1 person found this helpful
Not worth the expenditure. Underqualified, underspecced in all aspects. Too slow a CPU, not enough memory, not enough disks, crippled BIOS and to top it off, a Dell.
Look here to see what makes a good system: PPBM5 Benchmark
1 person found this helpful
I agree with Harm. That all-in-one desktop is no better than a typical laptop PC in CS5 performance even with the maximum loaded specs that you had specced for it. In fact, it costs as much money as a laptop PC of similar performance - but without any of the portability that makes a laptop PC a laptop. What's more, the i5-460M is an older Arrandale CPU rather than a mobile Sandy Bridge CPU - and is only a dual-core CPU (all Arrandales have only two physical cores). Plus, the all-in-one can accommodate only one internal hard drive - and there is no provision at all whatsoever to accommodate a second fast hard drive since the only connectors that system has are a few USB 2.0 ports (which are too slow for even a single current-model hard drive, let alone a RAIDed external hard drive).
Hi Harm, Rjl,
Many thanks for your quick replies - greatly appreciated.
I am not a professional by any stretch, and wonder if many of the systems commented on within these forums may be good enough for me, although not for other users, when compared to the very powerful systems available.
Without having a custom system built, could you recommend a starting point for a make/model? I started by researching Dell options, but am now looking into Asus following the link from Harm. Do you have any recommendations? (on a budget around £800 ($1300)).
Many thanks in advance,
You pretty much have to go custom-built or build-it-yourself at this point. The Asus brand that's referred to in the PPBM5 Results list refers to motherboards, not complete systems. (In fact, the overwhelming majority of systems in the PPBM5 list are custom or DIY builds.) Most brands of pre-built systems make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to configure to specs that are anywhere near Adobe's minimum recommended configuration (such as two or more physical hard drives configured as totally separate volumes, a higher-end Nvidia GeForce series graphics card and 12GB or more RAM) because most are housed in cases that are too small and come with PSUs that are too underpowered, and very few companies even offer options that come anywhere close to Adobe's recommended minimum configuration.
And laptop PCs generally have a tough time competing with fast desktops and workstations in the PPBM5 benchmark: The few laptops that rank in even the top half of the results list (as indicated by "Med" or better) mostly use desktop CPUs - and only one system that's based on a truly mobile CPU (a Clarksfield-based i7-740QM) ranked that high.
Desktop Video Editing PC http://www.adkvideoediting.com/
Laptop Video Editing PC http://www.sagernotebook.com/
This message has a really good graphic about requirements
CS5 Requirements http://forums.adobe.com/thread/810750?tstart=0
Thank you kindly for all of your help.
I have started to look into this option:
+ upgraded video card to Nvidia GTX 560
+ 2nd 1TB hard disk
+ Sound card Creative XFi Audio 7.1
This looks like it's ticking more boxes!!
Or this one:
Any thoughts? Is there anything I'm missing?
All typical gaming machines. Look at least at i7-930+, 12 GB memory, 3 x 7200 RPM SATA drives and a GTX 460+ video card.
And do not get a audio card, just use the onboard audio chip.
I agree. Only get a discrete audio card if one is also going to mix and/or equalize and/or balance audio tracks with that PC. But since most video editing work involves very little (if any) audio mixing/balancing/EQing (in fact, most of what audio work the video editor is going to perform is simple cuts and "splices"), onboard audio will suffice.
Thank you very much for your help. I have never bought a customised PC before, and your guidance has been extremely appreciated.
I am still considering certain options, and would very much value your input if possible.
Which would you recommend:
Intel Core i7 950
Intel Core i5 2400S (which I think is Sandy Bridge)
Reading a bit of the info on www.intel.com and doing a comparison here, http://www.intel.com/en_UK/consumer/products/processors/comparison-chart.htm
do I still need an nVidia graphics card if I go for the 2400S?
Currently my plan is to get the GTX 460 or 560.
Thanks in advance,
Get an i7-950, forget about the crippled 2400 and get either a 460 or 560. You still need the nVidia card. The integrated Intel chip is utterly worthless.
I agree with Harm, in this case. Premiere Pro CS5.x does not support QuickSync (nor will it support QuickSync for the foreseeable future), and thus integrated Intel GPUs are out of consideration. In this case, the integrated Intel graphics would have forced CS5.x's MPE to run in software-only mode, and the timeline export performance would have been no better than other GPU's in software-only MPE mode. Worse, without QuickSync support in Premiere, the MPEG-2 DVD and H.264 encoding performance would have been much, much slower than most of the discrete PCIe GPU's.
And the crippled i5-2400S is not a good choice in a video editing PC: Even if you're using that CPU on a motherboard that allows massive overclocking (which with currently available boards would have completely disabled the integrated Intel graphics and thus would have required you to purchase a discrete graphics card anyway), you will never get anything above 3.0 GHz out of that CPU with all four cores in use. What's more, even when overclocked to its maximum comfortable level, the Sandy Bridge i5's are still about 20 to 25 percent slower overall than an equally-clocked Sandy Bridge i7 because the quad-core i5's have no HyperThreading whereas all i7's have HyperThreading. (I did a test, whose results were not reported on the PPBM5 results list, on my previous i7-950 system with both HyperThreading enabled and HyperThreading disabled. Running 12GB of DDR3-1600 memory and the CPU at its stock 3.06 GHz, the total PPBM5 time increased from 297 seconds with HT enabled to about 345 seconds with HT disabled.) Put them both together, and you have an overclocked-to-the-max (3.00 GHz) i5-2400S system that still performs significantly slower than a stock-speed (2.66 GHz) i7-920.