Matrox RTX100pro VS Pinnacle Liquid 5.5 Pro at DVinfo.net

Miklos Xuereb · May 6th, 2004, 12:04 PM

Hi,

I am going to start doing some dv editing but i have a dilemma which is the best between the rtx100 pro and the liquid 5.5 pro. As a PC, I have a P4 2.4ghz with 1gb RAM, 2 x60GB IDE Hard Drive, Geforce 4 TI4600 Graphic Card. Can someone help me re this matter.

Thanks,

Miklos

Glenn Chan · May 6th, 2004, 12:11 PM

What exactly are your editing needs? Posting them might help, since each system has its own advantages.

Also... have you tried demoing both programs? From what I've read, Edition makes you learn a different interface.

Magnus Helander · May 7th, 2004, 12:31 AM

You could spend your money on upgrading your processor and buying a second display instead of buying video hardware.

Then use a software-only solution. On the specs and in marketing it seems dedicated video hardware will give you a "tremendous productivity and speed boost" - in my experience the hardware acceleration devices only help under basic scenarios. I spent four months trying to understand the different hardware-options, and in the end went with a software-only solution, with a very fast computer instead (P4 3.2 / Asus P4P800 mobo) and we use the set-up professionally. Since you have two disks, you can keep footage on one disk and render to the second - that will give you very good performance...

Anyone with dedicated hardware agree/disagree?

/magnus

Miklos Xuereb · May 7th, 2004, 12:51 AM

what i need to edit are footage of interviews, local documentaries, conferences etc.

Robert Mann Z. · May 8th, 2004, 10:06 AM

in my opinon with those needs any editor will do, the key is to feel comfortable with the editor, forget the all the snazzy features that you will never use...

some editors to consider demo testing

premiere pro - adobe.com
liquid - pinnicale.com
vegas - sony.com
edius - canopus.com
expressdv - avid.com

all those mentioned are software only, of course you can buy accelrator boards to speed stuff up like color correction for premiere pro, and edius....

Jim Gauthier · May 9th, 2004, 09:17 PM

For long format events (like weddings), the real-time corrective capabilities of dedicated video hardware cannot be overstated. If you are building a system for video editing, I would recommend a dedicated card, but if you want a powerful workstation for only occasional video, then I would not. I started using my RTX-100 on a 1.6 GHz Asus 233 P4 (had to overclock during install to fool minimum 1.8 requirement) and it worked great. Now I'm using a 3GHz Asus P4 800 and can do so much more. Plus I get a realtime analog and DV monitor output.

For instance, if you have a long sequence that needs color/gamma/brightness correction, slo-mo, instant-sex, while mixing 2+ microphones audio and audio correction, an mp3 and THEN start adding After Effects and lap dissolves, multiple cameras, b-roll etc. you end up with lotsa layers. You need speed any way you can get it.

I am still dreaming of moving up to a higher end system like the NewTek Toaster v3, but for the money, the Matrox performs well. I presume others will too.

May 6th, 2004, 12:04 PM	#1
Miklos Xuereb New Boot Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Malta Posts: 7	Matrox RTX100pro VS Pinnacle Liquid 5.5 Pro Hi, I am going to start doing some dv editing but i have a dilemma which is the best between the rtx100 pro and the liquid 5.5 pro. As a PC, I have a P4 2.4ghz with 1gb RAM, 2 x60GB IDE Hard Drive, Geforce 4 TI4600 Graphic Card. Can someone help me re this matter. Thanks, Miklos

May 7th, 2004, 12:31 AM	#3
Magnus Helander Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Sweden Posts: 221	Software only? You could spend your money on upgrading your processor and buying a second display instead of buying video hardware. Then use a software-only solution. On the specs and in marketing it seems dedicated video hardware will give you a "tremendous productivity and speed boost" - in my experience the hardware acceleration devices only help under basic scenarios. I spent four months trying to understand the different hardware-options, and in the end went with a software-only solution, with a very fast computer instead (P4 3.2 / Asus P4P800 mobo) and we use the set-up professionally. Since you have two disks, you can keep footage on one disk and render to the second - that will give you very good performance... Anyone with dedicated hardware agree/disagree? /magnus __________________ Magnus Helander, Crossmediageek on G+

May 6th, 2004, 12:11 PM	#2
Glenn Chan Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 4,750	What exactly are your editing needs? Posting them might help, since each system has its own advantages. Also... have you tried demoing both programs? From what I've read, Edition makes you learn a different interface.

May 7th, 2004, 12:51 AM	#4
Miklos Xuereb New Boot Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Malta Posts: 7	what i need to edit are footage of interviews, local documentaries, conferences etc.

May 8th, 2004, 10:06 AM	#5
Robert Mann Z. Skyonic New York Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NYC Posts: 614	in my opinon with those needs any editor will do, the key is to feel comfortable with the editor, forget the all the snazzy features that you will never use... some editors to consider demo testing premiere pro - adobe.com liquid - pinnicale.com vegas - sony.com edius - canopus.com expressdv - avid.com all those mentioned are software only, of course you can buy accelrator boards to speed stuff up like color correction for premiere pro, and edius....

May 9th, 2004, 09:17 PM	#6
Jim Gauthier Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 25	For long format events (like weddings), the real-time corrective capabilities of dedicated video hardware cannot be overstated. If you are building a system for video editing, I would recommend a dedicated card, but if you want a powerful workstation for only occasional video, then I would not. I started using my RTX-100 on a 1.6 GHz Asus 233 P4 (had to overclock during install to fool minimum 1.8 requirement) and it worked great. Now I'm using a 3GHz Asus P4 800 and can do so much more. Plus I get a realtime analog and DV monitor output. For instance, if you have a long sequence that needs color/gamma/brightness correction, slo-mo, instant-sex, while mixing 2+ microphones audio and audio correction, an mp3 and THEN start adding After Effects and lap dissolves, multiple cameras, b-roll etc. you end up with lotsa layers. You need speed any way you can get it. I am still dreaming of moving up to a higher end system like the NewTek Toaster v3, but for the money, the Matrox performs well. I presume others will too.