Whenever one edits GOP (Group of pictures) based codecs, PR needs to index those clips before it can edit them. Additionally, if needs to conform the audio and generate peak files, that can show the waveform. All these files are stored in the media cache. For easy access to all these files, PR also creates pointer files that are stored in the media cache database.
When loading clips into a new project, you can see these activities taking place in the right bottom corner of the display and PR needs to finish that process before you can edit. If you clean the media cache and media cache database and start PR again, it will recreate these files as needed.
In general it is wise to regularly clean the media cache and media cache database, so files from previous projects, that are no longer needed are removed.
The weakness in your system, whether it is the 990X or the 2600K, is the two SSD's. One for OS & programs can be acceptable and will probably gain you a few seconds loading programs each day for a price that is around 15 times higher than a decent boot disk like the Samsung F4 320 GB, around € 470 versus € 32. It depends on the wallet of your boss, but if it were me, I would consider it a waste of money for some lousy seconds loading the program. It has no impact on the editing performance.
The second SSD is another waste of money and not enough for comfortable editing. You need at least three physical different disks, preferably more. I would prefer 4 or 5 Samsung F3 1 TB disks @ € 42 than this single SSD for € 470. It is far less costly and will deliver much better performance. SSD's are notoriously bad at constant writing, even the much touted Vertex 3, and that is what you need when editing. SSD's are a waste of money for editing and have never shown any performance improvements over conventional disks. Quite the contrary. Look here: PPBM5 Benchmark
If you skip the SSD's and choose the suggested Samsung's, you have the 990X practically for free in comparison to your original budget and then the 990X is the better choice than the 2600K.
Thank you so much for your response, you've defiently helped in clearing up some of my questions..
Now as for budget... Really isn't one, trust me when I say we've wasted a lot more on a lot less..
If and SSD isn't a good idea for the scratch/media cache/database would buying a good quality SAS controller and Raid'ing 3-4 600GB 15k SAS drives be a better option then plain SATA drives?
As I said money isn't really an issue, hell if I knew that they needed it I would through in dual Xeon's but their not crunching enough data for what I can see for it to be close to utilised.
To correct 1 point:
Intel CPU Core i7 2600K, 3.40GHz, 8MB CACHE, LGA1155
24GB DDR3 (PC16000)"
24GB??? You mean 16 GB.
System1 It is a better choise any how just wait a bit and buy the new generation of sandy octo core, whit them will arrive the new moduls of ram so you can rise 32GB. and get a very hight clock speed.
I guess Prise for the new octo will be about the price of the i7990 may be -
I understand where you are coming from, being the systems and network guy. My son is a highly acclaimed Network and Security specialist consultant who works in very complex environments and whenever we talk about storage, it is always about HP Storageworks with huge backbones allowing bandwidth's in excess of 48 GB's and other unrealistic achievements, at least for the lonely video editor, and in his vocabulary there is only one disk, a 15K SAS. But his recent participation in the MMS (Microsoft Management Summit) in Vegas changed his mind a bit. He now even suggested we get some new 2 TB SATA disks for our local server storage.
However, for the lonely video editor there is no discernible advantage to justify the cost difference between 15K SAS and regular SATA.
On the highly disk intensive benchmark Bill Gehrke tested with 8x 15K SAS drives and with 8x SATA disks in raid0 and the difference was not discernible,
I do agree the a good raid controller is very beneficial for performance. Again, if you look at the benchmark results I linked to in an earlier post, you will see that all the top performers use raids and sometimes even massive ones. Popular choices are two raid0 arrays on the mobo, or an LSI or Areca controller with raid5 or raid3 or even raid 30. My personal preference is Areca with extended cache (4GB) and BBM (battery backup module), but it is pretty expensive.
OK so before I go and order it all, hows this final spec look..
Bear in mind I have already mentioned to the owner about the new Sandy E CPU's out towards the end of the year and their superior specs, and the response I got was thats ok we'll just buy new machines once there out..
Anyways heres the specs
Anything I should reconsider before I purchase???
1.Power Supplier to small. go For 1000w. Puting in accoun you will OC the pc in a very near future.
2. Change the SSD. Look the new Corsair SSD Force Series 3 . 550MB/520MB
3.CPU Cooling. that can make the difference betwen a Porche and a Bugati. (Only if you wan to OC your pc, Then Letme know and I will give you all info you need to make a stable 4.3ghz clock.)
Okay here are the final Specs until the new Sandy's are out.
Intel i7 990X
Asus P6T7 Mobo Seems like overkill to the max (Would it matter if I changed that to a cheaper alternative like a ASUS Rampage III Extreme??)
2x12GB DDR3 (PC2000) Low Latency Ram
1x OCZ Agility 3 120GB SSD
6x 1TB Samsung F3 Harddrives (Raid 10)
Corsair AX850 PSU
Corsair Obsidian 650D Case
OK I just have some questions regarding the best setup for CS5 on this machine... Harm, I hope you might be able to help me here...
The Raid 10 will just use the onboard raid controller. Is it really that bad in performace, when you consider they're currently using a single 10k WD velocoraptor drive in their current machines.
Therefore if I install the OS/CS5.5 on the SSD and then set the Media Cache Files / Media Cache Database to the SSD and the Scratch disk to Raid?
Whilst I understand that I should have more spindles in the Raid whilst also using a proper Raid controller its just I know that they'll just end up turfing this box once the new Sandy CPU's are out, in which I will either move them accross to a proper 10-16 sindle Raid with a decent Raid controller or ultimately move them to a 10GB iSCSI 32 spindle SAN.
The on-board ICH10R is perfectly good for striped or mirrored arrays, but is lousy for parity arrays. So your intended raid10, which is mirrored, should run OK without a dedicated controller.
This 4 disk raid10 array would probably show a performance around twice as fast as a single disk.
1) Your budget does not seem too limited (i7-990x is in your spec.)
2) You will be building a whole new PC in less than one year
Why not purchase and configure a good parity RAID card now to gain lots of speed for CS5 and other apps. and also reliability. Then, when you build the new PC moving the whole RAID over will be easy and secure.
If I were in your shoes this is what I would be doing and if the budget need to be cut some I would still go with a good RAID card, but downgrade to a i7-970.