Feedback on planned computor build capable of GH4

xberk wrote on 11/22/2014, 1:25 PM

I think the big question here is the CPU for preview speed. I went with the six core i7-3930K. OF course, that was about a year and half ago. I can't remember all my thinking then in terms of four core vs six core. But generally I remember that more cores seemed better. Recently helped a friend do a build for gaming only. We used the i5-4670K and he was very happy.

In any case, very very happy how my six core runs V13.

john_dennis wrote on 11/22/2014, 1:35 PM

"[I]I am trying to strike a balance between cost and functionality (i.e. keep cost low with options to upgrade later – e.g. increasing memory and perhaps swapping processor for a 6 or 8 core if the MB socket will allow and when they come down in price…).[/I]"

Unfortunately, if you buy an LGA 1150 motherboard you won't have the option of upgrading (easily) with a CPU swap as Intel tends to segment the market between "normal" desktop platforms (LGA1150) and workstation/server platforms (LGA2011). That's not to say you can't get acceptable performance from a 4770k, you just won't have much of an upgrade path without changing motherboard.

To add insult to injury, those who bought 3770k systems could not upgrade to 4770k because of a socket change. In the past two decades I've tried to buy platforms that allow a CPU upgrade after a couple years, but I've given up the strategy as a lost cause. All my upgrades now are "forklift" upgrades.

Buy what you think you are going to need and be done with it.

Jillian wrote on 11/22/2014, 2:36 PM

I don't think the ASUS Z87-Deluxe board is in production any longer, the present one would probably be the ASUS Z97, and if you want to stick with the 1150 socket (which probably has the most bang for the buck) the present CPU would be the i7-4790K. In fact, the last time I looked the 4790K was less expensive than the 4770.

The problem with those Videoguy DIY builds is that they are always out of date by the time they are published. I suspect Build 10 is already a year old from when it was compiled, and a year is a very long time in the computer world!

I think you just have to get the best available for the dollar at the time you decide to act, knowing full well that in six months some new super advancement will be made which makes you wish you had waited... but then six months later the same thing would happen all over again.

Also, I've never found that a ten or 15 percent "improvement" really amounts to that much, its only when you're really out of date that upgrading seems to matter.

Hope this helps.

OldSmoke wrote on 11/22/2014, 3:36 PM

If the OP is looking for 4K editing with preview set at Best/Full, sorry, there is no way around a dual Xeon setup. Not even the 8-core 5960X does well with it.

If you go the proxy route, then a Z97 chipset motherboard will do the trick. As for GPU, AMD's R9 290/290X is the way to go at the moment.

LRH (LDC) wrote on 12/5/2014, 2:12 AM

Thanks for your feedback John.

It's sad, but it seems making systems redundant is the marketing and sales name of the game these days, and the obsolescence in the computor world is particularly so...

I was wondering what you meant by "forklift builds"? Do you mean preassembled off the shelf units with the latest components?

LRH (LDC) wrote on 12/5/2014, 2:16 AM

Thanks very much everyone for your comments. Some good suggestions here. I will think it over and post my next (proposed :)) build here.

OldSmoke wrote on 12/5/2014, 6:24 AM

As mentioned in another thread, a slightly older HP Z820 with dual Xeon or Mac Pro with dual Xeon (running Win7) from eBay might be an option. As of now, I can only recommend AMD/ATI R9 290 or 290X for Vegas. My recently acquired 2x Asus Radeon R9 290 have greatly improved 4K performance on my system and 1080 60p projects are lot smoother too. MB Titler Pro and BCC are finally running the way the should.

NickHope wrote on 12/5/2014, 9:00 AM

Not even the 8-core 5960X does well with it.

OldSmoke, I've seen you say this a few times on the forum. What are you basing that on?

john_dennis wrote on 12/5/2014, 9:06 AM

"Forklift Upgrade".

Instead of receiving a pallet of parts and taking an outage to replace the parts of a running system to bring it up to current spec you receive a fully configured system. Where I work they are frequently unloaded with a forklift.

The system is installed in a different part of the data center and the work is migrated without interrupting the old system, often with little or no application outage.

Then the old system is removed and scrapped.

OldSmoke wrote on 12/5/2014, 9:22 AM

Nick,

I based it on your feedback regarding the SCS 4K benchmark project you ran. If I remember it correctly, you mentioned that the preview does drop below the project's fps when set to Best/Full? If I got that wrong I apologize.

NickHope wrote on 12/5/2014, 10:00 AM

No, you're right, but there was some really demanding work going on in that project in terms of FX etc., and it was running at Best (full), which shouldn't always be necessary. That should be pointed out. I think "must have dual Xeon" is a little alarmist.

My own feeling is that my rig is sufficient for basic 4K editing with sparing FX and the odd transition. And I still have the potential upgrade path to an R9 290X available. GH4 UHD 30p footage with no FX rocks along nicely at Best (full). I also have a mate down the road knocking out 4K documentaries for TV using Premiere Pro on a machine that was an equivalent cost to mine 2 years ago. I don't know the exact spec and I don't know if he's using proxies but I don't think so. He's using a GH4.

OldSmoke wrote on 12/5/2014, 1:06 PM

Well, basic 4K editing I can do with my system. With the new 290s in my system, even transitions are smoother but just not good. So yes, it depends on how demanding your project is. Just try a scrolling text Sony FX over a 4K clip and let me know how well it does, for some reason, scrolling text is a pain.

diverG wrote on 12/7/2014, 6:48 AM

Been watching this thread with interest.
Going to 4K from standard 1920x1080 implies a factor or 4 over normal working. Adding in a switch from 8 bit to 10bit is also factor 4. Are these assumptions correct? If so it would seem that an increase in processing power of 16 is needed over a machine which handles today 2K smoothly There is also the problem of puling & pushing the processed video back to the HD's. I guess a drop from 60P to 30 or 24P would ease matters but I would prefer to think 50/60P.
It would appear Nick's new rig is pushing the boundaries without costing in the ability to handle say 2 camera tracks.
So what should we be looking for in terms of a machine spec?