Vegas PC Build Question

[Tim Akin]

It’s been a couple of years since I’ve upgraded my Vegas editing PC. Since adding the GH2 and working with its AVCHD files, my 32 bit XP Quad Core was very sluggish throughout the edit. Not much improvement even after converting to cineform avi. My next wedding is not until next April, so now is a good time for me to put together a new editing system.

Everything I know about computers could fit on the very first hard drive ever built with plenty room left over :) I’m going with the suggested DIY8 build Videoguys Blog - Videoguys DIY8 Hex Core I’m not as concerned about render speeds as I am with smooth playback and stability...stability....stability.

My question is, since I have a few months for this build, is now a good time to purchase the more expensive items like MB, CPU and GPU? I think I read where Intel is about to release a new processor, if so will the price drop on the i7-950 3.06 Ghz? (which is the processor DIY8 recommends) I know there is always going to be something new a few months down the road and I don’t have to have the newest components but would like to know that I’m getting the best deals on what I do use, like everyone would :).

Any advice or suggestions very much welcomed!!

[Jeff Harper]

Tim, so you know, I'll confirm for you that the primary thing is processor speed 1st, then cores second, at least for smooth editing. Vegas doesn't use additional cores for preview, which completely sucks. Additional cores do help with multitasking and are nice to have, and do render faster.

Anyway, no the prices won't come down, the CPUs will disappear, but they don't get marked down. I wondered the same thing recently but someone corrected me, and it is true.

I would wait, I really would, and then I'd look at the fastest processor you can possibly afford. GPU, to me, not such a big deal. The processor is where I think you should sink your money. I have a cheap sub $100 video card but a kick-butt processor, and I'm pretty happy, but others will sing the praises of the GPU thing. For around $300 the GTX 570 is popular if you want to spend on a faster card.

Because of a recent experience I had, and have had before, I recommend the largest Gold Certified power supply you can afford, up to 1000w People will tell you 1000W is overkill, I don't care. Your system will not generate more heat, and it will only use the power you need. So far I've had three underpowered PCs over the years, and it will never happen again. My last was 850 watts and was expensive, but there was not enough headroom, and the issues were awful. True, I do extreme overclocking, and have a lot of drives, but still shouldn't need 1000 watts, but that's what it took to smooth my system out. I recommend the OCZ line, best value and highest quality, just get Gold Certified, whatever brand you choose. Corsair are reportedly among the best also.

Anyway, wait if you can.

[Tim Akin]

Thanks for your input Jeff.

CPU's these days confuse the heck out of me. SandyBridge or 9XX i7's? I don't have a clue. My budget for CPU is around $400, just can't go top of the line because I know in a year or two I will be doing this again.

I saw your post about the power supply today. I ordered a Corsair 850w yesterday, along with a tower,hard drive and win7 (trying to break the cost up). I have no intentions of overclocking though.

May be sending win7 back because I just read the home edition may not support all the ram I may want to use, pro does. Can anyone confirm this? I bought the 3pc bundle because I have a laptop and our personal pc to upgrade from XP.

[Jeff Harper]

Tim, I can promise you that if you get the 950, and the same board I have, I can have you running at 3.7ghz in 5 minutes, I will give you my settings, and you won't need an aftermarket cooler. It's a piece of cake.

Otherwise, just get this: Newegg.com - Intel Core i7-2600K Sandy Bridge 3.4GHz (3.8GHz Turbo Boost) LGA 1155 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor Intel HD Graphics 3000 BX80623I72600K and you'd be flying. It's a great processor, everyone loves it, and it's in your price range. It's fast as heck. It's not six core, but you really don't need six core, not truly. I would buy this processor in a heartbeat. It's quite a bargain, really, for what you get. I don't know anything about the chipset and it's disadvantages or advantages, though.

[Jim Schuchmann]

Tim, it's rally not that hard to build your own. The Videoguys are a excellent source of info. I'm sending you an email.

[Phil Lee]

Hi

Working in IT I don't recommend over-clocking. It's a fools game, you waste more time than you save by a bit of speed because of unexplained issues and crashes, which seems to be your issues Jeff.

Given Intel CPUs now automatically take into account safe operating temperatures and single threaded applications by upping clock speed when safe to do so, it's even more of reason not to over-clock and also means there is less head-room for over-clocking in the first place as Intel are basically doing this automatically on recent CPUs in a controlled way. Also given the competitiveness in the CPU market, if Intel (or AMD) could sell CPUs that reliably work at even higher clock speeds than they are rated for now don't you think they would?

A thousand watt power-supply is ridiculous Jeff, and if that power supply is only having to supply 80-100 watts at system idle they are more inefficient and may even have problems regulating their output at such low wattage.

My advice to Tim, if you can wait a few more months then go for the tock cycle of the next Intel chips called Ivy Bridge. These are built using 22nm and will use much less power than current chips (even less of a reason for an over spec'd power supply) and have an increase in performance, they include pretty powerful graphics processors now or will accept an alternative graphics card, plus the Intel chip-set that will arrive to support these chips have native USB3 and support for faster memory.

The lineup of Ivy Bridge CPUs is here More Details on Ivy Bridge Models "S" and "T" Emerge

Ivy Bridge is what I'm waiting for and will be my next upgrade.

Regards

Phil

[Joe Kollee]

I really agree with you Phil. IMO, I find that overclockers tend to spend a ton of extra cash on things that they believe makes a huge difference. I too, in the IT business and almost once per month, someone has so many issues with their machine and resetting the bios makes all the difference in the world. It is easy to read a website that gives you all the information to solve a overclocking issue, and it usually means buying a better this and that. PCs tend to work differently under different loads, so when you put it under a stressful situation, like rendering, that type of load may not be stable for the length of time needed to do the job...

What makes me smile, when talking to some diehard overclockers, is, they tend to buy a $200 cpu, and try to over clock it to the $500 cpu. This makes the all bragging rights happen :) However, many people spend $300 or more on extras to make this happen. Super quiet cpu fans... 40-90 bucks, supper high current power supplies 100-300 bucks, 5 extra cooling fans, special memory with crazy timings 100-200 extra

Why not just buy the $500 cpu, and use the normal ram, and a quality 600 watt supply and call it a 100% work horse and forget all the learning curve of what each OC tweak does what today? In the end, it costs less money, you have a stellar system, and you will be happy for many years...

Deep down inside, I bet there is a little overclocker in everyone, but from what I see, it usually ends up costing more, because every situation is a little different, and people tend to blog about what problem they had, and what they did to fix it, only to find out there is another issue around the corner...and people reading all this and that tend to take it as gospel, with out really understanding 100% what they are doing. It is the single most trial and error system on the planet.

Remember a bench mark might work fine with OC settings, and a game or two, but if you are running close to the red line, then some apps may use the cpu in a slightly different way, leading you down the garden path of what came first the chicken or the egg..

/my 2 cents off

In the end, each to their own.

[Tim Akin]

Jeff, are the i7-2600 and 2600K the same except the K can be overclocked?

Thanks Phil, so you think the Ivy Bridge is worth waiting for if performance and stability is the main concern? I was hoping to have this build done before April, once the weddings start I won't have to for a build.

Can anyone confirm the windows 7 home version not supporting all installed memory?

[Jeff Harper]

Phil, Joe, I've been assembling PCs since '95, and I've been running overclocked for 4 years, so while I may be a fool Phil, I am not new to overclocking, and running a close to a 30% increase in speed is worth a little work, and yes it takes time to iron out a new processor's settings.

Think about it guys. I run at 4.2 Ghz on a stock cooler. How much would that cost to buy? Wait, I forgot, they don't sell chips that run that fast, at least that I know of. You'll see that statement as bragging, but I'm merely making the point, what I do is very much worth the time spent. If you haven't tried it, don't knock it.

Joe, not sure where you got your info on overclocking but it's clear you don't do it. Special memory is not required for overclocking a cpu, just decent memory. I run very inexpensive 3 year old memory and it is fantasitic, even with my CPU which was only released in July.

Adding fans in a case that it's not designed to accomodate is not advisable and will inhibit airflow. I don't know of any conventional case that will accept 5 "extra" fans. My case came with 5, but it was made for them. Some better cases than mine do well with three or less fans. It's the case design that counts.

A top notch power supply is not a luxury. I purchased a high-end Dell workstation only to find it was underpowered because I ran extra hard drives, which is still the stupidest thing I've ever seen in my life.

Regarding my random crashes and other issues, if you missed it, I've replaced my power supply which caused me a myriad of issues, and has solved virtually all of them, except random crashes, which is not due to overclocking. I've run Prime 95, my temps are within range, and my pc is fine.

As you guys say, I do spend a ton of cash, I've got over $3k spent on internal HDs alone. High performance is not for the squeamish, or those on a budget, and most IT techs are conservative, I get that, and that's fine. It's why I quit the MSCE program, I couldn't breathe in that classroom, much too stifling.

At any rate, In my case I edit 4 lines of HD video at a time, and I've got a backlog of 20+ projects, so speed is my friend. I have had hiccups, but so what? If you guys want to run stock speeds, who cares? Please don't insult those of us that don't.

[Gints Klimanis]

Originally Posted by Phil Lee

Also given the competitiveness in the CPU market, if Intel (or AMD) could sell CPUs that reliably work at even higher clock speeds than they are rated for now don't you think they would?

Intel does. Their high end processor typically sells for $1000 and is "unlocked" to allow over clockers to do their thing. They sell it for $500 than the next grade processor without the unlocking. The main catches are 1) TurboBoost must be disabled for the highest over clocking 2) system consumes more power and generates more heat. Processors can easily run faster with additional cooling. There is a limit to air cooling. For those willing to invest in water cooling, Intel's 3.3 GHz processors can run at 5 GHz. I use the water-cooling to keep my system quiet with moderate over clocking.

nVidia GFX chips are also sold in over-clocking packages usually seen as "OC" in the product name.

[Phil Lee]

Hi Jeff

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

Think about it guys. I run at 4.2 Ghz on a stock cooler. How much would that cost to buy? Wait, I forgot, they don't sell chips that run that fast, at least that I know of.

Exactly, and why don't they sell them? Because there are problems reliably running CPU's at those sort of speeds. All the might of Intel R&D can't make a CPU currently running at that speed reliable enough to sell, so what makes you think you can?

Regarding my random crashes and other issues, if you missed it, I've replaced my power supply which caused me a myriad of issues, and has solved virtually all of them, except random crashes, which is not due to overclocking. I've run Prime 95, my temps are within range, and my pc is fine.

Virtually all "except random crashes", which says it all really. How do you know it's not due to over-clocking and a damaged CPU?

The trouble with overclocking is you are eroding any tolerances for power supply ripple or any other components slight variation from the absolute perfect. So you have bought a new power supply with nice new components and it gives a smooth enough supply for the CPU not to fall over at silly over-clocked speeds. As that power supply ages, and more ripple creeps in to it's output, which while perfectly in spec for a normal clocked system, suddenly starts introducing random errors again on an over-clocked one. So you start swapping more things out, perhaps it is the memory now, or the processor heatsink isn't big enough, or your hard-drive is going wrong and so on, until you think it must be the power supply again and go out and buy a 1500 watt one then start telling us we all need 1500 watt power supplies.

My PC went together by me over 2 years ago, all running in spec, I've never had an issue with it, and apart from putting in a larger hard-drive and the odd spring clean to remove balls of dust, I never need to go inside it, let alone had to replace any components for any reason. Can you say the same?

Originally Posted by Gints Klimanis

Intel does. Their high end processor typically sells for $1000 and is "unlocked" to allow over clockers to do their thing. They sell it for $500 than the next grade processor without the unlocking. The main catches are 1) TurboBoost must be disabled for the highest over clocking 2) system consumes more power and generates more heat. Processors can easily run faster with additional cooling. There is a limit to air cooling. For those willing to invest in water cooling, Intel's 3.3 GHz processors can run at 5 GHz. I use the water-cooling to keep my system quiet with moderate over clocking.

And sold by Intel with no promises it will work at higher speeds and is just Intel pandering to the market to gain some extra sales, they will take their money from anyone, no company is fussy. It also means Intel are cherry picking the best CPUs from their production to sell at a price premium, making it less likely standard CPUs can take over-clocking reliably.

Out of friends/family, the only people calling on me for help with random problems (they know I'm in IT) are those over-clocking, and I refuse to help. Even down clocking the system again after it's been over-clocked often components are damaged and will still not work reliably. Don't get me started the number of times I see memory/motherboards/CPUs being handled with no static precautions, that's another introducer of random problems and early failure that no one seems to grasp despite all the warnings in the manual and on the packaging.

Regards

Phil

[Phil Lee]

Hi

Originally Posted by Tim Akin

Jeff, are the i7-2600 and 2600K the same except the K can be overclocked?

Thanks Phil, so you think the Ivy Bridge is worth waiting for if performance and stability is the main concern? I was hoping to have this build done before April, once the weddings start I won't have to for a build.

Can anyone confirm the windows 7 home version not supporting all installed memory?

Windows Home Basic will support up to 8GB and Windows Home Premium will go up to 16GB, info here Memory Limits for Windows Releases

If you need to buy before April then unfortunately that puts the Ivy Bridge processors slightly out of reach. Performance wise not a big step increase except if you are using the integrated graphics which they say is a 30% improvement over the existing on die graphics. Power consumption is reduced while performance is improved but not by big strides.

Regards

Phil

[Gints Klimanis]

Phil wrote "It also means Intel are cherry picking the best CPUs from their production to sell at a price premium"

Yes, but not exactly. Manufacturing yields and overall product profitability both play into the distribution. Consider that Intel could ship every processor running at or near the top clock speed but deliberately offers speed grades with different pricing. This is how system integrators make more money as you notice the upgrades in the CPU, GFX, Memory, Storage, etc categories on the price sheet. Why pick on the top of the line? An additional $500 for processor and $500-1000 for a water cooling system saves operating costs, e.g. an hour on every three hour project render and the project is blocked by that operation.

Intel is selling a portion of their product with an additional ability and charging for that. Without the high end product and fat profit margin, the remaining processors would probably need to be sold at higher prices. To sell these additional abilities, they must be verified with additional testing that costs more. Processors are indeed able to run at higher clock speeds or voltages, but the performance of the parts is limited by the cooling solution. Most customers do not want to pay for more for a large or expensive cooling solution, so companies such as Intel design for the common cooling system : 1-2 case medium-sized case fans and one PSU fan.

Companies such as nVidia sell high end graphics chips in the $1000+ range with fat profit margins on the parts because those products are lower volume and need more company support.

P.S. In the past, I worked at one of the major graphics chip companies.

[Gints Klimanis]

Originally Posted by Phil Lee

I never need to go inside it, let alone had to replace any components for any reason. Can you say the same?

No. I'm a computer engineer by trade, PC-builder/tinkerer by hobby. Few devices pass through my hands without having the cover removed to peek inside. Even the espresso machine in the break room is not safe from tinkering. Sometimes, the device no longer works, but the curiosity will not be contained.

[Phil Lee]

Hi

Originally Posted by Gints Klimanis

Yes, but not exactly. Manufacturing yields and overall product profitability both play into the distribution. Consider that Intel could ship every processor running at or near the top clock speed but deliberately offers speed grades with different pricing. This is how system integrators make more money as you notice the upgrades in the CPU, GFX, Memory, Storage, etc categories on the price sheet. Why pick on the top of the line? An additional $500 for processor and $500-1000 for a water cooling system saves operating costs, e.g. an hour on every three hour project render and the project is blocked by that operation.

That has always been the over-clockers mantra, that CPUs are deliberately down-rated to hit a price point and are really no different to the higher rated parts a lot of the time. No one knows if that is really true or not, and what might be true for one production run or type of CPU may not be true for another. Intel have argued that the opposite is true, they test all CPUs for the highest performance that CPU can run at reliably and so some are just slower and are sold for a cheaper price.

The point being, you overclock and take a risk. In Jeff's case he's gone way over the top and his CPU is running at a clock speed Intel don't even sell it at ever, and without any special cooling.

If you want the faster CPU clock speed in the range, then buy it, why try and risk getting something for nothing, and in most cases as already written by Joe Kollee, ends up costing more due to esoteric cooling solutions and other over-spec'd components that tend to go hand in hand with over clocking. I bet Jeff has spent more on power supplies than I have on my entire computer.

No. I'm a computer engineer by trade, PC-builder/tinkerer by hobby. Few devices pass through my hands without having the cover removed to peek inside. Even the espresso machine in the break room is not safe from tinkering. Sometimes, the device no longer works, but the curiosity will not be contained.

Sounds like me, I've taking things apart since I could hold a screw driver.

Regards

Phil