• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

re: AMD or Intel for Video Editing PC?

T

The Rock

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 9, 2000
Messages
344
A friend of mine wants me to build him a video editing PC and I'm not too sure if the AMD64 or the P4 would be better.

For the P4 machine I was thinking:
P4 3.06GHZ
Abit IC7 MAX-3
2x512mb Kingston HyperX PC3200

He already has an ATI Radeon All-in-wonder 8500DV and a soundblaster live.

So P4 3.06 or AMD Athlon64 3000+?
 
I think the last time this came up the P4 was said to be better, beating even the A64. The system you have there looks good, with plenty of RAM (what you need) but the P4 system would be better then the A64.
 
what i've read and been told P4 for video editing.


i would suggest more ram if he can afford it.
 
Originally posted by The Rock
A friend of mine wants me to build him a video editing PC and I'm not too sure if the AMD64 or the P4 would be better.

For the P4 machine I was thinking:
P4 3.06GHZ
Abit IC7 MAX-3
2x512mb Kingston HyperX PC3200

He already has an ATI Radeon All-in-wonder 8500DV and a soundblaster live.

So P4 3.06 or AMD Athlon64 3000+?
Click to expand...

I would recommend a P4 3.2 800 fsb over the 533 fsb 3.06 chip.
 
Originally posted by MontyAC
I would recommend a P4 3.2 800 fsb over the 533 fsb 3.06 chip.
Click to expand...

Would you really notice the difference in performance?`
 
Originally posted by 4keatimj
Would you really notice the difference in performance?`
Click to expand...

There should be better performance with the 3.2, specially if overclocked. If not the 3.2 which is about $50 more than the 3.06 then get a 3.0 over the 3.06. they are about the same price.
 
the immediate advantage of 64bit computing is the ability to have an application employ more than 2GB of memory, 32bit computing limits the onboard support to 4GB but 2GB per application (Xeon duallies extention excepted)
Breaking Through the 2 GB Memory Ceiling @ Workstation Planet

Excerpts:
These chips, however, and to a large degree the entire x486 architecture, are limited because they can deliver only 2GB of RAM per application. Although that is more than enough memory for the average computer user, the average workstation user requires more.

Caching large databases, working with large 2D image files, modeling building plans in a CAD program, rendering complex machinery in an MCAD program, and running weather simulations all require the manipulation of large files in real time. And that often requires more memory than a 32-bit system can deliver.

On a 32-bit system, any given application will be limited to an allocation of 2GB of RAM, and the CPU limits the amount of RAM in the system to 4GB. This doesn't mean that a workstation with 4GB of RAM is always going to have 2GB going to waste. This 2GB limit applies to the resources that can be drawn by any one application. With 4GB, two different applications could crank through operations with 2GB of RAM each with the swap space never getting touched. Still, many workstation applications require more than 2GB to efficiently complete a single task

The latest 64-bit chips, such as AMD's Athlon 64 and Intel's Itanium 2, have twice the memory registers of a 32-bit chip, but the total memory that can be accessed is much more than double. A 32-bit processor can access up to 4.3 billion memory addresses for a total of about 4GB of physical memory. A 64-bit processor could conceivably access over 18 petabytes of physical memory. If you are sorting a database with terabytes of information, than 64-bit addressing can make a big difference.

Some applications are limited to 2GB even on 64-bit systems. Adobe's Photoshop has a 2GB RAM limit and Adobe has no plans of increasing it, even though Apple's latest operating system supports 64-bit extensions; Adobe says 2GB is plenty for the image editor's functions. Plus, using a Power Mac G5 with 4GB of RAM does enable users to work in Photoshop to the limits of its RAM allocation while, in the background, Final Cut Pro works steadily through a file conversion without impacting the speed of Photoshop.

If you need to manipulate large files or work with models in excess of 2GB, migrating to a 64-bit processor and operating system is essential. And with a bunch of 64-bit chips reaching the market, a host of 64-bit-ready Linux distributions, and a growing number of off-the-shelf applications, it is increasingly affordable to break the 2GB memory ceiling"
Click to expand...

so if the ap will support it, and the board is populated with that much RAM....
really depends on what level of video editing your talking about

alternately video aps like Hyperthreading
 
Originally posted by MontyAC
I would recommend a P4 3.2 800 fsb over the 533 fsb 3.06 chip.
Click to expand...

Whoops! I meant the Intel Pentium 4 3.0C GHz 512K 800FSB.

So it looks like the P4 would be the one to get considering the programs available now. This is for my friend's small business, as he shoots weddings.

More RAM would be very nice, but 1gig DIMMs are hard to find up here.

Right now he has:
AMD XP1900
2x512mb PC2100 RAM
K7S5A Motherboard
 
now.. I know that video editing is a daunting task for PCs... but I don't think you'll need 4 GB of RAM... just get 4 512 sticks if you even need that much.

On the other note, yes, I think that it has been found to be true that P4s are better for video encoding.
 
I've been working in video for quite awhile now and have built more than a dozen NLE setups.
512megs of ram with WinXP editing long format wedding is fine, 1gig would be more than enough, any more is just a waste.

I've never used an Amd based setup, all the setups I've used were either Mac, Amiga, PII, PIII, and PIV based. I would get the fastest PIV chip to help with the rendering.

Also, Premiere Pro is supposed to be able to do real time effects with DV source files, if that is true, I'd recommend getting Premiere Pro to edit with.
I am currently using a Matrox RT2000 at home and it does real time effects so I don't have to render that much. I just got a DVD burner so I am going to test out how long it takes to render a DVD compliant file, probably take forever with my P3 733.
 
Originally posted by pbXassassinX1524
now.. I know that video editing is a daunting task for PCs... but I don't think you'll need 4 GB of RAM... just get 4 512 sticks if you even need that much.

On the other note, yes, I think that it has been found to be true that P4s are better for video encoding.
Click to expand...

probably not if its just wedding videos
compositing and special effects being billed hourly however...
of course that is dual xeon\opteron level stuff
 
If the application is optimized for the P4, and it most likely is, then go that route. It is faster than anything AMD has to offer at the moment, at least judging from the benches I have seen.
 
Is he going to be overclocking this machine? If not then dont buy an Abit board. Buy an Intel board for stability purposes and memory compatibility. The MAX 3 does not like CH-5 chips which are on that Kingston PC3200.

I seriously doubt they will need more then 2GB of RAM. I would buy 2x512MB now and another 1GB later on if need be after testing the system out.

The Pentium 4 is alot stronger for video or media encodeing or rendering then the A64 because of Hyperthreading.

As for the Processor i would get the 3.0c or 3.2c because of the 800MHz FSB.
 
Originally posted by burningrave101
Is he going to be overclocking this machine? If not then dont buy an Abit board. Buy an Intel board for stability purposes and memory compatibility. The MAX 3 does not like CH-5 chips which are on that Kingston PC3200.

I seriously doubt they will need more then 2GB of RAM. I would buy 2x512MB now and another 1GB later on if need be after testing the system out.

The Pentium 4 is alot stronger for video or media encodeing or rendering then the A64 because of Hyperthreading.

As for the Processor i would get the 3.0c or 3.2c because of the 800MHz FSB.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up on the RAM incombatibility. I can get Crucial instead. I'll only start with 1gig of RAM and add some more later if he needs it.

He did want me to overlock the CPU, but not to the extent that I would do it, just some light overclocking.

Thanks for all the input so far! :)
 
I'd suggest a Dualie athlon MP motherboard with a few 2400+'s or some such on there, with 2 gigs of ram.

This would own.

~Adam
 
Bandwidth theft is frowned upon here - host these images yourself and then repost them - Mcseiam

Lower is better obviously, go P4! :)
 
Good benchies, but erm... I don't think people around here like it very well when you directly link to people's images :p
 
Personally overclocking would be ok but my very last concern..

First concern is will this guy want to surf, read mail, play a game, or do anyting while this box takes care of the video..If so i would suggest a Dual processor set up weather ya go AMD or Intell..

As far as flat out fastest the seconds of time difference between AMD and Intell means nothing when ya consider the 64bit ability of AMD..Thats the future... NOW....

If this guy plans on using that system while he does his video encoding you will find a unhappy customer no matter AMD or Intell if you stay with a single platform. BESIDES the software we use to encode is double threaded and designed for a dual processor workstation ....Something to think about.......
 
Its no question whether or not you should go with a Pentium 4 for rendering and encodeing.

Here you can see a Pentium 4 vs Dual Opteron 240's.

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2003q3/workstation/index.x?pg=14

Dual Opteron 246's or 248's would probably do better at most encodeing than a Pentium but would be a very expensive setup.

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2003q4/opteron-x48/index.x?pg=5

A single Opteron 246 is $689 retail and it takes two to outperform the single Pentium 4 with Hyperthreading.
 
I'm going to stray from my normal A64/AFX/Opteron cheering and recommend a Northwood-C based system.

Say, a 3.2C and 1GB of RAM, along with a Raptor for boot/scratch and an IDE drive or two for mass storage.
 
All I can say is spend a lot on fast storage. When I edit my drives are the bottle neck :(

I have a dual athlon system @ 1.47ghz with two 7200rpm disk drives.


I would suggest three 73 GB raptors, one for (OS, swap file, and premiere preview folder) and the other two in raid 0 for content.
 
Dual Xeons or a P4 will do the best job....and it's usually what the manufacturer of the software suggests...
 
Originally posted by Scottw
I would suggest three 73 GB raptors, one for (OS, swap file, and premiere preview folder) and the other two in raid 0 for content.
Click to expand...
Umm. No.

One for OS and swap, two 36.7GB units in RAID0 for active projects, and big IDE for mass storage.
 
Originally posted by Stiletto One
Umm. No.

One for OS and swap, two 36.7GB units in RAID0 for active projects, and big IDE for mass storage.
Click to expand...


Yeah that is ok too, but the reason I said only 73gb ones is because they are faster than the 36gb ones. Now if the 36'ers were the same as the 73gb I would have suggested those.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top