Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question
Solved

I7 2600k vs 2500k for video editing

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Video Editing
Last response: in CPUs
April 15, 2011 6:44:18 PM

Im just wondering because im deciding on whether to buy an I series or w8 for bulldozer, but is there a reason to purchase a 2600k over the 2500k? i do gaming and video encoding/converting. I have a hd 6850, and im wondering if there will be a noticable difference when converting a movie file from 1080p mkv ( or some format) to another 1080 (format that my xbox can read) right now i have an amd 640 and it takes 5+ hours for a good quality conversion. I wont be using quicksync because i have a pci card. will there be a big difference between conversion times from the i7 compared to I5?

More about : 2600k 2500k video editing

April 15, 2011 6:45:56 PM

btw if i go the 2500 route, i would have ~100 to spend on a good air cooler to OC, would my gpu bottle neck my cpu?
m
0
l
Related resources
April 15, 2011 7:09:29 PM

shadamus said:
For media transcoding you will notice a substantial boost with the 2600K.

See the Handbrake encoding results here (this is the app I use for transcoding):
www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-core-i7-2600k-core-i5-2500k,2833-17.html

Good luck with it.


im only seeing a few seconds increase in time, but im assuming thats because they're using very small files, so if i were to use a 10gb+ am i to expect the i7 would blow the i5 away, converting a file 30+ mins faster? i wont be using the quicksync feature, unless they update the firmware to switch from pci to HD 3000
m
0
l
April 15, 2011 7:20:23 PM

kilerz said:
im only seeing a few seconds increase in time, but im assuming thats because they're using very small files, so if i were to use a 10gb+ am i to expect the i7 would blow the i5 away, converting a file 30+ mins faster? i wont be using the quicksync feature, unless they update the firmware to switch from pci to HD 3000


I think we're looking at different things...

From 1 minute, 21 seconds with the 2600K to 2 minutes, 31 sec with the 2500K... The 2600K is just under 2x as fast on the transcode.
BTW: Handbrake is just using CPU rendering, no fancy new features.
m
0
l
April 15, 2011 7:26:02 PM

shadamus said:
I think we're looking at different things...

From 1 minute, 21 seconds with the 2600K to 2 minutes, 31 sec with the 2500K... The 2600K is just under 2x as fast on the transcode.
BTW: Handbrake is just using CPU rendering, no fancy new features.
http://media.bestofmicro.com/5/U/274962/original/HandBrake.png


It definitely is fast at VOB, but i dont convert VOB to often, my xbox (to which i stream movies to) doesnt support MKV/HDMKV so i need to encode 40+ movie files to a HD format it can support. do you think for other conversion methods it will also be 2x as fast?
m
0
l
April 15, 2011 7:35:00 PM

kilerz said:
It definitely is fast at VOB, but i dont convert VOB to often, my xbox (to which i stream movies to) doesnt support MKV/HDMKV so i need to encode 40+ movie files to a HD format it can support. do you think for other conversion methods it will also be 2x as fast?


That'll depend on the format. Best bet is to google around for benchmarks using the format that you need (and preferably the same application, unless you're open to changing your encoding app).

I encode VOB to MKV and AVI using handbrake, encoding time seems pretty equivalent between them (though I'm using a Q9550, not a nice new SB CPU) -- by my understanding, both AVI and MKV are just wrappers for the H.264 stream, so the heavy-lifting is identical, with just variation in packaging making them different.
m
0
l
April 15, 2011 7:41:56 PM

shadamus said:
That'll depend on the format. Best bet is to google around for benchmarks using the format that you need (and preferably the same application, unless you're open to changing your encoding app).

I encode VOB to MKV and AVI using handbrake, encoding time seems pretty equivalent between them (though I'm using a Q9550, not a nice new SB CPU) -- by my understanding, both AVI and MKV are just wrappers for the H.264 stream, so the heavy-lifting is identical, with just variation in packaging making them different.


right now ive been using xilisoft or arcsoft media converter cant decide on which is better. is handbrake good/ can it convert to alot of different file types, or even 1 HD that will work on the xbox
m
0
l
April 15, 2011 8:09:14 PM

kilerz said:
right now ive been using xilisoft or arcsoft media converter cant decide on which is better. is handbrake good/ can it convert to alot of different file types, or even 1 HD that will work on the xbox


Handbrake is very flexible, in terms of supported formats. I don't know which you need for the Xbox, but it should be able to get there.

http://handbrake.fr/
m
0
l
April 15, 2011 8:15:49 PM

shadamus said:
Handbrake is very flexible, in terms of supported formats. I don't know which you need for the Xbox, but it should be able to get there.

http://handbrake.fr/


so basically for a simple answer the 2600k is faster when it comes to encoding primarily because HT support and a higher cache.
m
0
l
April 15, 2011 8:20:10 PM

Best answer selected by kilerz.
m
0
l
May 21, 2011 4:33:26 AM

kilerz said:
im only seeing a few seconds increase in time, but im assuming thats because they're using very small files, so if i were to use a 10gb+ am i to expect the i7 would blow the i5 away, converting a file 30+ mins faster? i wont be using the quicksync feature, unless they update the firmware to switch from pci to HD 3000


You are lucky, I´m affraid. As far as I´ve understood, Lucid-Virtu is the software you need to get that switch. Try it
m
0
l