More Important To Video Editing - CPU vs Graphics Card?

[Mutt]

A) i5 Intel CPU and an 800 dollar graphics card

or

B) i7 Intel CPU and 400 dollar graphics card


which is faster/better or there's not much difference?

[mikesouth]

you didnt say which graphics card, what format your source media is in and what format you edit to or what editing software you use

any recommendations without that info are yanked from someones ass

[EddyTheDog]

Not really my area, but I would think the software would need to come into the equation as well...

[marcop]

Originally Posted by mikesouth

you didnt say which graphics card, what format your source media is in and what format you edit to or what editing software you use

any recommendations without that info are yanked from someones ass

What he said... I use Premiere Pro and there are specific graphics cards that work with the software to optimize rendering, etc.

[Rochard]

Stop being a cheap bastard and max out on both and be done with it.

This is what I did three years ago - Just maxed out on everything. My video card is two video cards strapped together with on board memory and fans. I'm running three monitors and I can do anything.

[pimpmaster9000]

dude get an amd 8 core for like 150$ it smokes most of the intels and use the rest for a good graphics card....

[johnnyloadproductions]

GPUs are evolving enough that you can use them for more general applications now, which is very good considering how much power and cores some of the cards have.

[vdbucks]

There aren't many programs out there that actually support gpu encoding, that's all handled by the cpu.

Adobe Media Encoder supports using either CUDA or Software (cpu) and having used both, there isn't very much difference between software encoding on the i7 3770k and cuda encoding on my gtx 660 ti phantom.

The only real benefit you're going to see at this stage from having a better gpu is when working with 3d animation and such...

[2MuchMark]

Hi Mutt,

The best thing to do would be to check with the makers of the software. I'm no expert but some programs use the CPU to crunch video data while others use the GPU because its faster and dedicated to video processes. If you want to use Adobe Premiere for example, go to Adobe.com or contact them and ask which would be the ideal hardware setup to get the best performance out of their product and they should be able to help.

[signupdamnit]

It depends on specifics as others mention. If you go with a better GPU make sure the software you use can actually support using the GPU to encode. But if it were me I would be more inclined to worry about the CPU since it is certain that it will be used. Check them out here http://www.cpubenchmark.net/ There are even dual processor systems out there which might be worth it for what you are doing.

[jimmycastor]

cpu matters

[Theo]

Cpu more important on video editing

[Paully]

Cpu for sure ^^^ i7

[JustDaveXxx]

Originally Posted by AVN Theo

Cpu more important on video editing

Absolutely.



Just Dave

[MiamiBoyz]

B

Your cpu is more important for encoding as it is done via calculations so the more horse power you have the faster those are done and the faster the encoding.

The graphics card is great for playing back video games where real time calculations are needed for things like 3d modeling to make your player turn left when you tell them to do so.

I have a laptop with an i7 and 16 gigs of ram for my program to work with as well. Does a find job and has for 3 years now (yet that old) and going great. HP Envy series.

[bronco67]

For video editing...CPU definitely. Even if the software says it's using GPU also, it's mostly bullshit.

[MrBottomTooth]

For the difference in price of an i5 and i7, just get the i7, then worry about the video cards.

[rockeru]

Better CPU without a doubt, I would even say that the integrated graphics core from the i7 would be enough thanks to Quick Sync but it depends on what software you are using. As graphics card be sure to get something from nVidia.

[Mutt]

Seems like a consensus here is that spending more on CPU than GPU is the way to go. I am NOT a gamer.

Thing is I don't want to spend 1K on the CPU - this is the CPU on the machine I'm looking at

Intel Core i7-4790K Haswell 4.0GHz CPU FCLGA1150 8MB 4 cores/8 threads 22NM 84W

It retails for $360 - the next CPU up is the Intel® Core? i7-5930K which retails for $650 - would there be a significant increase in performance that makes a tangible difference between the 4790K and the 5930K?

This is the video card:

Vidia Geforce GTX770 4GB GDDR5,EVGA 04G-P4-3774-KR ,256-BIT,2xDVI,HDMI

[rockeru]

I would get an i7 with 6 cores, cut from the graphics card if you can't affort. GTX 770 feels overkill to me if you're not gaming.
Edit: Get this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819117402

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by rockeru

I would get an i7 with 6 cores, cut from the graphics card if you can't affort. GTX 770 feels overkill to me if you're not gaming.
Edit: Get this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819117402

That i7 with 6 cores is only 20 dollars more - there can't be much difference in performance. That CPU is on some machines i was looking at but I saw a ton of bad reviews on the manufacturer.

I'm going to get a neighborhood shop near me to do a custom build - just want to keep it in the 1500-2000 range. What I've learned is cheaping out on the non-sexy parts of a computer because you spent most of your budget on the sexy CPU and GPU will come back to haunt you. That's what Dell and others do - they know the Intel i7 and the nvidea will get a customer all excited and make the sale, the rest of the parts they'll use will be low end.

[signupdamnit]

Originally Posted by Mutt

Seems like a consensus here is that spending more on CPU than GPU is the way to go. I am NOT a gamer.

Thing is I don't want to spend 1K on the CPU - this is the CPU on the machine I'm looking at

Intel Core i7-4790K Haswell 4.0GHz CPU FCLGA1150 8MB 4 cores/8 threads 22NM 84W

It retails for $360 - the next CPU up is the Intel® Core? i7-5930K which retails for $650 - would there be a significant increase in performance that makes a tangible difference between the 4790K and the 5930K?

This is the video card:

Vidia Geforce GTX770 4GB GDDR5,EVGA 04G-P4-3774-KR ,256-BIT,2xDVI,HDMI

Benchmarks:

Intel Core i7-4790K Haswell 4.0GHz ------------- 11335
Intel® Core? i7-5930K 3.5 Ghz------------------- 11725

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_look....00GHz&id=2275
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_look....50GHz&id=2336

In the real world for a multi-core application that is about the same. I would go with the $360 CPU.

[H-Tom]

Originally Posted by crucifissio

dude get an amd 8 core for like 150$ it smokes most of the intels and use the rest for a good graphics card....

You dont know what you are talking about.

[Jay-Rock]

Originally Posted by Mutt

Seems like a consensus here is that spending more on CPU than GPU is the way to go. I am NOT a gamer.

Thing is I don't want to spend 1K on the CPU - this is the CPU on the machine I'm looking at

Intel Core i7-4790K Haswell 4.0GHz CPU FCLGA1150 8MB 4 cores/8 threads 22NM 84W

It retails for $360 - the next CPU up is the Intel® Core? i7-5930K which retails for $650 - would there be a significant increase in performance that makes a tangible difference between the 4790K and the 5930K?

This is the video card:

Vidia Geforce GTX770 4GB GDDR5,EVGA 04G-P4-3774-KR ,256-BIT,2xDVI,HDMI

The GeForce GTX770 has over 1200 Cuda Cores you can enable it in Abobe Premiere to take over rendering over software you need to set it to GPU Rendering and you will see drastic improvement. I have that card and I am on a 4K 4096 X 2160 timeline with color grading and multiple layers with no hicups.

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by Jay-Rock

The GeForce GTX770 has over 1200 Cuda Cores you can enable it in Abobe Premiere to take over rendering over software you need to set it to GPU Rendering and you will see drastic improvement. I have that card and I am on a 4K 4096 X 2160 timeline with color grading and multiple layers with no hicups.

New camera?

[Jay-Rock]

For this video card you will need to watch this video to get it to enable CUDA rendering mine wasn't working and this was an easy fix.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aW12tw1kFM

[Jay-Rock]

Originally Posted by Mutt

New camera?

I got 2 Pansonic GH4 Cinema cameras for shooting 4k its a game changer for me.

[mikesouth]

Interesting to see the responses here...for the record using cuda to encode is OK but you will get much better quality by doing it in software particularly if you use the h.264 high profile.

all in all my first statement stands without that info everything here is just a guess...some more educated than others.

[Paully]

Originally Posted by mikesouth

Interesting to see the responses here...for the record using cuda to encode is OK but you will get much better quality by doing it in software particularly if you use the h.264 high profile.

all in all my first statement stands without that info everything here is just a guess...some more educated than others.

Mike, the software is using the cpu and graphics processing(cuda)from Nvidia to make h.264.

[Paully]

Originally Posted by Jay-Rock

I got 2 Pansonic GH4 Cinema cameras for shooting 4k its a game changer for me.

Hi Jay-Rock. What is your final output for your 4k content? Certainly you aren't streaming 4k. Just a better image, deeper color sampling? I mean we are limited by bandwidth as far as what the consumer can stream. Do you offer your content for download?

[mikesouth]

Originally Posted by Paully

Mike, the software is using the cpu and graphics processing(cuda)from Nvidia to make h.264.

in that case the gpu is THE most important factor for rendering go to the site for the editing software you use and see what Graphics cards they recommend TY Paulie heard from DB Cooper lately? been a while here....

[Paully]

Originally Posted by mikesouth

in that case the gpu is THE most important factor for rendering go to the site for the editing software you use and see what Graphics cards they recommend TY Paulie heard from DB Cooper lately? been a while here....

No I haven't heard from him, he disappeared, but no, cpu all the way. Cuda adds about 20%, they say, to overall rendering if your mobo and gpx card have the proper firmware and all the planets have aligned. I have not gotten any where near that performance and I have a couple i7's all using Adobe Premiere Pro on Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit.

Trust me. An i7 cpu with a mediocre gpx card will stomp the shit out of an i5 with a high end gpx card.

My edit station has 2 gtx 560's so I can output to 3 monitors and an extra reference monitor. Cuda can only be used from one gpx card with my mobo. Maybe some are different.

With an i7, 16 gigs of ram and 2 gtx 560's I cut through hi def like nothing. Rendering a 90 minute timeline doesn't give me time to take a leak.

Some of the best encoders like Handbrake (pretty ffmpeg) do the job faster than real-time at the highest quality encode using 2 pass. They don't utilize cuda at all, just cpu.

Go with an i7 and find the sweet spot price wise for an Nvidia gpx card, at least 8 gigs, preferably 16 gig system ram for editing and make sure you are running 64 bit OS. 32 bit only recognizes 4 gig ram no matter how many you put in there. btw Win 7 home basic only recognizes 6 or 8 gig max, W7 premium 16 max, W7 pro and ultimate are so much who gives a shit.

[Jay-Rock]

Originally Posted by Paully

Hi Jay-Rock. What is your final output for your 4k content? Certainly you aren't streaming 4k. Just a better image, deeper color sampling? I mean we are limited by bandwidth as far as what the consumer can stream. Do you offer your content for download?

I am rendering to full cinema 4k for future proofing but my clients will stream 1080p for the time being. You can upload to YouTube in 4k just a matter of time before adult companies start doing it. Xfinity just doubled there internet speed to 50mbit per second that will stream 4k no problem. Downsampling form the 4k to 1080 makes normal 1080 look really soft. Its hard to go back once you start shooting in 4k.

[Jay-Rock]

Originally Posted by mikesouth

in that case the gpu is THE most important factor for rendering go to the site for the editing software you use and see what Graphics cards they recommend TY Paulie heard from DB Cooper lately? been a while here....

I just got the cameras so far I have only done a couple mainstream jobs I am doing a real estate virtual video tour with a glidecam in a few days and will upload it in 4k this week for yall to see. Here is a great video about using GPUs for rendering.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp5u2Aj3v0w

Here is a good list of supported video cards that use CUDA with Adobe Premiere
http://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-pro/...uirements.html

[geedub]

I have an i7 and some sort of big fucking geforce with a bunch of cuda cores that I use with Sony Vegas in my office and also a server with dual xeons and 32gb ram that I use ffmpeg for server side video rendering. They are both pretty fast.

[leg4]

Get the fastest proc you can.... but also make sure you get a good video card with the CUDA engine on it.