1 person found this helpful
PSU: go for a gold label with 850+W.
HDD1: go for a € 32 Samsung 320 GB F4 for the boot disk.
CASE: Go for a big tower like the Antec 1200 or the CoolerMaster HAF932 or best Lian Li.
HDD2+: Get as many as you can afford, but at least 4 for dual raid0 arrays.
I/O: forget about Matrox unless you want to cripple performance severely.
Optical: consider a BR burner.
Look at PPBM5 Benchmark for some system setups.
HDD1 - Does boot disc improve performance, other than boot time and app loading/startup?
I/O - Matrox cripples system? What then are the I/O options for analog sources and ext ntsc monitor?
OPTICAL - How compatible are BR's created with a burner, do they work across the spectrum of BR players?
1 person found this helpful
No, yes, fully.
Re 2: One option is Canopus AVDC-1xx or 3xx.
CPU - Video Guys website does not recommend Sandy Bridge for PPro CS5.5""""
they are clueless, at first it was funny but now this is getting out of control
time to call Gary again and get him to remove that nonsense.
Time to tone down a bit, Scott.
Gary is correct in the limitations of the P/H/Z platform, even if you don't want to see it from a commercial point of view.
Might be time to correct your nonsense that the 'mid-level' platforrm outperforms the 'enthousiast' platform. Just take a look at the specs of the '68 versus '79 platform and it's capablities. The '68 platform is no more than mediocre and that is the simple reason Intel designated it as such, no matter how much you tout about it as being the ultimate, just below dual Xeon X5680+ platforms.
I do agree that '68 is a nice platform for the mid-level average user, about in the same class as the X58 but with some limitations, but not for the enthousiast, he has to wait for the '79 platform.
the X79 platform is non-existant as of right now therefore pointless to even discuss (unless it was coming out in a month)
but lest pick apart the nonsense
actually nope i am stopping right here until i talk with Gary today
No offense but I have already posted and emailed the numbers that disprove any negative comments about the SB and I/O cards and raid controllers. However people still continue to drum on about this subject based purely on speculation about the specifications and with no benchmarks or real world testing results to back it up. Video guys is also putting Thunderbolt on a pedestal and it's only a PCI-E 2.0 1X connection. According to one of our External chassis manufacturers, the Thunderbolt chips are in such short supply that most drive units wont be out until OCT or later. They also mentioned the bandwidth right now is only running at 50% though I have no way to verify that. So since the numbers supporting SB are readily available and there are none showing the speculative cons, why don't we go with the actual testing and not the speculation.
So what's the consensus. To SandyBridge or not to SandyBridge?
Well... if SandyBridge is not a problem then perhaps this should be my build:
CS5.5 / WinPro 64bit
MB: P8P67 Pro Rev 3.1
CPU: i7-2600 3.4ghz LGA1155
RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengance DDR3 1600mhz
PSU: Corsair TX750
The rest is much the same as first list.
GFX: EVGA GTX570 HD
CASE: Antec P183 (quiet)
HDD's: WD Caviar Black
I'd replace the Corsair TX750 with a newer and higher-quality PSU: That TX750 (if it's the original version) is long on the tooth. It's been superceded by the TX750 v2, which is of higher quality than the original TX750. However, I would up this to a TX 850 v2 at a minimum if you're going to do significant overclocking of the CPU in that system.
Second, the Asus P8P67 Pro Rev. 3.1 that you listed is the same board as the Rev. 3.0 except that Rev. 3.1 now has ASMedia USB 3.0 controller chips instead of the Renesas USB 3.0 controller chips used in Rev. 3.0. (My main rig is based on a Rev. 3.0 board, with the Renesas USB 3.0 chips.)
Thanks - I'm not really into overclocking. More interested in a stable balanced/matched system with no weak links.
Sandy sounds fine, particularly if you are not into overclocking.
Regarding, "balanced, matched, no weak links", you need at least one 2x1TB RAID 0, with a second 2x1TB RAID 0 even better.
Thanks to all for the comments to date, and for an excellent forum. There's been lots of good info although I still have not heard a consensus (for the layman) regarding whether to S-Bridge or not to S-Bridge.
Here is an update:
(I guess this should have been noted at the outset, nevertheless please view my observations within the following context:
1. I consider my editing requirements to be intermediate. I don't do it every day and when I do it's anything from DV to XDCAM. I do also use the PC for other everyday stuff.
2. Although I've been producing & editing film & video for many years, I am not, nor do I want to be a computer expert and studying/comparing all manner of charts and specs. With guidance to the right components, I can build it, set it up, and pretty much get everything running as it should.
3. The main objective is to have a system where all parts come together as a happy team, with no-one dragging down and no-one alone out front. Just all working together in unity.
4. Budget is an issue... isn't it always!)
So I started the build, installed W7Pro and installed CS5 Premiere & P/shop trial. Everything seems to work. However I'm still unsure about some components.
MB: The P8P67 Pro can currnetly use up to 16gb ram. Is this going to be a limitation, is there maybe another board I should consider, with more headroom for growth?
Or perhaps go back to the P6X58D-E / i7-960 config. I know it's not S-Bridge but it can handle up to 24gb ram.
GFX: The GTX570 HD is very long leaving little clearance behind the top HDD. I may change it for the standard (non HD) card which according to specs is 1" to 1.5" shorter, has marginally lower performance and is $20 less.
CASE: The Antec P183 is nice though I'm not sure about the front "door". Mid size seems to have grown about 4" taller compared to my current P4 / Antec mid. Also gotta add that computer cases and components still generally seem to make very inefficient use of space!
I looked at the Coolermaster 690 II and liked the sideways HDD mounting and all the fans. It is big and not as quiet as the Antec. I don't expect to add more than 4 HDD's. Is a full case really required?
PSU: It is the Corsair TX750 v2. Will this suffice or should I go to 850w? (I doubt I would run more than 4 HDD's at one time)
PREMIERE: I miss the Matrox X.tools effects/transitions and it seems that the Premiere transitions still look rather harsh.
So once again, comments/suggestions will be muchly appreciated.
Message was edited by: Tofkan11
I would appreciate some guidance deciding between these two MB's:
P6X58D-E (i7-960 3.2ghz)
P8P67 Pro (C17 2600 3.4ghz)
I think the x58 is an older MB though it costs about $30 more.
Harm, can you please specify, is gold label a brand of PSU or a category amongst the various brands?
It is a category and the Gold category has the highest power efficiency. For your electricity bill it is highly beneficial, but also for stability.
I don't mean to be a pest...
has the S/Bridge question been resolved?
I really need to commit to a MB.
Probably the P6X58D-E or the P8P67 Pro (I already got the latter though I can easily return/exchange it).
This whole rig is costing a lot and I hope to avoid any regrets later.
Sandy bridge issue was fixed in Feb.
If you exchange the P8P67 Pro for a P6X58D-E, you must also exchange the CPU for an i7-9xx series CPU (e.g. i7-960, i7-970, etc.). This is because the P8P67 Pro and the i7-2600K CPU are both Socket LGA 1155 while the P6X58D-E is a Socket LGA 1366 board. 1155 and 1366 are two completely different sockets that are not just electrically incompatible with one another, but are also physically incompatible with one another because 1155 is noticeably smaller than 1366 (socket-size-wise).
Thanks. Yes I understand that when exchanging MB, I would also exchange CPU & RAM.
I have looked at the PPBM benchmarks and many of the listed systems are overclocked, which is not something I plan to do.
So I would still like to know which MB would be preferred, and why.
Stock for stock the 2600 is much faster than all X58 and right there with a 980/990
I was a very early adopter of the Sandy Bridge, and don't regret it for one second. Even the recall was a non-issue- it took a couple of hours and a slap to the head from Scott to figure out the work-around for the controller problem in the first batches of motherboards.
While I have a certain very modest level of tech savvy i am much more interested in having a reliable box that does what it is told than in messing around with a computer once it's built- I would rather spend my limited time writing, shooting or cutting. That said, I confess to having been around computers long enough to remember that sick feeling from dropping a stack of punch cards, the joy of programming games in Basic on the wicked little Tandy Model 100/102s, and the indecent thrill I got from a 20 MB hard drive the size of a New York phone book.
I hadn't really looked at the new tech in years so I figured I could spend last Christmas season researching and building a computer. It ended up taking weeks more than I thought it would but it was time well spent. I needed a solid machine that would run what I threw at it, but in reality it was mostly for CS5-PP, LR, FCP/FCS, and various sound and imaging tools. I decided to go for the Sandy 2600k, even though I wasn't sure about an upgrade path or stability of the new platform. But it seemed promising, and I figured I could always sell the CPU/MB/RAM for better if I needed to.
The short version: it's been awesome.
My system was in the top 25 or something on PPBM5 when I first did the benchmark, with no effort put towards geting a good score and a bunch of useful stuff (and a bunch of crap) installed- and my usual excess junk running in the background. Last time I checked it had fallen to somewhere in the top 30 or so. I am not really that interested in my absolute score, but I do know it is a relatively respectacle performer that I put together at a decent cost.
And don't worry about overclocking on Sandy Bridge: just do it. It takes seconds, at least with the Gigabyte board. Mine has a modest over-clock running on the stock cooler and has been absolutely rock-solid. In fact I've had an after-market cooler sitting in the box for weeks (months, really- long story) and I just haven't felt any pressing need to install it and increase the clock speed. Partly because I have a case with decent cooling, and partly because I filled it with a bunch of drives and don't have any other "excuse" to open it- but mostly because I'm lazy, I'm very busy, and the thing runs like a racehorse.
Speaking of cases, I totally agree on getting a full-sized case and upping the power supply. Cooling is (usually) better and drives are cheap. Motherboards, RAM and CPUs are replaced, but a good case you really like with an adequate power supply will probably last for an ugrade cycle or two (I hope). Also, more drives are good if you use the puter for more than just editing or if you install multiple OSs. The fact that the Sandy Bridge has been such a pleasure to work with is largely responsible for me filling up the case with HDDS and making a configuration that really works for me. I originally had no intention of making such a machine but that's what it's turned into, relatively seamlessly and painlessly.
I am a long time anybody-but-Intel guy (even when I knew it to be wrong-headed) but these Sandy Bridge chips really are the feline's posterior. I am really looking forward to the new developments but I don't feel any burning urge to upgrade. It is not a perfect platform, but they do a lot and they do it cheaply and well.
Message was edited by: pauncho1
Your backstory sounds a lot like mine. In fact I remember as a teen my Dad's business had an IBM computer, it was about as long as a midsize car! And the endless piles of punch cards!
Like you I am more about a reliable box to do the work, rather than endless tweaking and fiddling. Right now I'm just trying to ensure that I start out with a decent foundation. In this regard your post has been very helpful.
So are you saying that the P67 PCIe shared bandwidth and integrated graphics are non-issues?
Actually, the P67 does not support the CPU's integrated graphics, so it's disabled. A discrete graphics card is required in order to use a P67 motherboard-based system.
And all chipsets and CPUs with integrated PCI-e lanes share their PCI-e bandwidth. No single chipset or CPU dedicates any specific PCI-e controller to a single slot. This goes for the X58 chipset, as well, whose typical implementation of its 36 PCI-e lanes has four of them eaten up by the connection between the X58 IOH and the ICH10R, leaving 32 PCI-e 2.0 lanes to be shared between multiple PCI-e x16 slots. And then, the ICH10R provides only six PCI-e lanes that are of only PCI-e 1.1 spec - most of which are also eaten up by onboard devices such as extra USB and SATA controllers and a non-Intel NIC. In that example, the X58 systems actually have two separate PCIe hubs on the motherboard. The P67 platforms have only one PCI-e controller hub on the motherboard (the PCH, which in this chipset's case provides eight PCI-e lanes of full PCI-e 2.0 spec - and again, most of them are eaten up by the on-motherboard controllers); the primary PCI-e controller hub (with 16 available PCI-e 2.0 lanes, plus an additional four lanes that are eaten up by the connection between the CPU and the PCH) is integrated on the CPU itself.
Thanks RjL, Although a lot of those details went over my head, if I read it right, the short answer is that the PCIe sharing is a minor (?) issue and the GFX is a non-issue when considering P67 platform?
So as a comparison, the overall (stock) performance of a P67 / 2600 / 16gb with GTX570 plus additional PCIe card/s would still be noticeably better (by some %?) than a X58 / i7-960 / 24gb?
Should it be a consideration that currently the X58 has more upgrade potential than the P67?
Message was edited by: Tofkan11