Benchmarks For Quad Core Verses Core-Duo for V 9.0

Nostromo wrote on 6/20/2009, 4:43 PM
I realize I need to upgrade my P4 3GHz, 3GB workstation but since its based on a really nice Antec box and has good expansion and a high output pwr supply (plus cards: FW 800 and Dual-head) I want to keep all that and add a new Mobo, Processor and Ram. I've always like Asus and have one now so would go that way.

In looking at the base requirements for V 9.0 there is little in the way of info specific to the advantage for Quad-core that would make me invest in the extra cost

1 GHz processor (multicore or multiprocessor CPU recommended for HD)

I know for instance with FCP, the genius at the bar told me it tops out at 3GB of system memory for rendering so I wonder how many mult-cores along with loaded up Ram will aid with Vegas 9? I also saw something that different filters and Codecs effect render speed and can only use so many threads at a time, is this correct and any recommendations on Mobos?

Thanks

Comments

jrazz wrote on 6/20/2009, 6:05 PM
Look (search) for a thread on here called Render Test started by John Cline. It will give you a good starting point for looking at dual vs. quad v.s octo and if you see a time you like and they don't show their system specs in the thread, click on their name and have a look to see if they listed out their system specs there.

j razz
srode wrote on 6/20/2009, 7:24 PM
A quad is going to be up to twice as fast as the same Ghz Dual core - if you're building a system for Veg 9 and using HD material I wouldn't go less than a Q6600. Vegas will use all 4 cores on a quad 100% CPU utilization depending on your render format and the project you are working on - AVCHD as an example is very demanding and if you are using many FX it will re-render everything. .
musicvid10 wrote on 6/20/2009, 9:07 PM
Why don't you look at the results in This Thread and decide for yourself?

Hint: the Search feature on these forums is really helpful . . .
;?)
Nostromo wrote on 6/21/2009, 2:09 AM
thanks, had put in: Benchmarks For Quad Core Verses Core-Duo but did not come up with anything
Nostromo wrote on 6/21/2009, 2:13 AM
Thanks srode, your info provides all the info I needed, namely that 9 will use all 4-cores of a quad :-) Understood that FX and layers will add to any time factor as will render setting and project size <g>
srode wrote on 6/21/2009, 2:55 AM
The time added will be significant for numerous transitions / FX / Layers as Vegas 9 won't skip recompression when it hits these spots - it does recompress. There are some formats of videos that Vegas will skip recompression on long GOPs which makes the CPU less of an issue - So - how you edit and what format your source and final output are make a big difference in the demand on the CPU.
Sidecar wrote on 6/21/2009, 6:38 AM
Okay. VP9 uses all four cores of a quad core.

1. Does VP9 gain anything if it's running on a DUAL quad core processor?

2. Does it make a difference if the processor is a Xeon vs an i7?

3. Sorry for the repeat of the question. I'm just getting up to speed on the latest processor nomenclature and abilities.
warriorking wrote on 6/21/2009, 9:52 AM
Basically if you are going to build a whole new system I would skip the Quadcore all together and build a i7Core setup, its more future proof and eats quadcore setups for lunch in video rendering....I know, I went from a Quad 9550 to a i7 setup and don't regret it a bit.....DDR3 RAM has dropped considerably as well as a i7Core Processor runs close to the price of a Quad...Your only issue is Motherboards, price around...I got a MSI X58 for $169.00 from Newegg that has performed flawless for me....
Just an example...as I type this reply my computer is rendering a project in Vegas 9, show consists of 2 HD camcorders...HG10, HG21, show is 1Hr 28 Minutes, I am rendering it to a DVD...using multi camera editing with transitions, My i7 920 Core render will be finished in 1Hr and 30 Minutes.....
Nostromo wrote on 6/22/2009, 2:26 PM
Thanks, I've always like Asus - have a P5VD-1X which is soo slow now. :-) I am rendering a 5:50min video to 720x480 without any effects and it will take me 55 mins, lol.

Is a 500w supply enough for all the heat your system generates?

ZipZoomFly which I've always like has the ASUS P6T Deluxe v2 Intel X58 Core i7 Socket 1366 PC3-12800 for $284.00

Tks
Nostromo wrote on 6/25/2009, 7:22 AM
Thanks, I found that Antec has a calculator on their site which is pretty extensive for devices

http://www.antec.outervision.com/

I also took the plunge and ordered a new system, thanks for the suggestions from people about going with i7, this is what is coming and what I could afford :-)

ASUS P6T Deluxe v2 Intel X58 Core i7 Socket 1366 PC3-12800 (DDR3-1600) ATX Motherboard

INTEL BX80601920 Core i7-920 2.66GHz Intel QPI 4.80 GT/s Socket 1366 Desktop Processor

PATRIOT Extreme Performance Viper Series PVT36G1600ELK 6GB PC3-12800+ (DDR3-1600+) CL9 Triple Channel DDR3 Memory

SEAGATE Barracuda ES.2 ST3250310NS 250GB SATA 7200 RPM 32MB Buffer Hard Drive

EVGA 512-P3-N866-TR GeForce 9600 GT 512MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 (2.0v) Video Card

Antec Atlas 550 Server case w/550 watt power supply

the whole thing was just over $900. so not bad and my friend is going to help me put it together for buying him lunch :-) sweet
musicvid10 wrote on 6/25/2009, 8:26 AM
Nice system.

You're going to need more storage space soon. Lots more.
Most people don't put their video project/media folders on their system drive.
One or two projects with media will eat up 250GB in a heartbeat.
Nostromo wrote on 7/2/2009, 6:58 PM
I edit on the internal drives/ going to get another 500 or 1GB drive and then move completed projects off to my external Promise RAID for a month and then blow the files away. I keep the veg file and of course the original tapes if coming from MiniDV for a longer period of time.

You are right of course about chewing up drives :-)