Author Topic: I tried a Mac for video editing...  (Read 171301 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mariush

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4983
  • Country: ro
  • .
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #150 on: April 09, 2013, 01:50:18 pm »
And here's a 3770k with Quicksync benchmarks :

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-benchmark-core-i7-3770k,3181-19.html

FX-8350 is not on the graphs there but it's faster than FX-8150 and on par or a bit slower than 2700k, so picture it around that point in graphs.
 


Offline peter.mitchell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
  • Country: au
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #152 on: April 09, 2013, 02:14:05 pm »
I'd switch the 2x 8gb to 4x 4gb; it's cheaper, and i don't see you needing more than 16gb, or even cheaper again to the "value" 2x 8gb set.
Also, as the case is essentially just a box, i'm not sure about the choice of the bitfenix, is there any particular reason for this over the http://www.scorptec.com.au/computer/46342-rc-371-kkn3 ?
 

Offline PA0PBZ

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5121
  • Country: nl
Keyboard error: Press F1 to continue.
 

Offline peter.mitchell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
  • Country: au
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #154 on: April 09, 2013, 02:18:21 pm »
No SSD?

http://www.scorptec.com.au/computer/48314-mz-7td120bw

No performance increase in this specific application, so it's essentially "fluff".
 

Offline EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37661
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
 

Offline EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37661
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #156 on: April 09, 2013, 02:19:46 pm »
Also, as the case is essentially just a box, i'm not sure about the choice of the bitfenix, is there any particular reason for this over the http://www.scorptec.com.au/computer/46342-rc-371-kkn3 ?

Yes, only one USB port on the front.  :--
 

Offline Lightages

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 4313
  • Country: ca
  • Canadian po
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #157 on: April 09, 2013, 02:26:32 pm »
Wow, lots of opinions here. I will through one more into the fray. The CPU is just one part of the equation. The motherboard can make a big difference in the ultimate performance so don't just buy something that holds the parts, make sure it has good reviews and benchmarks.

Anyone who says that you won't need more than 16GB should remember Bill Gates' quote "no one needs more than 640K". Not going to disk for swapping memory will speed up any system so don't block out the opportunity to add more RAM by filling the slots. The more RAM the better. I would get the AMD CPU and with the saved money buy more RAM.

Put 3 HDs in your machine. One for OS, one for scratch space, one for output.
 

Offline mariush

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4983
  • Country: ro
  • .
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #158 on: April 09, 2013, 02:26:58 pm »
No, not really a good value.

I've reconfigured the i7 3770K build:
http://www.scorptec.com.au/product/45658
http://www.scorptec.com.au/product/45270
http://www.scorptec.com.au/product/49376
http://www.scorptec.com.au/product/44675
http://www.scorptec.com.au/product/45304
http://www.scorptec.com.au/product/38787

$962

It looks good. I'd only change the power supply. Thermaltake is not really known for consistency, they use power supplies from different OEM manufacturers in the same series, or from revision to another, it's a mess.
That power supply is most likely a budget FSP based design from a few years ago. It's probably technologically outdated by now but it would work fine, it will be stable and work with your system, but for how long that's unknown. It's worth spending 10-25$ more for a reliable power supply, you'll be able to reuse the power supply on other systems later on.

You're also not including additional cpu cooler.

The Intel stock coolers are kind of anemic, they don't handle temperature variations well, they ramp up their fan speed quite fast the moment the cpu starts doing something and it can be annoying. In addition, the design is prone to getting full of dust real fast.

AMD stock coolers are more relaxed in this sense and they cool better and use heat pipes (intel stock coolers are just copper die in center and aluminum fins) but they're still somewhat noisy.

I don't agree with the guy that said to go for 4x4 GB memory modules. You don't get more bandwidth with 4 modules, just more heat and if you're overclocking, a tiny bit more risk of not being able to overclock as much.
The ones I recommended and the ones you linked to are LOW PROFILE, so they're work with any third party cooler, have low latency, they're very good. They're a bit more expensive but it's worth it.


 
 

Offline peter.mitchell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
  • Country: au
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #159 on: April 09, 2013, 02:29:22 pm »
Also, as the case is essentially just a box, i'm not sure about the choice of the bitfenix, is there any particular reason for this over the http://www.scorptec.com.au/computer/46342-rc-371-kkn3 ?

Yes, only one USB port on the front.  :--

Ahh, thought it mighta been something like that; i'd still get the case though just throw in something like this to go with
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/5-25-8-Port-Internal-SATA-USB-Audio-Memory-Card-Reader-/230728746181?pt=AU_Laptop_Accessories&hash=item35b88144c5&_uhb=1#ht_3670wt_1397
 

Offline EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37661
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #160 on: April 09, 2013, 02:36:16 pm »
I would get the AMD CPU and with the saved money buy more RAM.

No one has mentioned what kind of video the AMD has got built in?
By all accounts the i7 3770K has a pretty good GPU built in that I know supports my Sony software.
 

Offline peter.mitchell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
  • Country: au
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #161 on: April 09, 2013, 02:38:23 pm »
Quote
It looks good. I'd only change the power supply. Thermaltake is not really known for consistency, they use power supplies from different OEM manufacturers in the same series, or from revision to another, it's a mess.
That power supply is most likely a budget FSP based design from a few years ago. It's probably technologically outdated by now but it would work fine, it will be stable and work with your system, but for how long that's unknown. It's worth spending 10-25$ more for a reliable power supply, you'll be able to reuse the power supply on other systems later on.

You're also not including additional cpu cooler.

The Intel stock coolers are kind of anemic, they don't handle temperature variations well, they ramp up their fan speed quite fast the moment the cpu starts doing something and it can be annoying. In addition, the design is prone to getting full of dust real fast.

AMD stock coolers are more relaxed in this sense and they cool better and use heat pipes (intel stock coolers are just copper die in center and aluminum fins) but they're still somewhat noisy.

I don't agree with the guy that said to go for 4x4 GB memory modules. You don't get more bandwidth with 4 modules, just more heat and if you're overclocking, a tiny bit more risk of not being able to overclock as much.
The ones I recommended and the ones you linked to are LOW PROFILE, so they're work with any third party cooler, have low latency, they're very good. They're a bit more expensive but it's worth it.

Yeah, a good PSU is important, cmon, we're all here for electronics, we should know this :P

As far as the intel stock cooler goes; it's fine, no need to change it unless; dont like noise or plan to overclock. Millions of computers out there use them for extended periods of time with no issues.

The amount of heat from 4x4 vs 2x8 is negligible, and if anything would be better for overclocking because more surface area to spread the heat over, latencies being equal unless you get the "value" kit, low profile or not doesn't matter if you're using the stock cooler, sure you don't get more bandwidth but you don't get less either.

 

Offline mariush

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4983
  • Country: ro
  • .
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #162 on: April 09, 2013, 02:48:24 pm »
I would get the AMD CPU and with the saved money buy more RAM.

No one has mentioned what kind of video the AMD has got built in?
By all accounts the i7 3770K has a pretty good GPU built in that I know supports my Sony software.

The FX-8320 or FX-8350 has no video card built in.

The 3770k has HD 4000 graphics which is a basic onboard video card, good for 2D, video playback etc and works fine with Quicksync.  It does not compare however with standalone nVidia or AMD cards.

Problem is we're getting again to the cost of the platforms.

My build was 900$, which included a 85$ third party cpu cooler,  Dave's build was 962$ without a third party cpu cooler.  So taking out the retail cooler from my build, we're looking at 815$ vs 962$ - you can get quite a good video card with Cuda or OpenCL support for those 147$ you save, and that video card may bring more performance increase than Quicksync does.

Ex. nVidia GTX650 OC... Asus GeForce GTX650 DirectCU, 1GB : http://www.scorptec.com.au/computer/47705-gtx650-dc-1gd5 for 139$   Movie Studio supports Cuda afaik so it should work great (based on Movie Studio 10 release notes http://dspcdn.sonycreativesoftware.com/releasenotes/moviestudiope100_readme_enu.htm)
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 02:57:55 pm by mariush »
 

Offline ecat

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 296
  • Country: gb
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #163 on: April 09, 2013, 02:57:24 pm »
Well then, I didn't know Sony supported QuickSync. I have them both, so here goes...

Reconfigured BIOS to use iGPU
Installed Lucid from ASUS site. Reboot and Lucid crashed.
Installed iGPU driver from ASUS site. Reboot and Lucid crashed.
Sony made QS available but the render failed at the start.
Installed the latest Lucid. Reboot and my PC would not get passed the BIOS screen.
Removed ATi GPU.
PC freezes at the BIOS screen but continues after 5 mins or so (maybe a SSD would improve my boot time  :palm: )

Ok, Sony sees iGPU and I can render...


Numbers!
For what they are worth...

i5 2500k @ 4.2GHz (for those interested, CPU Mark = 7405 ish as I had some light stuff running in background) , ATi 6950.

In Movie Studio, Sony AVC/MVC as per (my understanding of) Dave's settings in reply #48

CPU only: 2:10 200.5MB file
GPU if available 1:58 212MB file

In Movie Studio, MainConcept AVC/AAC. No option here for 12Mbps so I tried 10Mbps and 14Mbps

CPU only 4:33 212MB file (10Mpbs I think)
OpenCL 1:27 176MB file (10Mbps)
OpenCL 1:30 246MB file (14Mbps)


Using QS:
Movie Studio, Sony AVC/MVC
QS speed 1:31, CPU activity only 40%
QS quality 1:55, CPU activity only 60%

There is no QS option for MainConcept AVC/AAC.

Conclusion.
On my system, QS does not need a faster CPU as it is only using half of my i5.
On my system, rendering via my ATi 6950 is faster than using QS. It 'may' also benefit from a faster CPU, about 90% usage.

Right, I have a PC to fix. How the hell can playing with Lucid cause a BIOS crash? Fuck, fuck, fuck. Still, it is for Science :)

Edit:
All better now, I must have half jiggled the USB cable to my optical drive. Unplug, plug and the world is a happy place again :)


« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 03:37:16 pm by ecat »
 

Offline hans

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1626
  • Country: nl
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #164 on: April 09, 2013, 02:59:14 pm »
The intel GPU is indeed a low-end, but does feature fast hardware video encoding.
I'm pretty sure it will run stuff like 3D view in Altium , or light stuff like that very well.

I also just saw the 3770 and 3770K both feature the HD4000 graphics. Only the i5 3570k and 3570 have the HD2500 and H4000 graphics difference.
However, QuickSync would be as fast on a i5 than on the i7. But having the faster CPU can be worthwhile, if you don't end up using Quicksync in live editting.
Ah well..

Not sure about graphics card acceleration these days. I will test it tonight (in a few hours) on my HD7850, which is already a 200$ graphics card.
 

Offline EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37661
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #165 on: April 09, 2013, 03:11:33 pm »
And I forgot to mention, all this optimising encoding speed talk is kinda moot when it takes >5 times the video length to upload to youtube  ::)
But at least fast encoding will:
a) make me feel better
b) finish a video quicker so I can start the upload before I go to bed.

If anyone can solve the Youtube upload speed throttling issue (it's not using my full upload bandwidth, common problem apparently) then that's worth it's weight in gold.
 

Offline Lightages

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 4313
  • Country: ca
  • Canadian po
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #166 on: April 09, 2013, 03:22:05 pm »
I would get the AMD CPU and with the saved money buy more RAM.

No one has mentioned what kind of video the AMD has got built in?
By all accounts the i7 3770K has a pretty good GPU built in that I know supports my Sony software.

I am making the assumption that you will want a dedicated video card in the end anyway.
 

Offline Markybhoy

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 59
  • Country: gb
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #167 on: April 09, 2013, 04:18:05 pm »
The stock intel cooler for the 3770k is pants,  it hits 85c + under full load.
I use a Noctua cooler which works well.

I use a Asus P8Z77 v pro motheboard and it has been rock solid,  the Z77 Gigabyte boards had a lot of issues when the came out so I would avoid them.
 

Offline Tooms

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 100
  • Country: dk
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #168 on: April 09, 2013, 06:42:50 pm »

Hi Dave

if your not have seen it already then i think i may be an good idea to see what another video blogger Dave Dugdale has done has he has just build an video edit pc.

Part 1 - New Computer and GPU for Premiere and DaVinci Resolve


Part 2 - Generic Disk Setup for Premiere Pro and DaVinci Resolve


Part 3 - My Monster Video Editing Computer Build


Part 4 - Dave's Monster Computer Speed Tests and Computer Recommedations for DSLR Editing


Part 5 - Red Epic Raw 5k Footage on Daves Monster Computer



I dont know dugdale but i like his video and seems like an nice guy with good videos, so it seems the name Dave is good for video blogging.


Tooms
 

Offline Sionyn

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 848
  • Country: gb
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #169 on: April 09, 2013, 07:13:35 pm »
i alway laugh why people pay for freebsd
eecs guy
 

Offline ddavidebor

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1190
  • Country: gb
    • Smartbox AT
I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #170 on: April 09, 2013, 07:51:28 pm »
And I forgot to mention, all this optimising encoding speed talk is kinda moot when it takes >5 times the video length to upload to youtube  ::)
But at least fast encoding will:
a) make me feel better
b) finish a video quicker so I can start the upload before I go to bed.

If anyone can solve the Youtube upload speed throttling issue (it's not using my full upload bandwidth, common problem apparently) then that's worth it's weight in gold.

The Youtube API allows you to upload videos, directly through API commands.
So you could upload the video to your eevblog.com server then run a script on the server which sends the video to youtube.

Tell your resident programmer to have a look here:

https://developers.google.com/youtube/2.0/developers_guide_protocol#Uploading_Videos

Search for some open source app or php script that does this.

Example, here's a pear class that supports uploading to youtube : http://www.phpclasses.org/package/3966-PHP-Upload-and-download-video-files-from-YouTube.html  (but someone that knows php must write a form or something for you, this is just a library)

other php examples : http://www.rd2inc.com/blog/2012/08/youtube-browser-based-uploader-with-php/

Or you can do a script that convert and send to youtube everything, so in this case a moderately powerful computer but energy saving that stay in 24/7 should be a good idea.

Dave, any server farm around you?
David - Professional Engineer - Medical Devices and Tablet Computers at Smartbox AT
Side businesses: Altium Industry Expert writer, http://fermium.ltd.uk (Scientific Equiment), http://chinesecleavers.co.uk (Cutlery),
 

Offline ecat

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 296
  • Country: gb
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #171 on: April 09, 2013, 07:57:20 pm »
Nice video links Tooms. I think everyone should watch parts 3 & 4. I love the bit where he pimps out the front of the case :)
 

Offline EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37661
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #172 on: April 09, 2013, 09:54:17 pm »
I am making the assumption that you will want a dedicated video card in the end anyway.

If it doesn't help with encoding speed, then no.
 

Offline ecat

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 296
  • Country: gb
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #173 on: April 09, 2013, 10:06:48 pm »
I am making the assumption that you will want a dedicated video card in the end anyway.

If it doesn't help with encoding speed, then no.

It helps more than QuickSync...


In Movie Studio, MainConcept AVC/AAC. No option here for 12Mbps so I tried 10Mbps and 14Mbps

CPU only 4:33 212MB file (10Mpbs I think)
OpenCL 1:27 176MB file (10Mbps)
OpenCL 1:30 246MB file (14Mbps)



Using QS:
Movie Studio, Sony AVC/MVC
QS speed 1:31, CPU activity only 40%
QS quality 1:55, CPU activity only 60%


There is no QS option for MainConcept AVC/AAC.

Conclusion.
On my system, QS does not need a faster CPU as it is only using half of my i5.
On my system, rendering via my ATi 6950 is faster than using QS. It 'may' also benefit from a faster CPU, about 90% usage.

Also, try video Part 4 in Tooms post just above...

Okay, my cpu is not the same as yours, my gpu is not a NVIDIA and unfortunately the Video above is not about Sony Movie Maker but we take what we can get and at the moment the results hint strongly at a fast multi core + GPU solution.

Edit:
We need a Movie Studio user with a NVIDIA GTX680 card.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 10:12:21 pm by ecat »
 

Online Smokey

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2538
  • Country: us
  • Not An Expert
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #174 on: April 09, 2013, 11:01:14 pm »
Question and comment... well actually 2 questions..

Q1:  Is this the fastest growing thread of all time that isn't a contest "I'm in"?  Wow.  12 pages in two days??

Q2:  (Sorry I didn't read every post first)  Is rendering video one of those tasks that high end graphics cards can do even better than a dedicated FPGA?
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf