1 person found this helpful
Your CPU & Ram are really what AE needs, and that's excellent.
The Gfx card is less important for AE, because it's use is more limited. Your 3D card is good for AE. If you plan to do encoding with Premiere or Adobe Media Encoder and in h264, I would recommand an Nvidia card, Cuda enabled.
Cuda is a new ability provided by Nvidia to use GPU power as CPU power. In CS4, encoding to h264 is Cuda accelerated, so it's really interesting if you plan to do lots of renders.
Thanks for a helpful and quick respose.
What is the difference we are talking about when using a cuda enabled nvidia card?
I don't actully do much encoding. I'm a bit of a philistine when it comes to encoding/compression etc. I just like to make pretty pictures with ease and playing it back is someone elses problem (well that's how I've been able to operate so far;)), so as long as the GFX card doesn't hinder my 3.0Ghz Corei7 and 12 Gigs of ram in getting Ae to run like a dream, then I'm happy.
Also I'm a bit of a gamer so I'm hoping that along with my 1G gfx card, I'll have pretty decent system for work & play.
Cheers once again.
If you don't do much encoding, then stay with your Ati. The acceleration in encoding depends on the number of "cuba cores" on the card, so it's difficult to tell you a number, but you can stay with the Ati board, it's still a good one
Thanks, your advice is much appreciated.. Whilst you're being helpful could you answer this question?:
I was going to get 2 internal drives on my system anyway, both 500GB each, but the guy at the shop recommended my second drive be 1TB. He said something about how he needed that much when he worked on photoshop, something to do with scratch discs (sorry but it was amongst a long conversation). Do you think I would need that extra 1TB on the second drive or is 500G enough? I'm not really knowledgable on stratch discs and Ae, seeing as though all the advice/research I've read so far is to concentrate on CPU and RAM.....
Storage isn't an issue for me as I plan to use mostly external backups......but right now the extra 500Gigs I'm wondering about will take me too far over my budget......but i don't want to not get it and regret it.......
Cheers in advance, I think that's the last of my questions....
1 person found this helpful
Don't let yourself confuse by your buddy. For AE these considerations do not really matter. It doesn't really use a temporary swap file in the way PS does. It uses a disk cache, if you tell it to. That disk cache is not persistent and wil lbe cleared when you quit AE. It also, for quite logical reasons, cannot exceed the size of all your comp frames and source footages and you can limit the size to begin with. Of course it will be higher with lots of HD stuff, but it's actualyl a quite smart thing and never exceeeds a certain multiple of what you e.g. can get with RAM previews. So for AE, you would only need such large disks for backup/ data storage, not as working drives. If you wanted to go crazy, you'd be more concerned about creating a RAID with two 500GB disks, so footage I/O does not become a bottleneck during multiprocessing renders. The story for PS is different. It creates history states of documents to allow undos, and depending on the size of the document, these can swell to considerable sizes. Still, even that can be tweaked and made to behave, so recommending excessively large discs is not per se the solution there, either. For the rest - Seb gave some good answers. If you don't do a lot of H.264 encoding and such that would benefit from NVidia's CUDA, there is no harm in getting an ATI card. It should offer sufficient power for what little Adobe products generally use OpenGL and otehr acceleration features.
You guys are an awesome help. Thanks Mylenium.