While im editing, I know the editing program should be on the SSD but what should the rendered video be saved to while rendering the video? The HDD or the SSD? Like if I set the destination to my HDD is there going to be a bottle neck in speed while rendering since SSD's are faster? Or should the destination be set to the SSD and then moved over to the HDD after the render is complete?
Quick question about SSD's (video destination while editing)
- Thread starter Joey249
- Start date
Solution
TechyInAZ
Titan
I'd put it on the HDD, main reason why you put the software on the SSD is so your program will boot faster and perform slightly faster. When only rendering it doesn't matter.
pasow
Distinguished
- Nov 15, 2012
- 474
- 0
- 19,160
that really depends on how slow your HDD is, where your software's swap is located, and how fast your rendering is. if your only finishing say a few frames per second, then a hard drive as your destination shouldn't impact your times at all. but if your rendering seconds worth of the video per second, then a HDD might impact your time. its best to benchmark on your own system and compare the results. generally speaking though, rendering to HDD will not be your bottle neck.
MarkW
Judicious
- Dec 7, 2009
- 6,308
- 0
- 32,960
There are hard drives specifically made for video, but they are talking about recording a video, think security camera feeds, etc... Rendering is a very different animal. Having said that though, today's faster hard drives should be able to keep up with a typical rendering system. So I would store the video (all data actually) on the hard drive. What you do not want to do is to fill up your SSD to its limits. They need free space to function properly. Basically, a full SSD is an unhappy SSD, which will then lead to an unhappy you.
As far as what to buy, I prefer HGST, Toshiba and WD, and in that order. The seem to have the lowest failure rates for hard drives. You will know better than I will about how much capacity you are going to need. Just available hard drive that has 3GB. For some reason 3GB hard drives seem to fail at far higher rates than 2GB or 4GB drives overall. I would also try to get at least a 64MB memory cache, and 7200 RPM drives for this.
As far as rendering to the SSD and then copying, I do not think you will see much, if any, benefit from doing that. But that does depend on how fast your rendering program can produce its output. But my understanding is that rendering is slower than just plain capturing a security camera feed. And a hard drive can do that easily. So I would put all of my video on a hard drive or two. Maybe you could put raw video on one hard drive and write the finished output to a second hard drive.
As far as what to buy, I prefer HGST, Toshiba and WD, and in that order. The seem to have the lowest failure rates for hard drives. You will know better than I will about how much capacity you are going to need. Just available hard drive that has 3GB. For some reason 3GB hard drives seem to fail at far higher rates than 2GB or 4GB drives overall. I would also try to get at least a 64MB memory cache, and 7200 RPM drives for this.
As far as rendering to the SSD and then copying, I do not think you will see much, if any, benefit from doing that. But that does depend on how fast your rendering program can produce its output. But my understanding is that rendering is slower than just plain capturing a security camera feed. And a hard drive can do that easily. So I would put all of my video on a hard drive or two. Maybe you could put raw video on one hard drive and write the finished output to a second hard drive.
The Original Ralph
Distinguished
- Sep 14, 2011
- 2,222
- 1
- 20,510
while not a professional, i render a lot of video and have found having a 2nd or spare SSD to use as a "worktable" drive, gives me the fastest renders. Files that took 45-70 minutes to render, dropped by 30-40% using the SSD to write to - then once rendered, i'll copy it to a HDD for permanent storage.
the sandisk Ultra II, 240 gb, is under $90, which makes it such an easy choice, if you have a spare sata port
the sandisk Ultra II, 240 gb, is under $90, which makes it such an easy choice, if you have a spare sata port
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
-
News US sanctions transform China into legacy chip production juggernaut — production jumped 40% in Q1 2024- Started by Admin
- Replies: 35
-
Question RX 6600 visual glitches right after upgrading to it- Started by Wamek
- Replies: 4
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram