ptbpilot Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Currently I am a Roxio EMC9 user, and capture MiniDV from a Sony camera and edit to SD DVD. I am looking to enter the world of HD editing and capture from a HD camcorder. I am looking for input as I will be putting together a new PC for this process. I am considering the following, please tell me what you think and feel free to make any suggestions. Keep in mind this is for capture and editing of HD video from a Canon HD camcorder (AVCHD format IIRC) and I don't have an unlimited budget. Processor: Dual Core Pentium of at least 3 GHZ. Do I really need to go up to Quad Core? RAM: 4GB DDR2 Min GHZ requirement? Graphics Card: Here I really need suggestions! I believe this is where I should splurge. ATI or NVIDIA with at least 256MB on it? What about cards with a GPU? Capture video: Currently I use Firewire for my SD Sony MiniDV. What do HD camcorders use? Are there HDMI PCI cards or do I stick with firewire? HDD: I think 2 SATA drives 7200RPM are a given. One for O/S and the other dedicated to storage and file transfer. I have been following the threads about AVCHD and BD and SD DVD. I think as the price comes down I will move up to a BD burner and buy a BD unit for the home. It sounds like in the mean time I can capture and edit in HD and compress that down to SD for now. Later I can burn it in HD when I obtain BD. If I come across a cheap BD player for the home I can burn using the plug in to a standard DVD for now and play it in the home BD player? Thanks in advance. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_Dave Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 How deep is your pocket book? The more you want to spend the better and faster the system will be. If you are planning to work with large HD files then faster CPUs with large L2 caches is a given. Also consider a separate video card with 512 MB dedicated memory or larger. DDR3 memory can be a performance boost depending on how many clock cycles are needed to read/write data. 3 GB of main processor memory is the maximum useable for 32 bit operating systems. Over 3 GB then switch to a 64 bit OS which you may find not as stable as the 32 bit OS. A three hard drive system using "stripping" between the work pair will provide the ultimate I/O performance. That will also require a raid controller. Look for 1333 mhz internal bus speeds or faster and memory speeds to match. Transferring the data onto your hard drive should be matched with an I/O port speed equal to or faster than the transfer interface port speed of your camera. You have some research to do but in the end you should be happy with your performance verses the amount you spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdanteek Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Intel C2D E8500, Asus P5Q3 Deluxe WIFI, ATI HD 4850 512MB GDDR3, 4GB Corsair XMS3 DDR3-1600 I have this system, build this or above, above preferably (CPU)... Hard Drives, I run four with a RAID 0 (striped disks) array. You need large L2 cache for C2D and Quad Core or large L3 cache for the new Intel Core i7. Or wait for the 'first octa-core processor--that's eight cores' due out this year! http://www.overclock.net/hardware-news/489...-octa-core.html Remember you need HDCP compliant hardware for Commercial Blu-ray DVD.... cd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_Dave Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 CD, I want your system. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptbpilot Posted April 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Thanks for the replies! I think for CPU I may opt for the Intel q9400 quad core 2.6ghz socket 775. The big thing will be finding a mobo that is 1333, supports raid etc.... I am considering making the system 64bit to take advantage of the RAM greater than 3GB. Is this the way to go? Does Creator 2009 support Vista 64 bit? Am I to expect a lot of trouble with a 64 bit system? If I go 32 bit, I'll def go with the Raid0 and will probably go with DDR2 as most of the mobo's I see for the Intel are very reasonably priced. I could check into DDR3 compatible boards. What do you consider "LARGE" L2 cache? Do I need a video card with a GPU? Thanks!! Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerman Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 While most people still don't get the benefit of 64bit, try buying a 32 bit OS system in the big box stores. Almost all of them are 64bit. I think it's about to come of age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdanteek Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 I think for CPU I may opt for the Intel q9400 quad core 2.6ghz socket 775. The big thing will be finding a mobo that is 1333, supports raid etc.... Go to newegg search Asus Intel Mother Boards, shouldn't be a problem at all.. Am I to expect a lot of trouble with a 64 bit system? If you do encounter trouble we'll call it self inflicted. I could check into DDR3 compatible boards. I built my DDR3 Mother Board PC, seven months ago. Again shouldn't be a problem and the Ram is half the price I paid then. What do you consider "LARGE" L2 cache? What the 9400 Quad Core comes with, 6mb. Do I need a video card with a GPU? A dedicated video card has a GPU, see link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_processing_unit What you don't want is ' Integrated GPUs, integrated directly into the motherboard, which are usually far less powerful than those on a video card. cd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_Dave Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 The Q9450 (12mb) has twice the L2 cache compared to the Q9400 (6mb). You'll have to look at the price differences and make your decision based on perf/$$. The cost difference is probably $50-$60. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptbpilot Posted April 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Thanks again everyone! One last question.... CD, I looked up the items in your system on newegg, if you could build your system again would you go with QUAD core? Or are you happy with the performance you see with your Dual Core? I don't see too much of a cost difference, it seems it comes down to power and cooling? Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_Dave Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Taking advantage of multiple processors will require application design and maybe fundamental architecture change. Very few applications exist today that will take full advantage of quad core. If you plan on doing many tasks at once; virus scans, video processing and internet surfing then by all means go with the quad core. If you are a one process at a time person then a dual core 3-3.2 ghz choice would do the job. Look over the benchmarks at Intel and decide for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdanteek Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Thanks again everyone! One last question.... CD, I looked up the items in your system on newegg, if you could build your system again would you go with QUAD core? Or are you happy with the performance you see with your Dual Core? I don't see too much of a cost difference, it seems it comes down to power and cooling? Pete Like Big_Dave says, it's what you do and how much you want to spend. When I built mine I planned on buying a Q9650 later and swapping out the C2D E8500 CPU. Then the Q9650 was like $459.00 compared to the C2D E8500 on sale for $179.00, today it's $324.99. The E8500 is a fast and cool processor, no complaints from me! With my MB 775 socket, Q Core 775 socket is my only upgrade. You need a MB with CPU Socket Type LGA 1366 for the new Intel Quad-Core Core i7 940 cpu's... This is my PS, aftermarket cpu cooler, and case. Antec NeoPower 650 Blue 650W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Certified CrossFire Ready Modular Active PFC Power Supply - Retail, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16817371010 ARCTIC COOLING Freezer 7 Pro 92mm CPU Cooler - Retail http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16835186134 The 'ARCTIC COOLING Freezer 7 Pro 92mm CPU Cooler' facing the rear position wouldn't work, it hit the cooling tubes on my Asus MB, I had to turn it up, wasn't a problem for me I built it in a Antec P180 case with a rear top fan and vent. Antec Performance One P180 Silver http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16811129154 cd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDWAGON Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Regarding DDR2 or DDR3 memory--- If you are building a new AMD computer you might want to read the information about Memory "Experiments in Memory" in the May 2009 issue of MaximumPC magazine. (Pages 41 thru 46) Based on a good set of tests it was the conclusion of the test that there just wasn't enough difference between DDR2 and DDR3 memory. Tests also showed that DDR/1066 vs. DDR/1600 didn't show enough difference either. This article is speaking about AMD's new DDR3 memory, but it's my suggestion that if similar tests were taken with an Intel build, it would show similar results. BTW, the article also shows some results testing 2GB vs. 3GB vs. 6GB of memory and just what is enough. You might be surprised at the results. Frank... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdanteek Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 , the article also shows some results testing 2GB vs. 3GB vs. 6GB of memory and just what is enough. You might be surprised at the results. Well spill the beans Frank! cd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDWAGON Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Well spill the beans Frank! cd The Results: "We saw fairly minimal differences between the dual-channel 2GB configuration and our 3GB and 6GB configurations in 3DMark Vantage and PCMark Vantage. Likewise, Valve's Particle Test, Quake 4, and ProShow Producer performed the same regardless of memory amount. Everest Ultimate also showed very little difference among the three configurations"... Frank... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptbpilot Posted April 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Taking advantage of multiple processors will require application design and maybe fundamental architecture change. Very few applications exist today that will take full advantage of quad core. If you plan on doing many tasks at once; virus scans, video processing and internet surfing then by all means go with the quad core. If you are a one process at a time person then a dual core 3-3.2 ghz choice would do the job. Look over the benchmarks at Intel and decide for yourself. Thanks Dave, CD, With this machine it will be just video editing and thats it (at a time anyway). My other machine will stay my everday workhorse. So I guess I'm going to go with the Dual Core then, 64bit, Raid0, DDR3 (why not) and the 512MB card. Quad core seems like overkill for what I'll be doing. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdanteek Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Thanks Dave, CD, With this machine it will be just video editing and thats it (at a time anyway). My other machine will stay my everday workhorse. So I guess I'm going to go with the Dual Core then, 64bit, Raid0, DDR3 (why not) and the 512MB card. Quad core seems like overkill for what I'll be doing. Pete If that is HD video editing, it would not be overkill... cd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptbpilot Posted April 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 If that is HD video editing, it would not be overkill... cd It will be HD editing. Overkill is the wrong word, maybe dual core is sufficient? I can get the Q9600 2.6Ghz for $179, and can get a MB for less than $200. Low $100's if I go with DDR2 Ram. Then I have to worry about proper cooling (can't forget that video card) for it all as I've never built anything with more than 1 CPU. That's why I was considering your C2D 8500 ....CD, as you mentioned it runs cool. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sknis Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 It will be HD editing. Overkill is the wrong word, maybe dual core is sufficient? I can get the Q9600 2.6Ghz for $179, and can get a MB for less than $200. Low $100's if I go with DDR2 Ram. Then I have to worry about proper cooling (can't forget that video card) for it all as I've never built anything with more than 1 CPU. That's why I was considering your C2D 8500 ....CD, as you mentioned it runs cool. Pete I have a Canon HV 30 HD camcorder. I make AVCHD discs at 1920*1080. It takes about 12 - 15 hours to encode about 30 -40 minutes of mpg2-HD video to an AVCHD ISO file with my computer. (see my signature). Since yours is "only" a video computer and you can let it run overnight, then what I have is barely enough. If you want something faster, then go with what you can afford ! I'm not sure of the encoding time for others for an AVCHD disc. I know that few of us have blu-ray burners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggrussell Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Well on my Dual Core D930 (smaller L2) 3Ghz and 3GB RAM, it took almost 3 hours to render only 7 minutes of AVCHD 1920x1080i. Video rendering doesn't need tons of RAM. MORE CPU would help though. My next machine will definitely be Quad core. By the way, multi-core CPUs are on one chip. Most are now on the 45nm die and run much cooler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grandpabruce Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Like Big_Dave says, it's what you do and how much you want to spend. The 'ARCTIC COOLING Freezer 7 Pro 92mm CPU Cooler' facing the rear position wouldn't work, it hit the cooling tubes on my Asus MB, I had to turn it up, wasn't a problem for me I built it in a Antec P180 case with a rear top fan and vent. cd How did you do that CD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdanteek Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 How did you do that CD? I hope this explains it better? It might of helped if I told you the Power supply was on the bottom in this Antec case. The Asus heat pipe interfered with the cooler fan pointing to the back of the case. Not a problem with the P180 case, it has a 120mm fan pointing up at the rear top of the case. cd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grandpabruce Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 I hope this explains it better? It might of helped if I told you the Power supply was on the bottom in this Antec case. The Asus heat pipe interfered with the cooler fan pointing to the back of the case. Not a problem with the P180 case, it has a 120mm fan pointing up at the rear top of the case. [ cd Thanks, CD. And yes, it would have made sense to me, had you said the PSU was at the bottom of the case. The heat pipes on my Asus, would prevent me from pointing that cooler, towards the back, too. And there certainly are advantages to have no IDE drives (or burners), with the PSU at the bottom of the case. It does make for neater laying out of the cables. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdanteek Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 Thanks, CD. And yes, it would have made sense to me, had you said the PSU was at the bottom of the case. The heat pipes on my Asus, would prevent me from pointing that cooler, towards the back, too. And there certainly are advantages to have no IDE drives (or burners), with the PSU at the bottom of the case. It does make for neater laying out of the cables. The MB has one IDE header for two IDE Drives. I wanted that for my supply of good BenQ burners. The behind the MB cable routing along with the modular PSU and the three stock 120mm fans with two 4" X 4" front air filters, make it a great case to build in. cd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerman Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 I see the boards still screw in and many cases have tool-less bays but I've found some of those don't allow some cards to seat as well as the screw in ones. However, the tool-less drive bays are very good. Seems like you have great air flow and good cable hiding skills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_Dave Posted May 1, 2009 Report Share Posted May 1, 2009 CD, Terrific pictures! Very nice stuff. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.