VideoHelp Forum

Try DVDFab and download streaming video, copy, convert or make Blu-rays,DVDs! Download free trial !
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13
Thread
  1. Member fitch.j's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    Hello,

    I'm new here, been looking around and found some answers to some questions i've had on here and now wanted to post one of my own so hopefully you guys can help me.

    I'm an AV Technician in a School and we have recently made the move to HD with the SONY HVR-V1.

    My current system that i have been using to edit all of the SD videos i've been making just simply isnt up to the task of handling the HD footage and i have been asked to spec up a machine that can be used as a stand-alone Editing system, simply for video editing. I've not really worked with HD a lot so i'm not completely aware of all the demands it makes on your system so was wondering what i should be looking at speccing for. The obvious as far as i can see is a fast multi-core processor, Bundles of RAM and a solid graphics card. If there is anything you think i need to know or would find helpfull please reply.

    It's going to be a stand-alone PC not connected to our network, and running only the needed software, Windows, Premiere Pro, After Effects etc.

    Thanks for any help you can give.

    Jon
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Core2 Duo or better (as fast as you can afford)
    4 GB RAM (2GB works)
    Display card should support PureVideoHD (NVidia) or AVIVO-HD (ATI)*.
    OS/applications hard drive plus separate hard drives for video (7200RPM SATA).
    IEEE-1394 interfaces
    Tower case with expansion room for more drives. 500+W power supply.
    22" or larger LCD monitor
    A separate HDTV for monitoring the result.
    A Canopus ADVC 110 is useful for SD monitoring from IEEE-1394. The ADVC does double duty as an analog capture device.


    *After Effects work may favor a Quadro card
    http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadrofx_family.html
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member fitch.j's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by edDV
    Core2 Duo or better (as fast as you can afford)
    4 GB RAM (2GB works)
    Display card should support PureVideoHD (NVidia) or AVIVO-HD (ATI)*.
    OS/applications hard drive plus separate hard drives for video (7200RPM SATA).
    IEEE-1394 interfaces
    Tower case with expansion room for more drives. 500+W power supply.
    22" or larger LCD monitor
    A separate HDTV for monitoring the result.
    A Canopus ADVC 110 is useful for SD monitoring from IEEE-1394. The ADVC does double duty as an analog capture device.


    *After Effects work may favor a Quadro card
    http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadrofx_family.html
    Thank you for this.

    The Computer specs are fine to be that low then ? 2GB Ram ?
    I assume most of the processing is done within the Graphics cards then.

    I Haven't looked into the Quadro range before and know very little about them. Thanks for the link, i'll look into them. Anything i should/Shouldn't know regarding them? The range seems quite vast.

    As for Displays it's going to go through a switch so that i can still run my standard PC for photoshop and web-work etc with same monitor and Keyboard etc so i'm simply looking for a base unit.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by fitch.j
    Originally Posted by edDV
    Core2 Duo or better (as fast as you can afford)
    4 GB RAM (2GB works)
    Display card should support PureVideoHD (NVidia) or AVIVO-HD (ATI)*.
    OS/applications hard drive plus separate hard drives for video (7200RPM SATA).
    IEEE-1394 interfaces
    Tower case with expansion room for more drives. 500+W power supply.
    22" or larger LCD monitor
    A separate HDTV for monitoring the result.
    A Canopus ADVC 110 is useful for SD monitoring from IEEE-1394. The ADVC does double duty as an analog capture device.


    *After Effects work may favor a Quadro card
    http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadrofx_family.html
    Thank you for this.

    The Computer specs are fine to be that low then ? 2GB Ram ?
    I assume most of the processing is done within the Graphics cards then.
    The CPU does most of the work. The graphics card supports 1x HD playback in hardware. Any extra budget should go to the CPU. 2GB RAM works, 4GB is bettter. More than 4GB has little gain.


    Originally Posted by fitch.j
    I Haven't looked into the Quadro range before and know very little about them. Thanks for the link, i'll look into them. Anything i should/Shouldn't know regarding them? The range seems quite vast.
    The normal cards are fine for Premiere and basic AfterEffects. The Quadros are workstation cards that also support vectors for 3D wireframes and CAD work. If this isn't a priority, stick to normal PureVideoHD (NVidia) or AVIVO-HD (ATI) cards. The GPU speed isn't important except for games.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member fitch.j's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    After looking into the Quadros i'm actuallly becoming more confused. The specs dont seem too different to warrant the prices as far as i can tell.

    At the moment the system specs i'm slowly putting together consists of the following,

    Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Socket 775 (3.0GHz) 1333FSB 6MB L2 Cache Processor

    ASROCK 4Core1600-GLAN P31/G31 Socket 775 6 Channel Audio ATX Motherboard

    4gb RAM

    **Geforce GTX 285

    1x 160gb HD (O/S, Software)
    1x 1TB HD (Video)

    **The graphics card is where i am really struggling on understanding what i need to be looking for. Would i notice a difference by going for a mid-range Quadro card over the GTX 285? in either Playback or Rendering power?

    Sorry for my nievity, Hardware is not my strongpoint!

    Thank you for you responses. Any other suggestions welcome.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member dragonkeeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    **The graphics card is where i am really struggling on understanding what i need to be looking for. Would i notice a difference by going for a mid-range Quadro card over the GTX 285? in either Playback or Rendering power?
    Yes the Nvida cards have decoder chips built on board to handle video playback of high def sources I'm not so sure about the Quadro cards sense the are really used for rendering more than anything else.(this may have changes in recent years i have not seen the newer versions of the Quadro cards)

    If you do a lot of 3d rendering then the Quadro is the way to go, if not go with the Nvidia GTX or the ATI Radeon 4890 (my personal fav or even the ATI 4870 it just be me but video play back looks better on the higher end ATI cards.

    My question is what are you going to be doing with this HD video once you have completed editing it.
    Will you be create a blu-ray disk?
    If so is the video Blu-Ray compliant or will it have to be converted?
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member fitch.j's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    The output at the moment is still under question. Blu-Ray Capability is definately going to be required, however i'm unsure as yet of how much of the work will end up in this format. (A lot may end up being finally compressed for DvD)

    After spending another few hours looking at the Quadro vs GTX cards i'm still unsure if Quadro is worthwhile. The after effects work i do is not particularly heavy, however time is a big issue and if rendering times can be reduced then that is always worth looking into.

    Looking at the GTX 295 Specs they seem very impressive, and for the 300-500 pricetag, seem to out-perform even some of the slightly more expensive Quadro cards. I don't have the budget to get anything near top of the range Quadro, so i dont see the advantages.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Quadro is not going to get you anything unless you work in 3D rendering programs or CAD programs. The difference in cost is mostly the extra driver software that comes with Quadro cards. (Those drivers query the hardware to make sure the GPU is a Quadro -- there have been hacks that allow the drivers to work on non-Quadro cards and they run almost as fast.) To the extent it is used in video apps it's for 3D transition or title effects. Unless you are working with tens of thousands of polygons you won't notice any difference.

    With video applications you won't see much difference between a $50 card and a $500 card. The additional cost will show up in 3d gaming. A bit in Windows Vista Desktop use.

    The use of the GPU for h.264 decoding isn't a big deal if you have a suitable CPU (pretty much any dual core). But even $50 graphics cards now have hardware video decoding so you'll be getting it anyway. For video encoding, there are some standalone applications that can encode h.264 using the GPU (Avivo, Badaboom). These can be very fast on a fast GPU (although not much faster than the fastest CPUs) but the quality, control, and stability arn't there.

    http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3475

    Get a quad core processor if you are going to be working in high def and h.264. Your money is much better spent on an i7 920 and suitable motherboard than a Quadro.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-Core-i7-Nehalem,2057-32.html
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3448&p=18
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Put your rendering money into the CPU not the GPU.

    I only mentioned the Quadros because academics are usually into heavy 3D/CAD as well but it doesn't seem the case with your students. Very high end effects work also uses the vector wireframes. The GTX may be overkill in the games direction. The ATI cards mentioned seem file. The NVidia 9600GT is enough on that side.

    I should have also mentioned the BluRay burner and player to close the loop. A WD HD player might be a good addition to teach alternative formats to Blu-Ray.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member fitch.j's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    Thank you all for your help, i think i'm getting to grips with it all a little better now, the Quadro really isnt worthwhile but i see why you suggested it. The majority of work is Premiere Based with some AE for specifics.

    As for processor i'm looking at this one

    http://www.ebuyer.com/product/141515/show_product_specifications#specifications

    Clock and Bus speeds both seem good and has a good Cache.
    Quote Quote  
  11. I would suggest:
    AMD Phenom X4 (Quad Core, more GHz the better)+ASUS motherboard (Striker series)
    ATi 4870 GPU
    3GB GSkill 800MHz RAM (for 32Bit Windows it will not be of any use to have >3GB RAM as Windows won't be able to use it.
    Cooler Master/Crosair 600-650W PSU
    CM cabinet with extra cooling fans.
    APC 20mins Backup UPS
    AOC 22' WS Monitor
    আমি বাংলায় গান গাই
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member dragonkeeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Good choice on Processor, I hate to say it but the intel quad cores will do video conversions a bit faster, but at a cost. A Phenom X4 2.6 Ghz BE can process video at great speeds for $100 dollars less. But if you feel the need for speed a Phenom II quad core runing @ 3.2Ghz can be had for a few dollars less than the possessor your looking at.

    Here are my recomendations:
    Proc: Phenom II X4 @ 3.2Ghz (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103674)
    MB: ASUS M4A79T (AMD DDR3) (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131363)
    RAM: DDR3 1600(http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820146777)
    Vid: ATI All-in-Wonder HD Gives you some options to capture Video from other soucres, and can use hardware play back for h.264 encoded video. (http://ati.amd.com/products/aiwhd/index.html)
    BlackMagic Intensity:( http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/intensity/) if you need to capture video from an HDMI\RGB source beware the video is uncompressed and needs a lot of space. 2TB as you may be working on multiple projects at once
    Hard Drive: WD Caviar Black WD1001FALS (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136284)
    Currently seems to be most reliable TB drive you can get unless you move up to server class drives.
    Monitor: SAMSUNG ToC T240HD Rose-Black 24 [Great picture color and Clarity](http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001280)
    PSU: CORSAIR CMPSU-650TX (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139005)

    You definitely want battery back up when comes to processing video. The longer back up time the better especially if you live in an area that has frequent power outages. I built my own unit amd it can run 2 computers for about 4hrs(enough time to finish most vid jobs). You can usually find a vendor in your are that can do something similar for you, if the off the shelf units don't meet your requirements.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    He is working in HDV format from the Sony V1.

    If he were to move to uncompressed video, the specs would change and the cost would go way up.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads