At this point the obvious answer is: The requirements will be no different than they are now. CC 2016 will more or less be like CC 2015 minus the bugs.
Getting worked up over anything else is an indulgence. Nobody knows what specificd demands and challenges future versions will bring or what hardware will be avialable at a given point of release
Nobody knows what specificd demands and challenges future versions will bring or what hardware will be avialable at a given point of release
Well, the After Effects team knows where the software is going. I thought in the past I'd seen a hint or two dropped of this nature, so I guess that's what I'm hoping for.
And true that no one knows exactly what kind of hardware will be available in the future, but it's reasonable to assume that computers will continue to be based on CPUs, GPUs and RAM for the next 5 years at least. If the big performance improvements don't come by then I think we're all going to be jumping ship anyways
I guess the one place Adobe's fumbling effects is the CPU purchase. While there is no word of when they bring back multi-threading, there is always the option of jumping between 2015 and 2014 when you want to have the advantages of each. Although I'm not sure what advantages there are to using Adobe's current build.
So I guess I'm saying if I were purchasing a new computer I would not let the mess that is AE influence my decision when considering CPUs. I would go with the bestest, fastast muli-threadedest cpu I could afford with the main influencing factor being whether or not I eventually wanted to cross the 32gigRAM mark in which case I would need a CPU that could facilitate.
Thanks for the reply. Maybe the real question is, should I be going for higher clock speed or more cores? Since you usually can't have both.
I think it depends on how you use your computer. As I understand it more cores means your computer can do more than one task at a time. So for example with multiple cores, if AE crashed you would not have to reboot your entire system. So you definitely want more than one core. Obviously the speed of each core says how fast it can process the task it's working on.
The AE team is not going to bring back multiprocessing, so to speak. As I understand it, they are planning to replace it with something very different. Which is good, because it was pretty buggy. We don't know the nature of the new rendering system and I'm not sure the Adobe team is quite sure about it yet either. But, from what I can gather, we don't have to worry about it just yet.
None of their sneak peek videos or NAB presentations hinted that the next version will be any different from CC 2015 as far as how it processes EXCEPT that you can use the GPU to accelerate some native effects. So, for your CPU, I'd lean towards more clock speed vs. more cores if all you do is After Effects work. However, if you do stuff with Cinema 4D (and remember, C4D Lite is included with AE now and it is pretty powerful) you may want to consider having a bunch of cores too. Since C4D's renderer does use all the cores you've got.
I mean, if it's between 4.0 GHz and 4 cores vs. 3.8 GHz and 8 cores, get the 8 core machine.
Yes, getting a decent GPU would be a good idea. Not only would it be useful for things like Red Giant Universe, Element 3d, Optical Flares, etc., the new version of AE will actually use it to accelerate some native effects. (Finally!)
What about between a 3.7GHz 4-core vs 3.5GHz 6-core vs 3.0GHz 8-core?
If it's between those three, 3.5 GHz 6-core would be my choice. If you render in C4D, you're getting almost the same amount of overall GHz compared to the 8-core (21 vs. 24), but the core clock speed is much higher which benefits AE, many things in C4D, and your overall computing experience. Whereas the 4-core isn't that much more clock speed, but fewer cores (only 14.8 overall GHz).