17 Replies Latest reply on Sep 22, 2011 5:29 AM by Xoomtell

    Best CPU value vs performance?

    Xoomtell Level 1



      I am tired of the slow performance my old i7 920 delivers when editing in Ppro 5. So I consider buying a new CPU for my PC.I have good disks, FX3800 Nvidia, 12 GB ram etc. but need some more speed from the CPU I guess....


      Here is a list of compatible CPUs - but wich one should I choose? I´m only using this PC for Adobe Master Collection and other workstuff. No gaming at all.


      But I am in doubt about wich CPU to choose - not paying for something that is overkill or too slow. Any ideas?




        • 1. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
          Jim_Simon Level 9

          If you can wait a month, you may want to have a look at the new i7 3930K.  If you can't wait,  the i7 2600K is the best option right now.


          Both will require a new motherboard.  But that's to be expected.  Another LGA-1366 wouldn't be a mart investment to replace a 920 at this point.

          1 person found this helpful
          • 2. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
            Harm Millaard Level 7

            You could have a look at the 970+ hexa cores, without the need to invest in a new mobo and RAM. You can also profit from a better video card, something like the GTX 570+ and upping the memory to 24 GB.


            See Benchmark Results

            • 3. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
              Jim_Simon Level 9

              Really, Harm?  A 970 at this stage of the game?  To replace a 920?


              That's very surprising advice coming from you.

              • 4. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                Harm Millaard Level 7

                Not really Jim. Just looking at the economics here. The 970 performs noticeably better than an i7-920, especially with AVCHD/H.264 material and exports and one can continue using the mobo and RAM one has. The only investment is the CPU and that is around $ 580. Investing in a 2600K will cost more, because you have to get a new CPU, new mobo, new RAM to operate with 16 GB or leaving the existing RAM untouched, maybe requiring a downgrade to 8 GB to avoid single channel memory use, further reducing the attractiveness of a 2600 and possibly a new cooler and it will not perform better than a 970.


                The i7-3930/3960 will not appear before mid November and they require almost everything new, CPU, RAM, mobo, and possibly water cooling because of the limited space between the huge socket and the DIMM slots, making existing coolers difficult, especially with the supported 1600 DDR sticks, while the initial mobos will not officially support PCI-e 3.0 which is only expected in Q2/2012. It still is too early to tell what is wise to go for with SB-E.


                I'm still using a 920 and want to upgrade to SB-E, but not before Q2/2012 because I want to wait for PCIe-3.0 raid controllers and support of PCIe-3.0 on the mobo's and for prices to come down a bit. If the OP has that time, yes he better wait a bit, but if not, then the 970 is the better alternative.

                • 5. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                  Bill Gehrke Most Valuable Participant



                  Have you tested your system to see how well it really performs.  That is what Premiere Pro BenchMark (PPBM5) is designed to do for you.  Maybe you just need some tuning!

                  1 person found this helpful
                  • 6. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                    Jim_Simon Level 9

                    Looking over the benchmarks and prices again, I see your point Harm.


                    As a point of interest, the 980 is just slightly faster than the 970, but currently $2 cheaper on Newegg.

                    • 7. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                      Xoomtell Level 1

                      Thx Harm


                      I will take a look at the 970 or maybe 980. Originally I did consider 980X, but I guess it´s overkill? Bet I need a better cooler for that one - and it is also more expensive - might not be worth the extra money?

                      Thx for the answers - I try the Benchmark someday too...



                      • 8. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                        Harm Millaard Level 7



                        In my reply to Jim I should have added, as I did in my answer to you, a "+" behind the i7-970 so it would have read i7-970+.


                        The difference between the 980 and the 980X is the unlocked nature of the latter, making overclocking a lot easier. Whether that is overkill is not something I can answer for you, but among the Top-20 results on the PPBM5 test there is not a single non-overclocked system, so that is telling, I think.


                        When you decide to overclock, you really want a good third party CPU cooler like CoolerMaster, Noctua or Prolimatech. Good cooling is extremely important and often overlooked. The lower the temps, the longer the life-span of your CPU and the less mysterious errors and hangs or BSOD's.

                        • 9. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                          Xoomtell Level 1

                          Hi again


                          Thx for all your answers! I love you guys ;-)


                          I am still i doubt about what to do? Don´t know if I should start a brand new thread about this, but then I would have to explain the background for my considerations once more and all your good advices. So here i go ;-) What should I do? I guess there is these three options:

                          1. Upgrade my existing PC with a 1155 MOBO and a i7 2600K and 16 GB RAM for aboiut 1000$ - but my 2 year old powersupply is making noises right now, and the HDD also makes some high frequency noise.
                          2. A brand new PC with i7 2600K, 16 GB Ram, 2 x 1GB SATA III 6GB/sec disks - special Desktop setup with noisereductioned cabinet etc. With Quadro 4000 I could get this for under 3000$ VAT incl. If I keep my almost new FX3800 I could get it for about 2000$
                          3. Wait till 2012 and buy the new LGA 2011 setup? But what will the price be like? Guess I would have to spend maybe 4000$ (Core i7 3930K/Core i7 3960K) on a system that does the same job as options 1 and 2 and even more if I would like to get an even better system (Core i7 Extreme 3960X that is set to 999$ just for the CPU)? or do you think the price for a Core i7 3960K system will start at prices comparrable to the i7 2600K? ths price for the Core i7 3960K seems to be almost equal to the i7 2600K?


                          I do not need state of the art machinery. My main wish is to get:

                          1. A less noiser PC = not so much heat and fans - could be an argument for choosing the 2600 I guess - it is making less heat than the 9xx series and I guess the new LGA 2011 CPU´s will make more heat compared to the 2600 as they go 130W compred to the 2600 90W? Don´t know if thats right?

                          2. A more smooth editting experience - playing back in full res inside PPro CS5. Guess the 2600 could do that - would it help buyng the Quadro 4000 or should I just go with my FX3800? Rendering time during export is not an issue right now - as the FX3800 does a pretty good job. I do not only work with video - so waiting a few minutes for a 10 minutes movie to export is allright. Right now I mainly work with AVCHD files in 720 50P - I might be working more with 1080 25P/50P in the near future, so I need a PC that is able to handle that quite a bit better than my existing system. I have almost just spend 1000$ on the FX3800 - it´s not even a year old yet...it helped exporting compared to my old Nvidia 285, but besieds from that I really did not see any major leap forward in gain of performance.


                          I think what I need is advice about wether to buy the 2600 now or wait for the LGA 2011. Guess I could live with my 920 for another ½ year, if I knew that I could get a much better system for the same price that I would have to pay for a 2600 based system.



                          Any clues?

                          • 10. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                            Harm Millaard Level 7



                            Before answering your question on what is wise to do, look again at Bill's suggestion in post #5, where he suggested you run the PPBM5 Benchmark test to see how your system performs. It is not unknown that tuning a system can lead to significant performance gains and if that happens in your case, you may be OK with postponing your decision for some months.

                            • 11. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                              Xoomtell Level 1

                              Hi Harm


                              I just did a minute ago. Can´t wait for the result....and what should I do with it when I get it? Will I be able to see if I have bottlenecks and where in my system?



                              • 12. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                                Zoop studio Level 1

                                You can see the result on the textfile on your sytem in the PPBM files.

                                You see 4 result numbers, 1=Disk i/o, 2= mpeg/dvd, 3=H.264, 4= mpe off and the second resultfile mpe on (cuda/mercury engine)

                                • 13. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                                  Xoomtell Level 1

                                  OK . i see.


                                  My results are:


                                  Output.txt: "127","45","119","14"'

                                  Output-MPE.txt: "127","45","119","15"


                                  Is that good or bad?



                                  • 14. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                                    Harm Millaard Level 7



                                    Please follow the instructions carefully for the non-MPE test, Step 4 only. Then run Statistics.vbs again and resubmit. Currently the figure 14 means than you have probably forgotten to set MPE to software only.

                                    • 15. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                                      Xoomtell Level 1

                                      Oh sorry - I tried once more and my figures are now:


                                      Output-MPE: "125","110","117","14"

                                      Output: "125","110","117","139"


                                      Good or bad? Can you analyze it for me?


                                      I have subitted the data once more to the PPBM5 site.





                                      • 16. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                                        Harm Millaard Level 7



                                        Thanks for that submission. The data are now added.


                                        If you go to the results page (Narrow your search) and click twice on the column header 'Date' the list is sorted descendingly and your entry is at top.


                                        Your rank # 204 is not worse than one expects with your system specs. I'll give you the details in a response to your submission, but you would gain from increasing memory from 12 to 24 GB and adding one or two disks to your setup. Last you could consider some overclocking, which is not as terrifying as it is often made out to be. Look here: Adobe Forums: Overclocking the i7, a beginners guide


                                        Increasing memory can be ported to a future new system, as can the extra disks, so in this way you keep investments down while slowly news evaporates about the new SB-E CPU's. It buys you some extra time to decide, without breaking the bank.

                                        • 17. Re: Best CPU value vs performance?
                                          Xoomtell Level 1

                                          Hi Harm


                                          Thank you for the quick reply.

                                          I wonder why 24 GB of ram should help anything? I only use 50% pof my RAM when editting - so I have plenty of free RAM allready?

                                          I have only bad experiences overclocking - tried with my existing setup OC the CPU and tried a lot of differnet setups - I only got bluescreen and constantly lockups. guess I´m not an OC guy yet...?


                                          My disks are 7200 RPM and 3 GB/s. Would it make any difference upgrading to f.eks. 2x2TB 6GB/s on a new MOBO with a 2600K CPU and 16 GB RAM (LGA1155 MOBOs are 16 GB only as far as I know)?

                                          What I need is a smooth playback inside PPro - preferably also with effects if possible, but thats only a "nice to have". And less noisy setup - so I guess a RAID with a lot of disks might be too noisy? Or is it possible to make low-noise setup consisting of a 2600K and 4-6 disk RAID?