What REALLY matters in computer hardware?

dsmithhfx · 10-06-2017, 05:18 AM

Originally posted by Digitalis

All those points and you still forgot to mention arctic silver CPU compound.

Another thing to consider is the peripherals you plan to use with the system. I work with a Wacom graphics tablet*, and it is hard to go back to keyboard and mouse for image editing**. Also which monitor you intend to buy for image editing.

When building a system I over-provision power requirements by 50%, this leaves room for expansion and most power supplies only reach their rated efficiency levels at 75% load anyway.

My current system is completely water cooled - it is quiet and very efficient, but it is complicated when it comes to maintaining it. I only recently changed to soft to hard PETG tubing to keep maintenance down.

*I also use Wacoms excellent Cintiq interactive displays in my studio.
** I use gaming peripherals as they are ergonomically designed with multi-hour sessions in mind. I use a R.A.T 7 mouse and a mechanical Corsair K70 keyboard with cherry MX silent keyswitches. Plus I do play games on my overpowered systems...why not?

Yeah gaming is a good reality-check -- any system that can play modern pc games is likely more than up to the task of image-editing, not to mention video editing and for that matter 3d modelling and rendering.

speaking of previous gen, my current pc, which is looong overdue for a replacement, yet somehow keeps soldiering on, has a 65W TDP Athlon x2 (4850e) an agp graphics card, and is maxed out @ 2G RAM. It is cooled by I took the sides off the case, and put the hdd outside it. I dual-boot xp and linux, and buy games mostly for < $5. (I spend way too much time playing computer games, and even contrived a photo project about them a couple of years ago)

**Digitalis** · 10-06-2017, 08:47 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by dsmithhfx

an agp graphics card

Wow

That is a graphics interface I haven't heard of in decades.

dsmithhfx · 10-07-2017, 05:37 AM

Originally posted by Digitalis

Wow

That is a graphics interface I haven't heard of in decades.

They originally made "agp" ("accelerated graphics port") to support 3d graphics cards. Accelerated Graphics Port - Wikipedia

My card is an hd4650, one of the last made in agp.

**Digitalis** · 10-07-2017, 06:38 PM

Originally posted by dsmithhfx

They originally made "agp" ("accelerated graphics port") to support 3d graphics cards.

Back in the day when Nvidia was the underdog with their TNT2 and 3DFX were the top dog with their VooDoo graphics cards...wow that takes me back.

Winder · 10-08-2017, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by ranmar850

Over the years, as my photography and video have evolved, I have received conflicting advice on really matters for PP and rendering . My current k-70 has a RAW file size around 28.5 Mb, and HDD RAW of around 90mb. Individually, just about anything can manage PP on these, but when I start doing panoramic stitches in PS, my previous i5 SP3 would often stagger. Particularly when i asked it to stitch 36 HDR images--just said no. 14 was OK, mostly. Likewise, with video processing, (mainly Gopro) it was pretty good, but you really had to limit the length or it would just fall over. So, earlier this year I purchased a faster machine. Lenovo Yoga 900 . This was powered by an i7-6500U, 2.5ghz, with 8mb of RAM. Brilliant display, so the smaller size is not really a handicap in PP. It manages all the above quite well, with only the rare "not responding" moment in LR. I started using LRTimelapse shooting in RAW. This means I may have up to 800 RAW images to work with at once, and all the corresponding changes. Again, it does it quite well, but is just slow--export from the program for the finished product will take 1.5 hrs for a render of that size, or probably 45 minutes for a more normal 400 frame shoot. Likewise during the processing, reload and visual preview take quite a while. looking into this machine, I believe it has Intel graphics integrated into the CPU, could be wrong? Video editing is now done with Premiere Elements 15.
So what has the greatest effect on ability to process large visuals files efficiently? Processor speed? Graphics card? RAM? A combination of all 3? Is hyperthreading ability an advantage?

If I were buying a computer today for video I would probably go with the AMD R7 chip. The 1700 is the best value for the money. If you are going to be using the new versions of Photoshop or Lightroom, more cores are going to be a big benefit. An M.2 drive would obviously help moving those large files, but if you are not doing this for a living it is hard to justify the cost. Any modern GPU card should be fine. GFX 1050 or 1060 is more then enough. The AMD video cards way over priced right now with all the miners buying them up.

Premiere Pro CC 2017.1.2 CPU Comparison: Skylake-X, Kaby Lake-X, Broadwell-E, Kaby Lake, Ryzen 7

kaspy · 10-08-2017, 12:20 PM

Originally posted by Winder

If I were buying a computer today for video I would probably go with the AMD R7 chip. The 1700 is the best value for the money. If you are going to be using the new versions of Photoshop or Lightroom, more cores are going to be a big benefit. An M.2 drive would obviously help moving those large files, but if you are not doing this for a living it is hard to justify the cost. Any modern GPU card should be fine. GFX 1050 or 1060 is more then enough. The AMD video cards way over priced right now with all the miners buying them up.

Premiere Pro CC 2017.1.2 CPU Comparison: Skylake-X, Kaby Lake-X, Broadwell-E, Kaby Lake, Ryzen 7

The Ryzen R7 processors come in at the bottom on their Photoshop test:
Photoshop CC 2017.1.1 CPU Comparison: Skylake-X, Kaby Lake-X, Broadwell-E, Kaby Lake, Ryzen 7

Not only that but the R7 1700 isn't tested (in either comparison), but the faster/pricier Ryzen 1700X did poorly, even against the older gen Intel CPUs (article was written before Intel's new line came out of course)

I'm excited about Ryzen too, but based on this comparison it looks like Intel is a lot better for Photoshop (thanks to Adobe's outdated software). Check out the new i7-8700, and i5-8400 looks like amazing value (costs less than R7 1700 too I think). If you are using other software Ryzen might be more competitive.

Edit: just realized you said for video specifically (whoops), but if anyone's use case also involves Photoshop it's still something to consider. Cheers!

Winder · 10-08-2017, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by kaspy

The Ryzen R7 processors come in at the bottom on their Photoshop test:
Photoshop CC 2017.1.1 CPU Comparison: Skylake-X, Kaby Lake-X, Broadwell-E, Kaby Lake, Ryzen 7

Not only that but the R7 1700 isn't tested (in either comparison), but the faster/pricier Ryzen 1700X did poorly, even against the older gen Intel CPUs (article was written before Intel's new line came out of course)

I'm excited about Ryzen too, but based on this comparison it looks like Intel is a lot better for Photoshop (thanks to Adobe's outdated software). Check out the new i7-8700, and i5-8400 looks like amazing value (costs less than R7 1700 too I think). If you are using other software Ryzen might be more competitive.

Edit: just realized you said for video specifically (whoops), but if anyone's use case also involves Photoshop it's still something to consider. Cheers!

All the R7 chips are the same and they are all unlocked for overclocking. You should be able to turn the 1700 up to 4ghz. For the price, the 1700 is they way to go. You can get the 1700 with an X370 MB for under $500. That will get you 80-90% of the performance for a lot less money. If money is no option then go for the new i9.

The review is showing MSRP prices. I can buy an 1700X for under $300.

You Tube

Last edited by Winder; 10-08-2017 at 02:33 PM.

**jbinpg** · 10-08-2017, 03:15 PM

Check out this linux performance comparison between Ryzen and I7. Software written to take advantage of Ryzen's multicore threading do very well. Not so much in single-threaded apps. Same situation across all operating systems.

AMD Ryzen 7 1800X vs. Intel Core i7 7700K Linux Gaming Performance Review - Phoronix

**Digitalis** · 10-09-2017, 03:34 AM

Originally posted by Winder

All the R7 chips are the same and they are all unlocked for overclocking.

You need water cooling to get the most out of overclocking, and that in itself is not for the inexperienced. In any case if the programs you are running are poorly optimized for multi-core performance then no amount of overclocking will offer much gain, it is a Kick the alligator scenario*. It is known that Lightroom even in its current iteration doesn't make good use of multi-cored CPUs, Photoshop never has.

* something where the advantages are vastly outweighed by the risks.

Winder · 10-09-2017, 06:44 PM

Originally posted by Digitalis

You need water cooling to get the most out of overclocking, and that in itself is not for the inexperienced. In any case if the programs you are running are poorly optimized for multi-core performance then no amount of overclocking will offer much gain, it is a Kick the alligator scenario*. It is known that Lightroom even in its current iteration doesn't make good use of multi-cored CPUs, Photoshop never has.

* something where the advantages are vastly outweighed by the risks.

You can buy a AIO cooler for under $100 that will handle any over clocking you want to do. LR 7 is in beta and it will use all of the cores you have. All of the Adobe products are going in this direction. 4-5ghz is pretty much the wall developers are up against. IF they want to improve the performance of their products they have to start taking advantage of more cores. With Intel now jumping to 6 cores on the new i7 8700K and the i9 offering 10-18 cores, we will see more software taking advantage. Capture One has been designed to take advantage of up to 12 cores since V. 5.1 and has probably been updated to take advantage of 16 cores by now. Final Cut is another that will use at least 12 cores. One of key points for Adobe LR on this revision is improved speed.

Jeff Lopez · 10-10-2017, 11:08 AM

The problem is HEAT...take it from an ex-gamer..as soon temp rises, those cores, gpu, and hdd spindles will throttle down, for sure.

**LaurenOE** · 10-10-2017, 11:34 AM - **1 Like**

Hmm...dunno if I should chime in here about the machines I use to do work.
I build machines around Asus Motherboards with the Intel X-99 Platform.
Today's tech is around SSD and M.2 drives, USB 3.1/USB-C and TONS of RAM.

On one machine, I run 2 SLI GTX1080s, with 128gig of ram, and a 950 m.2 drive with about 80T of storage.

So if you put aside about $4k for a machine, you can build something amazing.

**Ex Finn.** · 10-13-2017, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by LaurenOE

2 SLI GTX1080s, with 128gig of ram

Nice!

**Digitalis** · 10-13-2017, 08:30 PM

Originally posted by Winder

You can buy a AIO cooler for under $100 that will handle any over clocking you want to do.

If you want to slap a $100 "maintenance free" AIO cooler on a CPU costing over 1K, go ahead. I reserve the right to cackle when the cooler fails, resulting in your own private Chernobyl. Nothing is ever maintenance free, especially when computers are involved.

**Ex Finn.** · 10-14-2017, 05:23 PM

Originally posted by Digitalis

If you want to slap a $100 "maintenance free" AIO cooler on a CPU costing over 1K, go ahead. I reserve the right to cackle when the cooler fails, resulting in your own private Chernobyl. Nothing is ever maintenance free, especially when computers are involved.

I love my AIO`s. I do enable thermal throttling, just in case

10-08-2017, 12:20 PM	#36
kaspy New Member Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 20	Originally posted by Winder If I were buying a computer today for video I would probably go with the AMD R7 chip. The 1700 is the best value for the money. If you are going to be using the new versions of Photoshop or Lightroom, more cores are going to be a big benefit. An M.2 drive would obviously help moving those large files, but if you are not doing this for a living it is hard to justify the cost. Any modern GPU card should be fine. GFX 1050 or 1060 is more then enough. The AMD video cards way over priced right now with all the miners buying them up. Premiere Pro CC 2017.1.2 CPU Comparison: Skylake-X, Kaby Lake-X, Broadwell-E, Kaby Lake, Ryzen 7 The Ryzen R7 processors come in at the bottom on their Photoshop test: Photoshop CC 2017.1.1 CPU Comparison: Skylake-X, Kaby Lake-X, Broadwell-E, Kaby Lake, Ryzen 7 Not only that but the R7 1700 isn't tested (in either comparison), but the faster/pricier Ryzen 1700X did poorly, even against the older gen Intel CPUs (article was written before Intel's new line came out of course) I'm excited about Ryzen too, but based on this comparison it looks like Intel is a lot better for Photoshop (thanks to Adobe's outdated software). Check out the new i7-8700, and i5-8400 looks like amazing value (costs less than R7 1700 too I think). If you are using other software Ryzen might be more competitive. Edit: just realized you said for video specifically (whoops), but if anyone's use case also involves Photoshop it's still something to consider. Cheers! Last edited by kaspy; 10-08-2017 at 12:26 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Machinery Hardware Photography.	Tonytee	Post Your Photos!	7	11-11-2016 10:58 PM
Calling all computer hardware literates. Help installing SSD	LeDave	General Talk	35	07-12-2016 03:06 PM
Panasonic shows why 4k video matters	jimr-pdx	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	13	03-04-2016 03:06 PM
K-1 vs K-3 autofocus system - some hardware and other differences	rawr	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	7	02-20-2016 09:42 PM
Finally on the forum that really matters!	hugostar	Welcomes and Introductions	3	04-04-2011 12:55 PM

10-06-2017, 05:18 AM	#31
dsmithhfx Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: Toronto Posts: 5,144	Originally posted by Digitalis All those points and you still forgot to mention arctic silver CPU compound. Another thing to consider is the peripherals you plan to use with the system. I work with a Wacom graphics tablet, and it is hard to go back to keyboard and mouse for image editing. Also which monitor you intend to buy for image editing. When building a system I over-provision power requirements by 50%, this leaves room for expansion and most power supplies only reach their rated efficiency levels at 75% load anyway. My current system is completely water cooled - it is quiet and very efficient, but it is complicated when it comes to maintaining it. I only recently changed to soft to hard PETG tubing to keep maintenance down. I also use Wacoms excellent Cintiq interactive displays in my studio. I use gaming peripherals as they are ergonomically designed with multi-hour sessions in mind. I use a R.A.T 7 mouse and a mechanical Corsair K70 keyboard with cherry MX silent keyswitches. Plus I do play games on my overpowered systems...why not? Yeah gaming is a good reality-check -- any system that can play modern pc games is likely more than up to the task of image-editing, not to mention video editing and for that matter 3d modelling and rendering. speaking of previous gen, my current pc, which is looong overdue for a replacement, yet somehow keeps soldiering on, has a 65W TDP Athlon x2 (4850e) an agp** graphics card, and is maxed out @ 2G RAM. It is cooled by I took the sides off the case, and put the hdd outside it. I dual-boot xp and linux, and buy games mostly for < $5. (I spend way too much time playing computer games, and even contrived a photo project about them a couple of years ago)

10-06-2017, 08:47 PM - 1 Like	#32
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by dsmithhfx an agp graphics card Wow That is a graphics interface I haven't heard of in decades.

10-07-2017, 05:37 AM	#33
dsmithhfx Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: Toronto Posts: 5,144	Originally posted by Digitalis Wow That is a graphics interface I haven't heard of in decades. They originally made "agp" ("accelerated graphics port") to support 3d graphics cards. Accelerated Graphics Port - Wikipedia My card is an hd4650, one of the last made in agp.

10-07-2017, 06:38 PM	#34
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by dsmithhfx They originally made "agp" ("accelerated graphics port") to support 3d graphics cards. Back in the day when Nvidia was the underdog with their TNT2 and 3DFX were the top dog with their VooDoo graphics cards...wow that takes me back.

10-08-2017, 10:28 AM	#35
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Originally posted by ranmar850 Over the years, as my photography and video have evolved, I have received conflicting advice on really matters for PP and rendering . My current k-70 has a RAW file size around 28.5 Mb, and HDD RAW of around 90mb. Individually, just about anything can manage PP on these, but when I start doing panoramic stitches in PS, my previous i5 SP3 would often stagger. Particularly when i asked it to stitch 36 HDR images--just said no. 14 was OK, mostly. Likewise, with video processing, (mainly Gopro) it was pretty good, but you really had to limit the length or it would just fall over. So, earlier this year I purchased a faster machine. Lenovo Yoga 900 . This was powered by an i7-6500U, 2.5ghz, with 8mb of RAM. Brilliant display, so the smaller size is not really a handicap in PP. It manages all the above quite well, with only the rare "not responding" moment in LR. I started using LRTimelapse shooting in RAW. This means I may have up to 800 RAW images to work with at once, and all the corresponding changes. Again, it does it quite well, but is just slow--export from the program for the finished product will take 1.5 hrs for a render of that size, or probably 45 minutes for a more normal 400 frame shoot. Likewise during the processing, reload and visual preview take quite a while. looking into this machine, I believe it has Intel graphics integrated into the CPU, could be wrong? Video editing is now done with Premiere Elements 15. So what has the greatest effect on ability to process large visuals files efficiently? Processor speed? Graphics card? RAM? A combination of all 3? Is hyperthreading ability an advantage? If I were buying a computer today for video I would probably go with the AMD R7 chip. The 1700 is the best value for the money. If you are going to be using the new versions of Photoshop or Lightroom, more cores are going to be a big benefit. An M.2 drive would obviously help moving those large files, but if you are not doing this for a living it is hard to justify the cost. Any modern GPU card should be fine. GFX 1050 or 1060 is more then enough. The AMD video cards way over priced right now with all the miners buying them up. Premiere Pro CC 2017.1.2 CPU Comparison: Skylake-X, Kaby Lake-X, Broadwell-E, Kaby Lake, Ryzen 7

10-08-2017, 03:15 PM	#38
jbinpg Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Prince George, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,546	Check out this linux performance comparison between Ryzen and I7. Software written to take advantage of Ryzen's multicore threading do very well. Not so much in single-threaded apps. Same situation across all operating systems. AMD Ryzen 7 1800X vs. Intel Core i7 7700K Linux Gaming Performance Review - Phoronix

10-09-2017, 03:34 AM	#39
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by Winder All the R7 chips are the same and they are all unlocked for overclocking. You need water cooling to get the most out of overclocking, and that in itself is not for the inexperienced. In any case if the programs you are running are poorly optimized for multi-core performance then no amount of overclocking will offer much gain, it is a Kick the alligator scenario. It is known that Lightroom even in its current iteration doesn't make good use of multi-cored CPUs, Photoshop never has. something where the advantages are vastly outweighed by the risks.

10-09-2017, 06:44 PM	#40
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Originally posted by Digitalis You need water cooling to get the most out of overclocking, and that in itself is not for the inexperienced. In any case if the programs you are running are poorly optimized for multi-core performance then no amount of overclocking will offer much gain, it is a Kick the alligator scenario. It is known that Lightroom even in its current iteration doesn't make good use of multi-cored CPUs, Photoshop never has. something where the advantages are vastly outweighed by the risks. You can buy a AIO cooler for under $100 that will handle any over clocking you want to do. LR 7 is in beta and it will use all of the cores you have. All of the Adobe products are going in this direction. 4-5ghz is pretty much the wall developers are up against. IF they want to improve the performance of their products they have to start taking advantage of more cores. With Intel now jumping to 6 cores on the new i7 8700K and the i9 offering 10-18 cores, we will see more software taking advantage. Capture One has been designed to take advantage of up to 12 cores since V. 5.1 and has probably been updated to take advantage of 16 cores by now. Final Cut is another that will use at least 12 cores. One of key points for Adobe LR on this revision is improved speed.

10-10-2017, 11:08 AM	#41
Jeff Lopez Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 531	The problem is HEAT...take it from an ex-gamer..as soon temp rises, those cores, gpu, and hdd spindles will throttle down, for sure.

10-10-2017, 11:34 AM - 1 Like	#42
LaurenOE Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Back in Florida, but worldwide gigs! Photos: Albums Posts: 3,690	Hmm...dunno if I should chime in here about the machines I use to do work. I build machines around Asus Motherboards with the Intel X-99 Platform. Today's tech is around SSD and M.2 drives, USB 3.1/USB-C and TONS of RAM. On one machine, I run 2 SLI GTX1080s, with 128gig of ram, and a 950 m.2 drive with about 80T of storage. So if you put aside about $4k for a machine, you can build something amazing.

10-13-2017, 01:48 PM	#43
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	Originally posted by LaurenOE 2 SLI GTX1080s, with 128gig of ram Nice!

10-13-2017, 08:30 PM	#44
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by Winder You can buy a AIO cooler for under $100 that will handle any over clocking you want to do. If you want to slap a $100 "maintenance free" AIO cooler on a CPU costing over 1K, go ahead. I reserve the right to cackle when the cooler fails, resulting in your own private Chernobyl. Nothing is ever maintenance free, especially when computers are involved.

10-14-2017, 05:23 PM	#45
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	Originally posted by Digitalis If you want to slap a $100 "maintenance free" AIO cooler on a CPU costing over 1K, go ahead. I reserve the right to cackle when the cooler fails, resulting in your own private Chernobyl. Nothing is ever maintenance free, especially when computers are involved. I love my AIO`s. I do enable thermal throttling, just in case