Dual Intel E5472 with Areca 1680iX-12, 4G cache, BBM and raid50.
>Areca 1680iX-12, 4G cache, BBM and raid50
While there's nothing particularly wrong with such a choice, nor is it particularly necessary. AVCHD, even at it's best, actually has a slightly lower data rate than DV, so a single modern disk would be more than fast enough even for several streams. It's the CPU that bogs things down.
I am wanting to upgrade my computer so I can have the best video editing experience. Here is my question that i would appreciate getting feedback. I have several of the CS4 products.
If on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 represents a fast and best Premiere Pro CS4 editing experience and 1 represents the worst experience i. e., slow rendering, crashes, hangs, and no multitasking etc; what specs should I look for in my next computer system that would get me closest to a 8 or 9 level experience? I am asking for the software manufacturers min requirements - that in most cases creates a 3 to a 5 level experience.
32 bit system?
64 bit system?
7500 or 15000 rpm sata drives?
dual core or quade core?
64 OS (IMO XP or Server 2008, but opinions differ), 15000 SATA drives do not exist, nor do 7500, only 7200 or 10000. For OS 10000, for the rest 7200. Only dual quad cores.
What type of media do you plan to work with, David? No point in spending money on a "8" if your work flow only needs a "3".
David, as Jim Simon points out, it depends on what you are trying to edit. My thread is specifically asking about hardware requirements when editing native AVCHD files for the smoothest workflow. You may want to post your question as a new topic with details about what is important to your project.
The lack of responses here (along with other posts in this forum) suggests nobody with similar hardware specs is having a smooth editing experience with AVCHD. Therefore, I have decided not to upgrade to CS4.
> The lack of responses here
Haven't you read the responses given? Use the Show all Messages link.
napynap, you have everything except the CPU. Your decision is correct.
a new current CPU would require different RAM and of course a new motherboard.
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 CPU, 3 Gig DDR2-667, LGA775 pkg 2.40 GHz, 8MB L2 catch Total, 1066 MHz FSB, Nvidia 9800GT 512 video, 3-500 gig SATA 7200 rpm drives. Built by a place that knows how to build serious video work horses.
It screams with Sony AVCHD format using PPRO CS4 as advertised. No problems so far with any Adobe top end products. (Knock on wood).
Marv, which OS do you use?
Will the choice of graphic card have anything to do whether the editing of AVCHD is smooth or not, using only Premiere and not After effects?
I am waiting for the new Canon Legria HF20 to enter the shops (April here in Norway). Then I need to upgrade, or more likely, build an new desk top for editing the AVCHD, so reading that your specs "eats" AVCHD easily.
I seriously doubt any differences do to graphic cards. I have no experience yet with AVCHD but from all my past and current benchmarking of SD and HDV of Premiere I have never seen any performance differences, especially since you excluded AE I think that to be 100% true.
Apparently April for the new Canon's here also. My question--will Premiere capture the new 24 Mbps AVCHD?
Premiere doesn't capture AVCHD. You just import it - from the cards, from a hard drive, etc.
I guess the question then is can I import this new 24 Mbps AVCHD, will there be a difference to Premiere just because of the new data rate?
Hey that is now better, I logged in after writing a response and it was posted. Before when you were a guest and wrote a message it would lose the message.
If memory serves, users have successfully imported the files. However, performance with them seems to be somewhat lacking, even on decent rigs. The lower bitrate files seem to be less stressful, as you'd expect.
Yes, I have read all the responses, and I'm greatful that editors like you and Marv Naumann have provided specific hardware specs that have produced smooth results when editing native AVCHD files.
Unfortunately, I didn't have enough similar posts from others to make an informed decision on whether I should upgrade to CS4.
However, it gives me a positive goal to reach for just knowing that obtaining the right hardware can work successfully with AVCHD, which, until now, did not exist on this board.
Thank you all for the responses, and please add more for others who are making this decision.
...Now time for me to plan new hardware, because I really like the Premiere work flow, don't want to change up..
I am pretty sure I have sees guys in this forum having problmes with editing AVCHD, even with CPU faster than Marv's Q6600. Why does some have troubble editing AVCHD and some not, even with specs that are "better" or the same? Or do I remember wrong ...
I have a 775 socket (Core 2 Duo) today, but I'm not sure to go for the new 1366 socket and a Intel i7 920, or get the a "top of the line" CPU that will run on my 775 chipset (then I wont need a new MBO). Any ideas on whether to put extra money on the i7 will pay off when editing AVCHD (to handle it smoothly - with a "good" margin)?
How much faster (I guess it is) is the i7 compared to the Quad Q-series, and the Xeon?
All else being equal, benchmarks have the i7 up to 40% faster than a Core 2 with video related tasks.
> How much faster (I guess it is) is the i7 compared to the Quad Q-series, and the Xeon?
You can see for yourself whether your system is significantly slower than an i7 or not by doing the following:
Create an HDV 1080i 50 PAL project with master audio as 5.1
Make a sequence with a length of 46:40:02 and render the sequence to MPEG2-DVD with CBR @ 8.25 Mbps, quality 5 and audio @ 256 Kb 5.1
If you do that, the rendering time on my i7 system is 17:14
I would be interested to see your figures.
at the moment I only have a Intel Dual Core 2,4 CPU (for my DV editing) - and I guess comparing this to yours are of no interest (other than just for fun ... to see the improvements the last 2,5 yrs). But, isn't the Dual Intel E5472 a Xeon CPU (as mentioned in message #1) , and not a i7 - or do you have both?
I guess I'll go for a i7 as the results from this CPU is that much faster :) It would cost me some extra $$, but it would be fun :)
Is the AVCHD from Canon just the same as from Sony - and would not cause any trouble in CS4 (other than all the other trouble that are reportet in this forum with AVCHD...)?
What is recomended for the OS? Vista or XP, and I guess 64 bit is needed (to put in more RAM than 4 gig - if needed??)
about your benchmark site (which I enjoy, and carfully study!!) - have you done any benchmarking on AVCHD editing, or do you plan to do that when you upgrade the benchmark test to CS4?
A dual E5472 is even faster than the i7 and is indeed a Xeon with a 771 socket using FBDIMM DDR2, whereas the i7 is a 1366 socket using DDR3. However, the performance gain is only around 60-75% but the price differential is around $ 1700 so it does not make much sense. However currently there is nothing faster than 2 E5472's or the X5482's, soon to be succeeded by the E5570 which is even faster (the Xeon version of the Bloomfield i7).
However, realize that to be on the bleeding edge of performance carries a hefty price tag.
I don't know about AVCHD, since I don't use that.
For OS I have started using Vista 64, but can not say I'm entirely happy with it. Windows 7 seems a far better choice. If you go for an i7 system, you can easily use 6 or 12 GB of memory and then Vista 64 makes the most sense currently.
Since I also do not have AVCHD I have not explored any benchmarking of it. Also since so far I have not been able to get repeatable consistent results with CS4 like I was able to do with CS3 benchmarking CS4 does not mean much. As I have more time and as Adobe works to solve some problems maybe by the time CS5 is out I will have something worthwhile.
For instance with a simple SD benchmark for MPEG2 DVD encoding on my dual E5410 based system I have seen times ranging from 14 seconds to 45 seconds (ten separate trials). Running that benchmark under the identical hardware with CS3 for ten tests I get either 38 or 39 seconds. I get the same inconsistency on my older AMD FX60 system with CS4. I also see the same inconsistency running CS4 under Vista 64.
Windows XP Pro.
DO NOT Shoot audio in 5.1 if you don't have to. You can't fully edit it or do any audio sweetining. You'll have to convert it to export the clip to stereo first.
> DO NOT Shoot audio in 5.1 if you don't have to. You can't fully edit it or do any audio sweetining. You'll have to convert it to export the clip to stereo first.
What is the relevancy? No normal camera allows for 5.1 recording, apart from some obscure consumer camcorders, that most of us would not touch.
Any decent mic is mono, so what do you mean?
>I have seen times ranging from 14 seconds to 45 seconds
Is that with or without input variables?
Jim, I am not sure what input variables means to you. I have a standard (to me) benchmark that does not change I run through the three portions (one is encoding to MPEG2 DVD) of the test. If I run it 10 times in succession those are the results I get.
Sorry the PassMark results did not display due to DNS problems or forum problems. It seems pictures are no longer displayed, so here is the link.
>I am not sure what input variables means to you.
It means any parameter of the test (or external to the test that might yet affect the outcome) being changed. Examples would be the length of the segment being exported, the effects applied, the location of the raw media, the export location, other processes unrelated to Premiere running in the background, etc.
Basically I was asking if each pass was under identical conditions.
Harm, I have no problems viewing your PassMark results first time around or now. It might be due to the viewing email program, I have noticed that with some images there is a difference of what shows up between when I use a web email client (FireFox in my case) or if I am looking at my mail in Outlook.
Jim, an absolutely identical master benchmark project file is copied to a new folder each time and the "virgin" project file is used as the source for each benchmark run. I can alternate back and forth between CS3 and CS4 on the same computer in the identical setup and see the same type of results--consistent numbers in CS3 and inconsistent results on the CS4 runs.
It has been traced back to the migration of Windows 2008, Exchange 2007, a new hosting partner and a new domain and active directory. Don't ask me what exactly caused the problem, it seems to have to do with the DNS records, but anyway, it has been solved.
For reference it may be interesting if others could post their PassMark results for comparison. For the moment it seems that my results are not too bad and could even be improved upon when I add some additional memory, both to my system and to the Areca, due next tuesday.
Is there any chance I can get by on one I7-940, 2.93 quad core processor? I am not a professional (not using every day) and want to make at home high quality HD videos using Premiere and After Effects. My Sony camera records in AVCHD.
Also, do I really need separate from the main drive raid 1 for the video files? Can I get by on just a second hard drive as a video file disc?
Running Vista 64. 6mb Ram or more (easy to add). ATI 4850 512mb.
I currently have the spec (i7, 12 gb ram, 2 HD (need a few more), ATI 4870 on x64 Vista) and edit AVCDH from a Canon unit and get quite a bit of artifacting when scrubbing the timeline and playback is somtimes exhibits stuttering or video will stop playing, but audio keeps going. Rendering is fine and final output is fine, but makes editing a PITA sometimes.
I still think PP CS4 has issues (at least with AVCHD and MOV wrappers).
A system is only as fast as it's weakest link. While in a finely tuned system an i7-950 may get by editing AVCHD, it will not if other components are crippled. Using only two hard disks in an NLE rig, is like deliberately crippling a system.
An analogy might be like giving Nadal, if he is ready to play in the US Open, a badminton racket instead of a tennis racket or take away his shoes. He would be severly hampered and chances of success dwindle. Same with your idea of using only 2 disks.
Gosh, the forum is slow tonight! I almost forgot what I wanted to comment on.
As for the Nadal analogy, that is a good one for an editing system. The I/O sub-system is immediately behind the CPU, with AVCHD.
Now to the US Open. Should R. Nadal be facing R. Federer, then I'd say take away his racquet AND his shoes!
Thanks for your response Harm,
Forgive my ignorance, but what is an NLE Rig?
C'mon, at that level, they could beat club pros using shovels.
So where is the value prop in disk arrays? We all can't afford 100TB racks, so when, if ever do the diminishing returns start? 5, 10, 20 disks?