Not really. It is nothing more than a sidegrade, not an upgrade and the cost would not justify it. It will still be around 10 times slower than a better equipped system.
Either upgrade the current systems, that are very weak to begin with, not enough memory, only two disks and a non-CUDA video card, or
Get new systems based on the X79 platform. See Adobe Forums: What PC to build? An update...
* 6GB DDR3 RAM
* Nvidia GTS 250 512MB VGA card
Double ram to 12Gig and exchange video card for one that will work with hardware MPE... which card partly depends on your power supply size and number of video card connections
I agree with Harm: Neither of the two graphics cards you have currently on hand can use MPE GPU acceleration at all (or put it this way, using either card permanently locks Premiere Pro into the MPE software-only mode even with the hack): The GTS 250 does not have enough VRAM to even enable GPU acceleration (which requires a minimum of 765MB of free, unused VRAM), while the HD 7970 is not a CUDA card at all (and even the latest version of Premiere Pro, CS6 6.0.1, still does not support OpenCL GPU acceleration in MPE at all in the Windows environment).
And in these systems, even 8 or 12 GB is marginal. You need to quadruple the amount of system RAM in that i7-920 all the way to its maximum supported 24GB for any newer version of Premiere Pro or After Effects to even run well at all. (For the i7-2600K, you need at least 16GB to run well, and 32GB is even better.)
And as Harm stated, you need to add more disks to whichever system that's going to be doing the work. Two disks are barely adequate.
Will Adobe CS6 ever have GPU acceleration for AMD cards?
We do have a NAS system that takes care of all our needs so I guess the 1TB is OK for now. I might upgrade the RAM instead
to 24GB and see what kind of performance I might get out of After Effects.
So I'm guessing the GTX 570 would be a better alternative to the Radeon 7970s?
I forgot to mention that the TV station is in Ghana, West Africa so parts like these (GTX 570, GTX 580) are exteremly hard to by.
The last time I hit town I could only find a GTX 460SE by EVGA. So I may have to end up importing them if the 7970 are a NO-NO.
We do have a NAS system that takes care of all our needs so I guess the 1TB is OK for now.
Major mistake. A NAS is way too slow for editing. For comfortable editing you need at least 400 MB/s sustained tranfer rate for simple codecs on all disks combined. For dififcult codecs you need even more.
Unfortunately, NAS disk systems are too slow to be of much use for anything besides backups. This is due to the limitations of the Ethernet interface itself: Most NAS devices rely on Gigabit Ethernet connections, which have a maximum theoretical throughput of only 125 MB/s. (Please note that "Gigabit" does not equal "Gigabyte", in this case: One byte is equal to eight bits.) But due to the overhead involved, the maximum practical transfer speed of the NAS disk system would be only around 100 MB/s. That's slower than many single disks, let alone RAIDs.
Well like I said we are very small.
Our workflow usually comprises of us editing using Premiere, exporting over the network to MPEG-2 via Gigabit (which usually takes 5-10 minutes
depending on the duration) to the playout machines (Playbox Airbox). The rest of the setup comprises of dubbing tapes and DVD material to the
NAS box. When we need it, we just pick it from there and import it into our playlist - not exactly high-end stuff.
I'll tell you this: Even exports to SD will take significantly longer than it should with such slow disks. Here's why:
All NLEs, including Premiere, unpack (or decompress) video to full uncompressed RGB for display purposes. And uncompressed (or unpacked, in this case) SD material requires a great deal of disk throughput just to edit smoothly. If your disk system is too slow, not only would encodes/exports be significantly slower than they should have been, but the system would start dropping frames big time on playback.
The end result is that in effect, the NAS disk system is barely adequate for SD source material (allowing for a minimum overhead of double the maximum sequential bandwidth of uncompressed SD video). This is because the minimum sequential transfer speed of a single disk (which most NAS disks consist of) barely surpasses 50 MB/s on those disks - just enough (in your case) for uncompressed/unpacked PAL SD, with very little throughput to spare. If your source is HD (even 720p, let alone 1080i/p), the NAS disk will not be able to keep up.