Home Your Ad Here

Go Back   IndieTalk - Indie Film Forum > Tools of the Trade > Computers/Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-04-2017, 10:55 PM   #1
jetzerwar
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: washington
Posts: 2
Advice: how to upgrade my workstation

I'm looking for advice on how to upgrade my current workstation to be ready to edit 4k footage. I'll be gearing up for a project with a bunch of c300 mk II 4k footage, I believe some flavor of ProRes. I've edited a few projects with 4k Panasonic footage, and my system chugged a bit doing that. What do you think I should upgrade?

My system:
• Intel Core i7 4770K (3.50 GHz)
• 16 GB DDR3 RAM
• 1TB + 8GB SSHD HDD
• Windows 10
• NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Samsung SSD 840 EVO 250 GB (OS and program drive)
• 6tb Backup 7200 RPM HDD
• 4TB 7200 RPM Seagate project Drive
• 1 TB 7200 RPM empty drive
Adobe Creative Cloud Premiere Pro 2017

Based on a slightly upgraded Lenovo machine: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...82E16883265837

Where is my bottle neck? GPU? CPU? Storage needs serious upgrades (I think I'm dealing with 8-12 TB of footage), but I'm not sure what I need besides that. Thanks!

Last edited by jetzerwar; 09-04-2017 at 11:01 PM.
jetzerwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today   #1A
film guy
Basic Member
 
Posts: 17

 
Old 09-04-2017, 11:04 PM   #2
Quality
Basic Member
 
Quality's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Caribbean
Posts: 561
You're not gaming so why are you worried about bottlenecking? What you want to worry about is your processor speed. Ever thought of overclocking? 16 GB of RAM is more than enough to match your processing. Your rendering, however, you might want to upgrade your graphics card. Your storage for 4k seems okay, But raw uncompressed footage is spacey.
Quality is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2017, 11:10 PM   #3
jetzerwar
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: washington
Posts: 2
OK, graphics card. Yeah, I don't think I should overclock-- that processor runs very hot normally. When I've tried OC'ing, it got close to meltdown levels. What kind of graphics cards should I be thinking about? Will that help me to get better resolution in Premiere pro?
jetzerwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2017, 11:19 PM   #4
Quality
Basic Member
 
Quality's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Caribbean
Posts: 561
If you consider overclocking, you'll need to use water-cooling instead of an air heatsink. You're using Nvidia so look at one of their latest cards. It all depends on your budget range.
Quality is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2017, 01:06 AM   #5
Sweetie
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 4,222
Quote:
You're not gaming so why are you worried about bottlenecking?
That's meant to be a really crappy joke right? There's no reason to be deliberately mean to such a new user.

Quote:
4k Panasonic footage, and my system chugged a bit doing that
What codec? h264? If so, it's not made to be an editing codec.

Quote:
Where is my bottle neck? GPU? CPU?
You really need to work that out. Load up some resource monitor and work it out. Without your machine in front of me and knowing exactly what you're doing, you're going to need to answer that question.

At first glance, you'll be fine to handle that Prores 4k footage from a C300mk2. The video card may be a potential issue. You may need a card with more ram. Depending on what you're doing, you may need a better hard drive setup.

I'd suggest learning a proxy workflow and work at a lower resolution during the online edit. The majority of the machines I'm stuck working with are way less capable than the machine you're running with. Editing wise, they run like butter with the right workflow.
Sweetie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2017, 04:37 PM   #6
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC
Premiere Member
 
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rego Park, NY
Posts: 4,238
I agree with Sweetie that your video memory seems to be the only issue. 6 to 8 Gigs of video memory is better. A gaming computer is idea for 4K editing, packing the most punch. 18 core Intel processors are around the corner, if you can wait. The big problem for most will be the price tag of the new 18 core computers. An iMac now with 4 cores and 4K video is in the $1,300 to $2,000 price range. The 18 core Intel iMacs will run between $6,000 and $8,000. Can you afford it?

Also, 5K video VFX has been announced by ActionVFX.

These are things to consider.
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2017, 08:10 PM   #7
Sweetie
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 4,222
Quote:
18 core Intel processors are around the corner, if you can wait.
He's using Adobe. Did they change their core code in the latest update to take better advantage cores beyond the 4th? If not, why waste that much money when the benefits are so little, or even may give you worse performance?

It's one reason it's important to know what an editor is using, what codecs and resolution they'll be working at before giving unqualified advice.

Quote:
16 GB DDR3 RAM
You'll probably get a large performance bump, depending on the length of your time lines.
Sweetie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2017, 09:03 PM   #8
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC
Premiere Member
 
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rego Park, NY
Posts: 4,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweetie View Post
Did they change their core code in the latest update to take better advantage cores beyond the 4th? If not, why waste that much money when the benefits are so little, or even may give you worse performance?

It's one reason it's important to know what an editor is using, what codecs and resolution they'll be working at before giving unqualified advice.
Right from Adobe's Forum. More memory and cores can work in some cases.

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1863125
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2017, 09:15 PM   #9
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC
Premiere Member
 
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rego Park, NY
Posts: 4,238
Here are multi-core test results with Premiere Pro.

https://www.techspot.com/article/127...u-performance/
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2017, 10:24 PM   #10
sfoster
IndieTalk Moderator
 
sfoster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 4,937
i heard american television was requiring a minimum of 4.5k for broadcast
Someone said that on facebook I didn't research it's authenticity.
sfoster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2017, 11:30 PM   #11
Sweetie
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 4,222
Quote:
Here are multi-core test results with Premiere Pro.
Thanks for backing me up. I gather you don't know how to read this?

Just take the 6700k and 6850k on your list. You should be seeing about 30% performance boost, but you're losing half that benefit with the inefficiency of Adobe with the extra cores. With the 6950X, you should be seeing nearly a 100% boost, but it's only at about 40%. You're spending a lot of money with marginal benefits. The more cores you throw at it, the less benefit you get, especially when you're throwing weaker cores at the task. All you have to do is look at the dual 2690. A machine that should be 4 times faster than the 6700k only gets a 22% bump.

You're essentially suggesting the guy spends $6k+ to get a machine that is likely to run marginally better in PP as a cheap 7700k machine. Probably only about 20% faster than the machine s/he already has, which is likely to be good enough for the task at hand. Shame on you.
Sweetie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2017, 09:30 AM   #12
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC
Premiere Member
 
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rego Park, NY
Posts: 4,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweetie View Post
Thanks for backing me up. I gather you don't know how to read this?

Just take the 6700k and 6850k on your list. You should be seeing about 30% performance boost, but you're losing half that benefit with the inefficiency of Adobe with the extra cores. With the 6950X, you should be seeing nearly a 100% boost, but it's only at about 40%. You're spending a lot of money with marginal benefits. The more cores you throw at it, the less benefit you get, especially when you're throwing weaker cores at the task. All you have to do is look at the dual 2690. A machine that should be 4 times faster than the 6700k only gets a 22% bump.

You're essentially suggesting the guy spends $6k+ to get a machine that is likely to run marginally better in PP as a cheap 7700k machine. Probably only about 20% faster than the machine s/he already has, which is likely to be good enough for the task at hand. Shame on you.
Apparently, you didn't read through my post properly.

I did show a BIG price difference between 4 core and 18 core and talked about what his budget can afford.

Shame on you for not reading carefully.
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2017, 09:49 AM   #13
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC
Premiere Member
 
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rego Park, NY
Posts: 4,238
I also talked about 5K VFx is around the corner, as announced by ActionVFX.

We have a member here interested in 18 core with a goal of editing 4K in real time. The loss of performance may not matter, if the 18 core is still better than before. People with the budgets to afford the latest in technology think about the near future as well as the here and the now. How long will it be before Adobe announces support for 18 cores? It will be out of the price range for most small businesses and entrepreneurs. But, there's still a market for it. That's why these new technologies are made with their initial high price tags.

I am just presenting additional options for those who can.
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2017, 07:42 PM   #14
Sweetie
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 4,222
Quote:
How long will it be before Adobe announces support for 18 cores?
This is an example of what I'm talking about. I don't know why I'm surprised. You don't know what you don't know.
Sweetie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2017, 09:00 PM   #15
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC
Premiere Member
 
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rego Park, NY
Posts: 4,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweetie View Post
This is an example of what I'm talking about. I don't know why I'm surprised. You don't know what you don't know.
What we do know from the test results is for those members in this forum who have the luxury of not worrying about budgets because they have big studios to buy the equipment and software for them, they can invest in an $8,000 18 core iMac and edit 4K faster than someone with a $2,000 quad core iMac with 4K. Yes, there is performance waste without software support. But, hardware always will improve performance to some degree.
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


©IndieTalk