Honestly, what will I gain going 64bit 8gbRAM?

Back to post

Comments

Grazie wrote on 12/16/2010, 10:44 AM
Rob, that's very clear. 

So, presently, my system is kinda being hobbled by only having 2gb ram to work with Vegas. Once the system grabs 1gb (?) Vegas et al only have the remaining 1gb plus the less than capable Page File.

I'm starting to think that a UG route would be for me to purchase 8gb and use it in a 32bit enviro. Then, next year, have 64bit installed and at some point go the whole hog with MOBO and CPU and full ram overhaul. 

Thanks guys. Again you have exceeded my greatest expectations, with your patience and downright sound advice. I'd also like to thank those who have taken the time to email me directly - THAN YOU!

Now, does my UG path seem sensible? And have I got an answer to my questions? I think so. So I can get an advantage from 8 and 64. And now I have a sensible path too, which was really worrying me. 

Grazie
farss wrote on 12/16/2010, 11:56 AM
My only concern now is how your sensible upgrade path is going to play out alongside your planned camera upgrade.
If you're trying to wrangle a bit more out of your existing rig with your current camera until your new camera turns up and at that point you'll do a full upgrade with new mobo and CPU then your plan seems reasonable enough to me.
If that's not the case and you plan to use your existing rig with only more RAM with an AVCHD camera I'm not so certain. At best you may find yourself having to transcode to a DI of some form to remain a happy camper. That alone brings up other questions and possibly more costs.
We really need to have the whole plan laid out otherwise you're getting answers to only part of the puzzle.

Bob.
LReavis wrote on 12/16/2010, 12:33 PM
I had a core-2 quad with 8gb RAM that probably is similar in performance to what you'll get if you add more RAM. Then I got a new MB & 12GB RAM and a new CPU running at 3.9 gHz.

But I don't think it was worth the effort. True, rendering is about 3x faster, but otherwise, I notice few benefits. Remember- even with only 8GB of RAM, you can render one project while you work on another in a new instance of Vegas. If I were you, I'd get the added RAM and stick with your current MB (but of course go with Win7-64!).

Then, in a year or so when the next chips arrive, check with rendering test times to see if you'll be tempted. The current architecture is dated, and we may see some pretty impressive improvements - especially with the ever-narrower traces that are going to be in the new chips.

One other upgrade that I'd recommend: Get an SSD boot drive. That made far more difference for my day-to-day experience than any other hardware upgrade I've done in a long while (except for the added RAM needed by the 64-bit OS).
Grazie wrote on 12/16/2010, 12:38 PM
Sure.

I do like the output from the Pannie AGAF101. By mid January I'll be able to get my hands on some of its AVCHD.

Grazie

Grazie wrote on 12/16/2010, 12:46 PM
LR, that's the kinda real world experience I'm seeking. And yes, my thoughts were along the lines that by that time something faster better would rear-up. I hadn't got as far as what you suggest, architecture, but sure.

Thank you

Grazie

farss wrote on 12/16/2010, 12:50 PM
So you haven't ordered one as yet and your sensible upgrade is purely to wrangle a bit more out of Vegas on your existing rig. If and when you make the leap to HD and probably AVCHD at that, you'll do the full upgrade thing?

If so then yes, your current plan is quite sensible. After all DDR2 RAM is very cheap, nothing much to loose really. I do agree with others, get Win7/64 as well. An OEM licence is pretty cheap. You'll more than likely have to buy another licence when you do the full upgrade but by then you'll have got your moneys worth out of the Win7/64 licence anyways. Come to think of it you can run Win7/64 for 30 days for free, a zero cost way for you to put your toes in the water.

Bob.

Grazie wrote on 12/16/2010, 12:57 PM
So, Bob, are you implying that my 8gb and 64bit win7 would give mw grief with AVCHD files?

Grazie

LReavis wrote on 12/16/2010, 8:12 PM
"You'll more than likely have to buy another licence . . ."

I don't think so. I used the same Win7pro on my new computer - and the old one still worked; but I did wait 6 months or more before installing the old Win7pro on the new machine.

However, I plan to sell the old computer, so did buy another activation key and transfered the old OS to the new key - just so the buyer would have no grief. Of course, if you connect to the web with both machines, you could have problems from MS if you have only one license.

Also - you probably won't need to re-install your programs unless your old installation is getting cranky. I planned to use the Paragon migration tool, but it didn't work. Turned out that I didn't need it - I was able to do all the migration without it. See details at http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=725349
farss wrote on 12/16/2010, 11:50 PM
"So, Bob, are you implying that my 8gb and 64bit win7 would give mw grief with AVCHD files?"

I wouldn't not put it that way, that could be taken the wrong way.

HD needs more RAM, I think we've agreed on that.

AVC = Advanced Video Codec. It needs more CPU power to decode.

Win7/64 with 8GB of RAM covers the HD part of AVCHD. What you don't have is the AVC part covered. You might also need a zippy i7 CPU to be a happy camper. I am only going on what others here are saying, the ones who say they're not having much trouble with AVCHD always add the rider that they're using the latest fast CPUs.

Bob.
farss wrote on 12/16/2010, 11:57 PM
From multiple independant sources I here M$ are getting tough on their EULA with Win7. I've had no issue using the one OEM XP licence on mutliple machines I own. Many people bought TechNet Win7 licences on the cheap and only recently had M$ shut them down. Same seems to be happening with the OEM licenses, M$ are well within their rights to do so, you have no grounds for complaint.

I just played safe and shelled out my hard earned for a retail licence which I can install on 3 PCs.

As for doing an upgrade, my understanind is that we're still talking about having a dual boot machine. Leave what was still able to run exactly as it was and do a clean Win7/64 install onto a new partition.

Bob.
Grazie wrote on 12/17/2010, 1:28 AM
>[I] [B]AVC = Advanced Video Codec. It needs more CPU power to decode.  [/b]  [/I]

"More", than what? More than I presently have? Or would my exsisting CPU carry the day? Your reply is open to further interpretation?

Grazie



srode wrote on 12/17/2010, 2:02 AM
Bob, what problems with AVCHD are you referring to? It takes more time to render however it does work fine on my system and without effects plays smoothly in the preview window. With effects frame rate drops somewhat, more effects the slower it goes and longer it takes for rendering, but still really works fine, just slower.
Grazie wrote on 12/17/2010, 2:12 AM
Steve, you do have a faster CPU than I:

Steve: Q6700 @ 3.33gHz
Grazie: Q6700 @ 2.66gHz

I suppose I could look to see if your did a rentertest to view the difference. Did you post one?

Grazie

farss wrote on 12/17/2010, 3:50 AM
"More", than what? "
More than HDV or other mpeg-2 HD variants

"More than I presently have?"

To do what?

" Or would my exsisting CPU carry the day?"

Doing what?

Your reply is open to further interpretation?"[/i]

I don't see how. I was making a comparison between the difficulty of decoding AVCHD compared to other common HD formats.
In terms of increasing difficulty of decoding video:

DV < HDV < AVCHD

I simply cannot say if anything will "carry the day for you" and I doubt anyone here can with what we know at the moment. What is your benchmark for a pass mark, what is your test etc.

I can tell you my experience with my current PC, I can do almost anything with DV at Best / Full. Cuts only with HQ XDCAM EX (mpeg-2 HD) at Best / Full, it struggles but is good enough to get the job done. AVCHD, cuts only Best / Full, best I've had is 9 fps, just painful to work with.
Your projects might be very different to mine and your pain threshold higher or lower, I don't know. All I can tell you is AVCHD takes more CPU power to decode than HDV and that takes more than DV.
Taking that on board you have to make the decision about which way to go.

If you want to do some comparitive tests of your own I'd suggest getting some original footage from a Panny AVCHD camera, I doubt Panny will make any radical changes to their encoder in the AF101.

Will having more RAM and a 64bit OS ease any pain you fear based on that test?
Perhaps not, more RAM gives you a bigger sandbox, that means longer RAM previews or at higher quality. It does not make them happen any faster. If you want RT playback at Best/Full more RAM does not help much if the CPU cannot keep up at all, if it was just teetering on the edge and dropping a bit now and then, yes it might get you over the edge.

Bob.