • Using the Asus DCII GTX 670 card:
                        • - The 670 is priced between the 580 card and the 680 card while providing more than twice the number of cuda cores than the 580, and a little less than the 680.
                        • - 670: 1344 Cuda cores / 580: 512 Cuda cores / 680: 1536 Cuda cores.
                        • - Having more cuda cores, increases a lot the performance in Adobe premiere.
                        • - Asus DCII cooler, have superior cooling combined with silent operation.

                         

                        • About the Power supply:

                         

                        Calculating the power usage of each part:

                        • Intel Core i7 3770K: 77W @ maximum usage.
                        • ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77: 110W @ maximum usage.
                        • 2 x CORSAIR Vengeance CMZ16GX3M2A1866C9: 10W @ maximum usage.
                        • ASUS GTX670-DC2-2GD5: 170W @ maximum usage.
                        • 2 x Samsung 830 128GB SSD: 0.3W @ maximum usage.
                        • 2 x Western Digital Caviar Black WD1002FAEX: 14W @ maximum usage.
                        • 2 x Noctua NF-S12B: 2.4W @ maximum usage.
                        • 3 x Noctua NF-P14 FLX (including CPU cooler): 3.6W @ maximum usage.
                        • PLEXTOR PX-LB950SA: 5W @ maximum usage.
                        • nMEDIAPC ZE-C228 / mouse / keyboard: around 10W

                        TOTAL power consumption @ maximum LOAD: 395.3W.

                        As you know its near impossible to use all the components at maximum load.

                        I am using ENERMAX Platimax EPM600AWT.

                        • - This is a 600W platinum certified power supply, with an efficiency of 89-94%.
                        • - 100% 105°C Japanese electrolytic capacitors.
                        • - Less than 10% aging in 5 years.
                        • - It has a 5 year manufacturer warranty.

                        So the system is too relaxed in terms of power usage, even after years of usage.

                        Having a high efficiency, will reduce power going to waste. Less power going to waste = less power converting into heat.

                        Less heat = less cooling noise, and longer life components.

                         

                        Please I need your feedback on the points I discussed.

                        • 9. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                          this is the pope Level 1

                          I guess there is a bit of confusion as to whether AE is happier with a 6 core 3930K or a faster 3770K.

                           

                          According to this Tomshardware benchmark the clock speed wins in AE and the cores win in Premiere.

                           

                          Dani F. also brings up the issue of buffered memory (not to be confused with ECC memory) for a 32GB system, explaining that when in the double digits, unbuffered memory causes more latency because of the higher density of chips polled. Does anyone have any thoughts on this and its impact on Premiere and AE?

                          • 10. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                            Harm Millaard Level 7

                            Tom's benchmark is not representative for PR. It is too narrow a test and does not measure systems performance in video editing. That is probably why Dani made the ridiculous statement that an AMD FX gives the same performance as an i7 CPU, which shows he does not know what he is talking about. The best AMD FX syswtem with a CUDA enabled video card is around 3.5 times slower than an old i7-920 and is preceded by 439 Intel systems in benchmark testing. See: PPBM5 Benchmark

                             

                            AFAIK there is no good benchmark test for AE to be able to say whether it is happier with cores or clock speed.

                             

                            To your question whether the 3770K is better suited than a 3930K or not, for PR the answer is clear. The 3930K is a way better choice. The 3770K is a nice CPU for a mid-level system on a limited platform and is no comparison to a high-end system with a 2011 platform. It is like comparing a Honda Civic to a Porsche Panamera. Well, you get what you pay for.

                            • 11. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                              RjL190365 Level 4

                              Harm Millaard wrote:

                               

                              Tom's benchmark is not representative for PR. It is too narrow a test and does not measure systems performance in video editing. That is probably why Dani made the ridiculous statement that an AMD FX gives the same performance as an i7 CPU, which shows he does not know what he is talking about. The best AMD FX syswtem with a CUDA enabled video card is around 3.5 times slower than an old i7-920 and is preceded by 439 Intel systems in benchmark testing. See: PPBM5 Benchmark

                               

                              AFAIK there is no good benchmark test for AE to be able to say whether it is happier with cores or clock speed.

                               

                              To your question whether the 3770K is better suited than a 3930K or not, for PR the answer is clear. The 3930K is a way better choice. The 3770K is a nice CPU for a mid-level system on a limited platform and is no comparison to a high-end system with a 2011 platform. It is like comparing a Honda Civic to a Porsche Panamera. Well, you get what you pay for.

                              I agree. In fact, there is a bottleneck in the LGA 1155 platform that crops up when running a high-end CUDA GPU: The MPEG-2 DVD encoding scores from many of these PCs are artificially fast when these systems are running CS5.5 and equipped with 16GB or more RAM and heavily overclocked - in fact, the performance increase is disproportionately high in relation to the increase in clock speed (or overclock). Revert these CPUs back to their stock speeds, and the PPBM5 MPEG-2 DVD times increase disproportionately in relation to the decrease in the clock speed. This tells me that there is caching going on in there, and that there is also a bottleneck in these systems.

                               

                              Because of all that, if one cannot afford a true hexa-core Intel system, the i7-3820 on an LGA 2011 board may be a better choice than any LGA 1155 system unless the latter is heavily overclocked.

                              • 12. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                                Another Photographer Level 1

                                According to http://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5.htm, 6-series GTX cards like the GTX-670 don't work properly with AE6.0 at this time.

                                 

                                Is there a test comparing 3770K to 3930K, in each case with a GPU and 32GB, in all aspects of PP 6 and at different OC rates?

                                • 13. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                                  ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                                  Actually Registered Dimm's have overall higher latency because you have that extra layer of communication going on at the Dimm level. Remember, ram execution is measured in clock cycles. So any delay in transit of data whether it's a write, read, refresh, or wipe command add's latency to the entire process. Now multiply that extra latency by the amount of commands issues per second or over any given period of time and the difference is very significant. There were actually several benchmarks/studies done on this back in the DDR1 days and all pointed to the same result. Remember the memory is broken down into pages and rows so commands and polling is specific to those identities. The size of modules on the Dimms will not change the latency nearly as much as the overall execution latency added on by the registered layer and the ECC checking. These modules are meant for data integrity at the sacrifice of latency for mission critical environments likes server or database operations. They were not meant for enthusiast/performance applications.

                                   

                                  Premiere benefits from Clockspeed more than threading once you have the amount of threads to handle the decoding/encoding. That is a result of the MPE engine. AE performance is effected far more by threading than GHz since it's all CPU processing and ram. Any benchmark that shows otherwise either did not have enough ram to allocate for all threads or might not had something setup right. Either way AE will benefit from any threading you can give it provided you have the ram to support the amount of threads.

                                   

                                  The specification to remember about PSU's is the efficiency drops over time. You want to account for that efficiency dropping when you allocate for load. The general rule is get a PSU that the current system load will only take no more than 70% of the rating of that PSU. However that does limit your expandability. So if you are going to add drives, I/O cards, or any other devices then you want to increase the PSU headroom. I would not recommend a PSU with that video card and CPU that is less than 700W especially with that many drives.

                                   

                                  Eric

                                  ADK

                                  • 14. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                                    scpulp

                                    As an oddball, I'd like to actually chime in here with something essentially heretical: PPBM5 is surprisingly inconsistent.

                                     

                                    I initially included it in my benchmarking suite for workstations, but found test results to show too much variation even between runs on the same system. Ultimately the results I had for my workstation reviews were next to worthless. I'm not sure Tom's benchmark is that much better or worse, but I'm also not really convinced Premiere can even be consistently benchmarked in the first place.

                                    • 15. Re: Building a rig for AE and Premiere
                                      Bill Gehrke Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                      I am not sure why you are having inconsistent results.  you of course are going to have +/- 1 or 2 second variations due to Windows files timing is only accurate to seconds.  Then of course the disk intensive (Disk I/O or encoding to AVI) you are timing an asynchronous disk and have randomly written pieces of files and if your disk has lots of data on it it is going to exaggerate that score

                                       

                                      I have run various versions of PPBM actually well over a thousand times and find it to be very consistent.  For example here are results versus clock frequency on my i7-2600K with CS5.5.1

                                       

                                      Clock-PPBM5.5.jpg

                                      I would suggest you regularly defrag your drives and make sure you precisely follow directions.  My runs are always with less than 5-10% utilization of the project RAID array and recently defragmented

                                       

                                      Message was edited by: Bill Gehrke

                                       

                                      Oh! I forgot the other big one.  Do you have any other prrocesses runing in the background that are stealing CPU cycles like Anti-virus,spam filterin etc. plus do you have indexing turned off?  All these things can and do randomly interrupt your encoding runs.