NLE question...Today's workstations vs. older ones...

[pijetro]

I'm looking into upgrading to the new generation of Core 2 Duo's, and perhaps adding an HDV/DV card for more robustness...
Looking at prices... although not cheap, is somewhat attainable...

Question:

How does a home made desktop PC compare with some of the older "Higher Priced" systems??
I don't even know what half of the acronyms on the oder systems mean?
I would assume more hardware support for broadcast specific components..

Can i get the same performance out of a modern machine as with some of the older ones, or am i comparing apples to oranges??

[Krispy Kritter]

In order to give any sort of answer, we need more information. What are the specific parts you are looking at? What are the "older" computers you keep referring to? Just a quick comparison between the specs of the new and older pc's should provide all the answers that you need. Also, what is the primary use of the pc?

[rallynavvie]

Though you can get pretty great prices on OEM systems as opposed to building your own these days the high-end workstations are still outrageously priced. My last video workstation cost me ~$4000 USD to build 3 years ago when the equivalent Dell workstation was $6000 USD. My build also had mostly superior components to the Dell Precision, the rest being at least the same.

If you're seriously considering dropping $2k on the HDV hardware like that then get ready to spend at least twice that on the workstation it's going into. Forget a single Core Duo, get a pair of them. Dual quad-core Xeons may be overkill for multimedia workstations for now since we don't get a chance to run that many threads without chewing up so many other system resources that they become the bottleneck. HDV will also probably require a proper RAID setup. SCSI isn't all that necessary, though it is still a great option, but a solid nested SATA RAID array will help feed that RT card its video in a timely manner. But at least you can skimp on the video card, you'll only need one that supports your preferred display configuration not one that supports the latest DirectX and such. I've found Quadros are more for CAD systems, I never did see much difference with mine with video work.

As for comparing to older machines the prices of the base hardware, such as your processors and memory, have levelled off or become cheaper so we're fortunate there. Proprietary and specialized hardware, such as the Matrox you linked, is still pricey. However to compare older high-end workstations, like my dual Prestonia, to a new Core Duo dekstop is about equal. There are some things my platform and chipset still do better than the Core Duo systems but the cost difference just doesn't justify the performance difference anymore. But hey, it's a 3 year old PC keeping up with the latest hardware so keep that in mind too, you can build high-end workstations and they'll do you good for at least that long.

[pijetro]

Sorry Krispy Kritter...
I should know better...

UP until now, i've been editing wedding videos via my current PC specs..I'm thinking of beefing up my videos by introducing some After Effects, and using the Adobe prodution bundle to better my workflow..My current PC is underpowered for the task..
An option is to buy a new PC, and introduce a Matrox card for future HDV support.
My primary concerns (for now) is to utilize the Adobe Production set of programs to output wedding videos..

That being said, the math would dictate that current desktop costs and functions SHOULD work correctly..

Of course, this leads me to the questions about the older, more expensive systems...

Fortunately, rallynavvie gave me a good direction to walk towards..Although i'm quite surprised at his Core Duo suggestion..
If and when i DO turn to HDV, it would probably be at the HDV end and not HD uncompressed...Being the consumer choice...
I mean, realistically....How many weddings are taped in High-Def, let alone a broadcast offshoot...

But i digress..
I'm lookin for the pricerange of a decent computer PLUS potential HDV editing within the Adobe Production bunlde of software, and was wondering if i'm missing the boat by overlooking the more expensive systems...

Thanks once again fellas...

[JohnnyMalaria]

Check out this puppy from Sony:

http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProduc...me=specs&var2=

1TB RAID storage
Blu-Ray burner
Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 (odd that Sony bundles this, not Vegas!)

[edDV]

HDV is software intensive and After Effects at 1440x1080 is a toad. You need a fast CPU. I'm finding Core2 Duo runs faster than dual CPU P4/Xeons of a few years back for DV editing but still sluggish for HDV.

Look to Core2 Quad, or Multiprocessor Core2 Quad. If you still have more money the multi Xeons are an option.


PS: If you are considering the Matrox RT.X2, it does some hardware assist at 1440x1080 but it depends on CPU only for many processes. You should get the full demo before you buy.

[rallynavvie]

Look to Core2 Quad, or Multiprocessor Core2 Quad. If you still have more money the multi Xeons are an option.

As long as we're seeing support for that many processors from the apps we're using otherwise they're just wasted money. If you're using the extra processors to run other tasks in the background then your chokepoint will be elsewhere in your system such as HDDs or memory.

I'm going to make a prediction and say that we'll see more and more support for multiple processors in applications now with SMP being so mainstream. Hopefully it starts with increasing the limits on workstation software before trickling out to gaming markets. I'll be extremely displeased if I see the next Unreal utilizing 4 processors while AE only uses two

[lordsmurf]

What are your needs? That's all that matters.

[edDV]

Premiere Pro 1.5 and Vegas 6 are fine for multicore multiprocessor now. Even my old Premeire 6.5 came up in multiprocessor mode without any updates. Also Nero 7, VLC, Windows Media Encoder and others are running fine on multi-cores.