Video editing/Gaming build - Budget (1000$ to 1500$) HELP!

[RadioActivated]

1 hour ago, ir_cow said:

No worries that what we are here for

Are you worried you wont get a video card that can handle your editing? When I get home today I can upload a video of editing a bunch of 1080 streams togther in premiere using a GTX 1650. I just picked that card because its low wattage and runs cool. You never hear the fans, which is good when you are trying to edit and hear a airplane inside your computer. Makes recording audio a challenge.

As I said before a lot of effects are rendering on the CPU. Especially in CC 2017, mostly everything is. Here is a list of currently supported acceleration for NVIDIA GPU on CC 2019. https://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-pro/using/effects.html

Your video editing on a budget. Ideally I would suggest a more "powerful" video card for future proof and possible high end CPU, just in case you end up working with 4k footage.

Ok Great.

I also updated my SSD's seeing I need a crap load of space for what I am doing so the price went up quite a bit. It's sitting at 1432$ at the moment and I have a 2700X CPU with a 2070RTX. Honestly, I find that with the GTX760 I have premiere runs pretty good so I mean any minor upgrade will probably show to my eyes so I don't really need much. Do you think I should downgrade the video card a bit to let's say a 1080GTX or 1070Ti and get a 9 series Ryzen? I do intend on boosting the CPU a bit if it's not locked using the Hyper 212 cooler, let me know your thoughts

Thanks btw ir_cow  

[ir_cow]

Hey I got side tracked, do you still need help with deciding?

I actually can't test any other card right now because I have VEGA 64 card in my computer for benchmarks n' stuff. I been using this Vega 64 card for 4K editing all week. Granted I don't do anything serious besides minor color correction and basic After Effects (no 3D stuff). I also did some 4K editing with the GTX 1650 when I had it in my computer.

So its hard to narrow down exactly what you need when you say 1920x1080 editing. Do you know more about the content you will be editing? Like will you have multiple streams, image stabilizing and color collection going? Or it is just basic cuts with a few dissolve and wipes? Because some of it will depend on the CPU and lot more than the type of video card you have. Than you speed more on the CPU and less on the Video Card. Win WIn. Or the opposite because the functions you like to use is supported by GPU Acceleration, thefore you would want a beefer card, maybe with 8GB of ram. Once again depends on how you are editing 1080P content and what you are editing.

Heck at my old NBC job I used a Dual Core Xeon from 2010 for all the 1080P content. It had 6GB of ram, and Windows XP. Yet it worked for basic stuff like basic dissolves and wipes with 2 video clips. Render times was insane though. Either it had to be exported in a MPEG2 or nothing at all. Everything else would take an hour for 2-3min clip.

[RadioActivated]

13 hours ago, ir_cow said:

Hey I got side tracked, do you still need help with deciding?

I actually can't test any other card right now because I have VEGA 64 card in my computer for benchmarks n' stuff. I been using this Vega 64 card for 4K editing all week. Granted I don't do anything serious besides minor color correction and basic After Effects (no 3D stuff). I also did some 4K editing with the GTX 1650 when I had it in my computer.

So its hard to narrow down exactly what you need when you say 1920x1080 editing. Do you know more about the content you will be editing? Like will you have multiple streams, image stabilizing and color collection going? Or it is just basic cuts with a few dissolve and wipes? Because some of it will depend on the CPU and lot more than the type of video card you have. Than you speed more on the CPU and less on the Video Card. Win WIn. Or the opposite because the functions you like to use is supported by GPU Acceleration, thefore you would want a beefer card, maybe with 8GB of ram. Once again depends on how you are editing 1080P content and what you are editing.

Heck at my old NBC job I used a Dual Core Xeon from 2010 for all the 1080P content. It had 6GB of ram, and Windows XP. Yet it worked for basic stuff like basic dissolves and wipes with 2 video clips. Render times was insane though. Either it had to be exported in a MPEG2 or nothing at all. Everything else would take an hour for 2-3min clip.

Hey, that's fine, I haven't decided yet if I go Intel or AMD and I still don't know which GFX card to get lol. A lot of people are telling me to get Intel instead of AMD because they claim to be better for video editing than AMD. Just so you know, I only film in 1080p, and I don't do much editing apart from what you said, dissolves and zooms here and there with some audio enhancements. I don't plan on filming in 4K but hey, life is full of surprises lol so I might need to plan for that. The PC I have right now does the job, I just find it to be a tad bit slow at just operating Premiere and other programs so I need a refresh lol and plus it adds to my expenses seeing it's my primary job.

It's a tough decision lol

I left a .TXT of my current PC specs so you have a better idea of what I am talking about.

 

GOT2LEARN-PC.txt

Edited July 12, 2019 by RadioActivated

[ir_cow]

People are right about Intel being "better"...that is up until a week ago with the Ryzen 3 series. Core for Core, Intel CPUs were/are a lot faster, but AMD countered this by just adding more cores. Now Ryzen 3 is out, Intels 8core matched AMDs now 8core (for encoding at least). 

Neither is cheap. Instead of $200, your looking at $350 entry level.

It seems like to me you just need to add more ram and a SSD to your current computer. But if you can write it off as a tax break, a new computer might be the way to go.

I'll put togther a $1500 build when I get home tonight. 

I think AMD is killing it right now in the low and the high end market. My primary computer is a Threadripper 1920X right now. Does everything I need very well.

[RHKCommander959]

AMD is doing well and Intel is suffering from security holes and patches.

What motherboard is your old system? 8350 is OK, 9590 is probably the highest for your socket but all in a new CPU would run laps around either of them.

That GTX 760 is holding you back a bit too

[RadioActivated]

20 minutes ago, RHKCommander959 said:

AMD is doing well and Intel is suffering from security holes and patches.

What motherboard is your old system? 8350 is OK, 9590 is probably the highest for your socket but all in a new CPU would run laps around either of them.

That GTX 760 is holding you back a bit too

Yeah I was always a fan of AMD, but then again, I wasn't editing back then lol.

The MB is a AsRock 990FX Killer. The setup is awesome and it works good for most tasks, but like I said, I need some sort of a tax break and the PC is what I am leaning towards at the moment. I will still be keep this PC as a backup for most stuff, but I need something that's a little quicker, in my case, time is money here so I have a good excuse

[ir_cow]

Its hard to find a direction comparison for the 9590 in video encoding / editing vs a Ryzen 3700X. So i did a few cross references and it seems you are looking at least a 100% increase in preformance. Probably even more honestly.

[RadioActivated]

1 hour ago, ir_cow said:

People are right about Intel being "better"...that is up until a week ago with the Ryzen 3 series. Core for Core, Intel CPUs were/are a lot faster, but AMD countered this by just adding more cores. Now Ryzen 3 is out, Intels 8core matched AMDs now 8core (for encoding at least). 

Neither is cheap. Instead of $200, your looking at $350 entry level.

It seems like to me you just need to add more ram and a SSD to your current computer. But if you can write it off as a tax break, a new computer might be the way to go.

I'll put togther a $1500 build when I get home tonight. 

I think AMD is killing it right now in the low and the high end market. My primary computer is a Threadripper 1920X right now. Does everything I need very well.

Thanks Cow

[RadioActivated]

6 hours ago, ir_cow said:

Its hard to find a direction comparison for the 9590 in video encoding / editing vs a Ryzen 3700X. So i did a few cross references and it seems you are looking at least a 100% increase in preformance. Probably even more honestly.

From what I have now to a new PC you mean?

[ir_cow]

Yes. If your current computer is a FX 9590 and you got a Ryzen 3800X, it would be at least a 100% increase in CPU preformance.

[RadioActivated]

Hmmm, dunno what the FX9590 is but on CPUID it says my CPU is a FX-8350, which is far from even being a Zen lol 

[ir_cow]

The FX 9590 is the "fastest" cpu for your mothebroard (AM3). Its just a reference point. Ive had a FX 8350 before. Great budget CPU for its time, but no where near Intel for the the time. 

Any Ryzen 3XXX CPU will be night and day in comparison. AMD FX chips really struggled to keep up with a Intel i5 (for its time period). You bought a FX because it was half the price as Intel and in gaming the FPS wasnt that far off (depending on the game). Differently not a CPU for video editing in any way shape or form.