7 Replies Latest reply on Dec 10, 2010 7:27 PM by Dave Knarr

    Hard Drives and video card for new CS5 system

    Bill Strehl

      I've read through much of the threads in the hardware forums and find I still have questions.  I am just beginning to learn how to edit and it is not a source of income for me at the moment.  My sources will be from tapes from my Canon HV20 and at some point either a Panasonic GH2, Canon 60D or similar.

       

      I have bought the following:

      ASUS P6X58D-E motherboard

      24 GB of Patriot Sector 7 DDR3 1333MHz memory (9-9-9-24)

      Intel i7-950 3.06 GHz CPU

       

      I plan to use Cineform NEO or maybe NEO HD to ingest my files.

       

      I also have 4 Seagate 750GB 7200.11 hard drives I can use.

       

      It seems like the best bang for the buck for a video card is a GTS 450 at about $100 because I can't find any data that indicates a GTX 460 or a GTX 570 would make any difference (see http://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5.htm)

       

      As far as hard drives goes, Harm's article on creating separate storage makes sense to me.  It seems like I could create a "4 drive" system quite easily (see http://forums.adobe.com/thread/662972).  Given that I am not ready to spend moeny on an Areca card until I can develop my skills,  I am wondering if I should get one of the new WD Velociraptor 600GB (SATA 6) drives as my system drive for about $280, a 150 GB (SATA 3) Velociraptor drive for about $100, or some other fast drive.

       

      Given that my motherboard can support RAID, should I consider RAIDing the "D" drive or the "E and F" drives?

       

      Is there any value to using an SSD drive for the "E" drive (page file and media cache) [see http://forums.adobe.com/thread/662972]?  Microcenter has a 64GB drive for $100.

       

      Thanks in advance.

        • 1. Re: Hard Drives and video card for new CS5 system
          Harm Millaard Level 7
          I also have 4 Seagate 750GB 7200.11 hard drives I can use.

           

          I do hope you have used these drives for about a year or longer. Then you may have some confidence in them. The 7200.11 drives have caused Seagate to lose a lot of their reputation as relaible. They were an utter disaster and failure rates of over 70% were not unknown, in fact they were rather common.

           

          For your boot disk a 150 GB Velociraptor is more than enough, no need to go for a 600 GB model. If you are strapped for budgetary reasons, a Samsung F4 320 GB for around € 30 is quite a bargain.

           

          SSD's are way too costly IMO at this moment. I would skip that for the moment. If anything, save for a good raid controller, instead of spending money on a SSD. If you are talking BFTB (Bang-for-the-Buck) forget about SSD. You could consider using 2 x 320 GB F4's in a raid0 which will outpace almost any SSD for only € 60 for temp storage (pagefile and media cache).

          1 person found this helpful
          • 2. Re: Hard Drives and video card for new CS5 system
            Bill Strehl Level 1

            Thanks for the quick response Harm.

             

            The batch of Seagates I have have been working fine for more than a year or two.

             

            Which drive letter do you recommend I RAID? "E" (Page file, media cache)

             

            Also, any recommendations on the video card?

            "It seems like the best bang for the buck for a video card is a  GTS 450 at about $100 because I can't find any data that indicates a GTX  460 or a GTX 570 would make any difference (see http://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5.htm)"

            • 3. Re: Hard Drives and video card for new CS5 system
              Dave Knarr Level 1

              Hi Bill,

               

              You've been lucky with the Seagate drive.  I have had 4 of them die on me within the last year.  I have switched over to Samsung and Western Digital drives.

              You won't go wrong with the 450 video card.

              • 4. Re: Hard Drives and video card for new CS5 system
                Bill Strehl Level 1

                Thanks Dave and thanks for all you work on your website for "Video Cards for Adobe Premiere CS5".  What is not clear to me is what value the expensive Quadro cards have or what (assuming you only use the computer for editing) cards like the GTX 400 or 500 series offer over the GT 240 or GTS 450.  On Harm's benchmark site, most of the higher perfoming systems use a GTX 480.

                • 5. Re: Hard Drives and video card for new CS5 system
                  Dave Knarr Level 1

                  Bill, I haven't done much testing witht he Quadro cards so I really can't comment on them.  In the tests that I have done, which are explained in the article, I didn't see any performance difference between the 450 and the 480.  I can only assume that on Harm's benchmark site, most of the people reporting in decided on the 480 thinking that it will give them more power.

                   

                  This last weekend I tested a 450 card and a 480 card in a I7 system with Premiere CS5 using Harm's benchmarks and they came in with the same performance (withing a two or three seconds which is normal for Windows overhead).  I run AMD processors here, so I was interested in seeing the results in an I7.

                   

                  In my AMD systems, the 240 is giving me the same results as the 400 series cards with Premiere CS5 version 5.02.  I haven't done any performance testing with version 5.03.

                   

                  Harm, please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember seeing anyone on Harm's benchmark list that kept the hardware clock speed and memory the same and just sent in results for different video cards in their system.

                   

                  David Knarr

                  • 6. Re: Hard Drives and video card for new CS5 system
                    Harm Millaard Level 7

                    David,

                     

                    You are quite correct that in the benchmark we have all kinds of systems, some using stock speed, other overclocked. This makes comparisons difficult, because you are comparing different setups at different speeds.

                     

                    However, there is one commonality. The hardware assisted speed versus the software speed and that is where one can draw conclusions.

                     

                    If system A runs 10.1 x faster than with software MPE on card X and system B runs 14.7 x times faster than with software on card Y, one can say that card Y is faster than card X. Now, admittedly, this is a dangerous path, because there are so many other factors that influence these results, so I would be at fault and lying with statistics if I were to say this based on a single observation. But we now have more than 150 observations and now one can draw some conclusions.

                     

                    With around 20 480's and 30 470's in the benchmark test and seeing that the average MPE gain with the 480 is around 14 times, while the 470 comes out at slightly over 10 times, it feels statistically valid to say that the 480 is faster than the 470. This of course is an average with all kinds of systems at different speeds with different setups, but the general tendency is that systems with a 480 benefit more from hardware MPE than do systems with a 470. It is another matter to say how much that benefit is in terms of performance gains. We are still trying to get a grip on that.

                     

                    There is one other remark I want to make to set the record straight.

                     

                    Bill Gehrke is the 'Founding Father'. He designed the benchmark when it was still the PPBM benchmark. After he updated the benchmark to PPBM4 I got involved and assisted him. Admitted, a large part of the work for PPBM5 was done by me, as well as the whole site, but this is a close cooperation of Bill and myself and I see it as 'Our' benchmark and like to emphasize that Bill and I need each others help, assitance and support to keep this a valuable tool for users.

                    Bill and I are like partners in crime.

                    • 7. Re: Hard Drives and video card for new CS5 system
                      Dave Knarr Level 1

                      Hi Harm,

                       

                      First let me say, I didn't mean to exclude Bill Gehrke.  I just didn't know what was what.  Thank you for explaining that to me.  Let me also say the you and Bill have a great site.

                       

                      I have a question for you,  in the tests I have run with my systems, I am not seeing any speed difference between the 450 and 480.  Now granted, they are AMD processors and I know they don't have the SSE 4.1+. Here are my systems that I ran the tests on:

                       

                      An AMD X4 Quad Core computer running at 2.9 Ghz with 12 gigs of RAM and a single Samsung 7200 rpm SATA 3.0Gb/s hard drive
                      An AMD X6 Six Core computer running at 3.2 Ghz with 12 gigs of RAM and a single Samsung 7200 rpm SATA 3.0Gb/s hard drive

                      Both computers were running the same version of the NVidia driver and all non-essential programs were disabled.

                       

                      When I test the 450 and the 480 in the AMD X4 system, they are turning in pretty much the same level of performance, in that system.

                      The same holds true with the AMD X6, the 450 and 480 turn in virtually the same level of performance, in this system.

                       

                      The AMD X6 with either the 450 or 480 does turn in a better performance over the AMD X4 with either video card.

                       

                      The question.... Are you seeing result that are like this?  Where using the exact same computer, turns in the same results with different video cards.

                      From the number of emails I get about the article, other have reported this to me also.  I have had a few people who said when they did see a minor speed increase when they did switch between a 450 and a 480 and a couple who did see a good speed increase.

                      I am working on changing the article to reflect this and would really appreciate your input or Bills input on this. 

                      I have looked at your benchmark chart and read through the result, but one thing that concerns me when reading some of the results is what programs do they have running in background, if any.  And how is that effecting their performance.  That is why I used the two systems I listed above to do the tests with.  It gives me a controlled enviroment to do test the performance of the video cards in.

                      As a side note, when I tested the 450 and 480 cards in a friends Intel I7 system, again we didn't see any performance difference between the two video cards, but he did have some programs running in background which may have caused the perfornce results I got.

                       

                      Best Regards

                      David Knarr