Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Video editor need your help !!!!!

Last response: in Systems
Share
April 29, 2011 3:22:49 PM

I am a video editor, not a gamer. I found so many threads for gamers, but not so much info for serious video editors. And I am so confused about one thing for which I didn't get answers for. I am building a new system with GTX570 and 2600K. My main question is...should I wait for z68 or not? Quick Sync feature is very enticing for my job of transcoding, but is it producing better and faster video output than running with GTX570 and P67? or is it better with H67 without GTX570? Can I use Quick Sync with H67 AND GTX570? Is a discrete GPU adding a benefit to H67 after all? Again, I do NOT do gaming, and if you could kindly give me your expertise on my questions, it would be so much appreciated.

More about : video editor

April 29, 2011 5:55:22 PM

For transcoding, the software (CPU based) is the best
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/video-transcoding-a...

If you use software transcoding you don't need a powerful GPU (or a dedicated GPU at all if you have IGP on the CPU). If you want to use QS AND a video card you must wait for the z68. Without, you can use QS and the H67 and the IGP on the CPU (no video card). If you want to use the video card, AMD is better than Nvidia.



m
0
l

Best solution

April 30, 2011 12:37:44 AM

Well, the H67 CAN do Quick Sync and discrete card, but it cannot overclock CPU using the multiplier, so the K in 2600K is essentially wasted with an H67. If you use the H67 chipset, get an i7 2600; it loses out on overclocking with the multiplier but is a bit less expensive and even has some security features the 2600K does not.

CUDA-accelerated encoding may produce more artifacts than Quick Sync (the link mosox provided is just the review I had in mind), though that's subjective and on a case-by-case basis. Non-accelerated video encoding may still be best, but Quick Sync may be good enough, whereas CUDA-accelerated may be lacking- again subjective.

In any case, Quick Sync encoding appears to be the current speed king, no matter what the current (5-series nVidia GeForce and ATI counterparts) discrete GPU competition is. Take a look at page 3 of 9 at the following link: http://www.asrock.com/download/e-catalog/Z68%20Extreme4...

ATI and nVidia are competitors like AMD and Intel so depending on the generation, one may have an advantage over the other, but not by excessive amounts (i.e. orders of magnitude).

A discrete GPU may add benefit when it comes to using CUDA-accelerated effects, or maybe when scrubbing, though for that RAM and maybe even an SSD would be beneficial. Does anyone know empirically if one can scrub and work smoothly with HD video on an i7 2600x system without a discrete GPU?

If the answer is yes and if you're planning a low-cost yet powerful system, a Z68 paired with an overclocked i7 2600K, 20GB SSD (a la "Smart Response" SSD caching) and no discrete GPU may be a good way to go. Or slightly lower cost yet still powerful, just an H67 with i7 2600. I'm still going to run a discrete card, in a z68 setup for any eventualities, though plan on using Quick Sync to encode if the output quality holds up. nVidia Synergy is an intriguing alternative to Virtu.
Share
Related resources
April 30, 2011 5:06:14 AM

thanks so much...markmywords. It's great to know that I can do QS with H67. Now...I noticed one problem.....NewEgg and TigerDirect don't sell Intel H67 chipsets anymore. Probably they look at H67 as a loser mobo. To avoid all these BS, maybe I should wait for z68??!!!
m
0
l
April 30, 2011 5:33:31 AM

mosox said:
For transcoding, the software (CPU based) is the best
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/video-transcoding-a...

If you use software transcoding you don't need a powerful GPU (or a dedicated GPU at all if you have IGP on the CPU). If you want to use QS AND a video card you must wait for the z68. Without, you can use QS and the H67 and the IGP on the CPU (no video card). If you want to use the video card, AMD is better than Nvidia.



mosox...thanks for your reply. I am kinda new to editing field, and i am not sure what you mean by software transcoding. you mean...using software program instead of on-board QS feature to transcode?
m
0
l
April 30, 2011 6:18:12 AM

markmywords said:
A discrete GPU may add benefit when it comes to using CUDA-accelerated effects, or maybe when scrubbing, though for that RAM and maybe even an SSD would be beneficial. Does anyone know empirically if one can scrub and work smoothly with HD video on an i7 2600x system without a discrete GPU?

If the answer is yes and if you're planning a low-cost yet powerful system, a Z68 paired with an overclocked i7 2600K, 20GB SSD (a la "Smart Response" SSD caching) and no discrete GPU may be a good way to go. Or slightly lower cost yet still powerful, just an H67 with i7 2600. I'm still going to run a discrete card, in a z68 setup for any eventualities, though plan on using Quick Sync to encode if the output quality holds up. nVidia Synergy is an intriguing alternative to Virtu.


markmywords....Thanks so much for your reply. I am using Adobe Premiere Pro and, like yourself, I am very curious if anyone knows if I could render HD video only with onboard graphic, and without discrete GPU. I am pretty sure the quality and speed of rendering will be much better with discrete GPU, but does anyone have some knowledge about this? Intel says you don't need discrete GPU but is it that good to stand alone?
m
0
l
April 30, 2011 3:45:49 PM

stevemobo said:
markmywords....Thanks so much for your reply. I am using Adobe Premiere Pro and, like yourself, I am very curious if anyone knows if I could render HD video only with onboard graphic, and without discrete GPU. I am pretty sure the quality and speed of rendering will be much better with discrete GPU, but does anyone have some knowledge about this? Intel says you don't need discrete GPU but is it that good to stand alone?


You're welcome. I'm like you and anybody else here, just excited :bounce:  and researching the snot out of any posts remotely to do with the Z68 chipset. Hopefully I'm spreading the correct information and not adding to misinformation.

But that link mosox posted to me suggests the best video encoding route for quality is not accelerated (neither Quick Sync, CUDA, nor STREAM), thought Quick Sync may have quality improvements over CUDA and for sure speed improvements for this generation of CUDA-enabled cards, and likely the next if I had to make a guess. So if you'd want the best of fast and high quality, you'd encode with Quick Sync using the integrated GPU. But while you're working with the video, doing the actual editing, you may actually benefit more from using the discrete GPU. So your workflow could look like this:
1.) Open video editing program using the discrete GPU and slice and dice your video/audio.
2.) Save your progress and close the program.
3.) Open the video editing program using the integrated GPU. Render your video.
4.) Play it back using different methods to check for compatibility and quality.

Anyone out there try these steps yet with the H67?
m
0
l
April 30, 2011 3:52:41 PM

stevemobo said:
thanks so much...markmywords. It's great to know that I can do QS with H67. Now...I noticed one problem.....NewEgg and TigerDirect don't sell Intel H67 chipsets anymore. Probably they look at H67 as a loser mobo. To avoid all these BS, maybe I should wait for z68??!!!


;)  Judging from the Z68 boards coming out, the P67 counterpart Z68 boards pack a little more punch, but the first ones slated to be out appear to be middle-high end. E.g. Asus P8P67 Pro (12+2 phase power) vs. Asus P8Z68-V Pro (12+4 phase power). http://www.improbableinsights.com/2009/08/28/do-i-need-...

H67 was already sort of middle of the road, so maybe no benefit to hold on to it over Z68. It remains to be seen what benefit the P67 will hold over the Z68 by year's end. After that, it's on to the next greatest thing...
m
0
l
April 30, 2011 5:02:46 PM

You can do software video editing and use the CPU (any X86 CPU) or hardware using a video card or an integrated IGP that's on some newer CPUs (QS).

The software video editing is the best in terms of quality, here's another article
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-rev...

The QS is not supported by Adobe although it seems there's a new plug-in that can do the job

You can software encode with any CPU, even a single core, the only difference is the speed.

I suggest you test some free simple programs first and when you get the hang of it you can get the i-5 or i-7 or the new AMD bulldozer CPUs (due in June) who look very promising for that kind of tasks. In the meantime use the system you already have and software encode using some simple video editor like Avidemux or Handbrake.

http://handbrake.fr/

http://www.winxdvd.com/resource/handbrake-windows-tutor...
http://ovationplayers.com/yttut/Thumbnails.html

You can google "handbrake tutorial", lots of them.

Also here are some great tutorials
http://forum.videohelp.com/forums/20-User-guides?s=dd64...
This one seems to be easy, never used that program:
http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/331848-How-to-easily...



m
0
l
April 30, 2011 6:35:23 PM

Thanks so much to both of you....markmywords and mosox.

Based on your comments, I made up my mind in my new build.
I am keeping the following items I already purchased and building it.

Intel i7 2600k
Nvidia GTX 570
Intel P67 Express
Western Digital Caviar Black WD5002AALX 500GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache (for system)
Western Digital RE4 WD5003ABYX 500GB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache (2 of these) (for RAID 1)
12GB RAM (Kingston HyperX 4GB 240-Pin DDR3 3 of these)

It looks like QS is not worth looking for because my priority is the quality of the outcome, not so much about saving time...so neither H67 nor Z68 for me. (Thanks to mosox's link)

I will use CS5 Premiere Pro and After Effect to edit and render raw videos with GTX 570.
Software transcode with Adobe media.

Does it sound good? or any other suggestions before I go ahead with the above? Thanks in advance.
m
0
l
April 30, 2011 9:11:19 PM

stevemobo said:
Thanks so much to both of you....markmywords and mosox.
I will use CS5 Premiere Pro and After Effect to edit and render raw videos with GTX 570.
Software transcode with Adobe media.


Sounds good and you can do that. After a while you can try the x264, the best H.264 encoder in terms on quality (not on Adobe but on Handbrake, Sony Vegas, Virtual Dub, MEGUI, etc). After you rendered it you can encode with that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X264
http://x264.nl/

http://mirror05.x264.nl/Dark/website/compare.html

m
0
l
May 1, 2011 2:07:49 AM

stevemobo said:
Thanks so much to both of you....markmywords and mosox.

Based on your comments, I made up my mind in my new build.
I am keeping the following items I already purchased and building it.

Intel i7 2600k
Nvidia GTX 570
Intel P67 Express
Western Digital Caviar Black WD5002AALX 500GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache (for system)
Western Digital RE4 WD5003ABYX 500GB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache (2 of these) (for RAID 1)
12GB RAM (Kingston HyperX 4GB 240-Pin DDR3 3 of these)

It looks like QS is not worth looking for because my priority is the quality of the outcome, not so much about saving time...so neither H67 nor Z68 for me. (Thanks to mosox's link)

I will use CS5 Premiere Pro and After Effect to edit and render raw videos with GTX 570.
Software transcode with Adobe media.

Does it sound good? or any other suggestions before I go ahead with the above? Thanks in advance.


Sounds good. :) 

So just to recap, you will software encode, correct? I'm not sure the GTX 570 will do much for you there as the CPU main cores will be doing most of that work, but again, in doing the actual editing the GTX may help. Also, the 2nd generation i7 (e.g. 2600K) only works in dual channel so you can use 2 x 4GB. This is where I'm a little unclear because you may be able to put in the additional 4GB for 12GB total but I think you lose the dual-channel speed at that point.

Lastly, take a look at CyberLink's PowerDirector 9 Ultra64 for video editing. You can try out the demo for free. No limits, I believe, just a watermark in the output until you buy. It's powerful, speedy, and made for 64-bit systems so it uses all that RAM you're about to put in your system (running a 64-bit WinOS of course) and supports latest hardware/software optimizations. The downside is it's a bit buggy and crash-prone but I have a nice procedural workflow that is a good workaround for that I can share with you if you like.
m
0
l
May 2, 2011 6:02:00 AM

mosox said:
Sounds good and you can do that. After a while you can try the x264, the best H.264 encoder in terms on quality (not on Adobe but on Handbrake, Sony Vegas, Virtual Dub, MEGUI, etc). After you rendered it you can encode with that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X264
http://x264.nl/

http://mirror05.x264.nl/Dark/website/compare.html



Thanks, mosox. I didn't know about x264 until you mentioned it. I checked out the link you provided, and saw quite a pleasant result with x264. I'll definitely use this for encoding after rendering. Thanks a million. :pt1cable: 
m
0
l
May 2, 2011 6:06:47 AM

markmywords said:
Also, the 2nd generation i7 (e.g. 2600K) only works in dual channel so you can use 2 x 4GB. This is where I'm a little unclear because you may be able to put in the additional 4GB for 12GB total but I think you lose the dual-channel speed at that point.


Sorry...my mistake.... I have 4 of 4GB that will make 16GB total....which should work for dual channel, right?
m
0
l
May 2, 2011 6:18:59 AM

markmywords said:
Lastly, take a look at CyberLink's PowerDirector 9 Ultra64 for video editing. You can try out the demo for free. No limits, I believe, just a watermark in the output until you buy. It's powerful, speedy, and made for 64-bit systems so it uses all that RAM you're about to put in your system (running a 64-bit WinOS of course) and supports latest hardware/software optimizations. The downside is it's a bit buggy and crash-prone but I have a nice procedural workflow that is a good workaround for that I can share with you if you like.


markmywords, in fact, I used CyberLink's PowerDirector 8 previously, and I loved it for its simplicity. I hesitated to upgrade to version 9 because I was going to use CS5 Premiere Pro (which I have now) to work with its magnificently improved chromo-key function. Do you think I should upgrade my PowerDirector and use it instead? How is green screen editing with PD9 compared to CS5 PPR? All my files are 1920 x 1080 AVCHD format. If you could share with me your procedural workflow with the software, it would be so great!!! I will try what you suggest.
m
0
l
May 2, 2011 7:01:39 AM

stevemobo said:
Sorry...my mistake.... I have 4 of 4GB that will make 16GB total....which should work for dual channel, right?


I think that will work. :) 

Something to keep in mind, though, is 4 sticks of RAM can tax the memory controller more than 2 sticks, so if you have tight timings or high speed RAM, 4 sticks may give your system trouble. If they do, loosening timings and/or lowering the speed of the RAM in BIOS/UEFI should help.
m
0
l
May 2, 2011 7:50:52 AM

stevemobo said:
markmywords, in fact, I used CyberLink's PowerDirector 8 previously, and I loved it for its simplicity. I hesitated to upgrade to version 9 because I was going to use CS5 Premiere Pro (which I have now) to work with its magnificently improved chromo-key function. Do you think I should upgrade my PowerDirector and use it instead? How is green screen editing with PD9 compared to CS5 PPR? All my files are 1920 x 1080 AVCHD format. If you could share with me your procedural workflow with the software, it would be so great!!! I will try what you suggest.


Unfortunately, I don't know much about CS5 PPR, but it's big boy editing, so maybe it's best for you to stick with that. Then again, a free PD version 9 ultra64 demo won't hurt to try. The last Adobe video editing product I tried was 6.5, and it wasn't very user-friendly to me, but that was a long time ago.

Both PD 8 and 9 have worked well for me. I mostly use AVCHD 1920 x 1080 video, as well, from both a Sony high-end and a JVC low-end camera, with the occasional 720p, 480p, and custom-sized clips here and there. I haven't focused on PD9 vs. PD8's transparency differences, but it should work similarly well in both versions. The keyframe adjustments make 9 more powerful than 8, but it takes a bit of mental focus to make them worthwhile. One thing I miss from version 8 is that the fade transition duration button is gone, so you have to adjust fade duration by sliding with a mouse, a workflow step backwards in my opinion. But I do like being able to import flv video in 9, and I can't wait to install my 2 sticks of 4GB ram (8GB total) after the z68 boards come out and really see what the Ultra64 hype is about; right now I'm running only 2GB of ram on a 5+ year-old system. I snagged a version 9 upgrade for ~$60 on a turn-of-the-year sale, so it was especially worth it for me.

Another thing I like about PowerDirector these days, besides the easy editing and good output results without much tinkering, is their support of really new hardware technology.
"NEW Optimized for 2nd Generation Intel® Core™ Processors – Faster Editing, Previewing & Rendering
PowerDirector 9 takes advantage of hardware acceleration built into 2nd generation Intel® Core™ processors to handle all your video editing needs faster and better than ever before!
TrueVelocity Accelerator support for Intel Quick Sync Video technology and Intel Media SDK delivering optimized video encoding and decoding for MPEG2 and H.264 video formats
TrueVelocity RapidEffect enables accelerated video effects using Intel processor graphics core"
Here's a marketing page on their TrueVelocity: http://www.cyberlink.com/products/powerdirector/truevel...
I remember some reviews touting the virtues of PD9U64's speed compared to the competition, which I really appreciate, but it remains to be seen by me (soon :bounce:  ).

Here's my workflow to get around the potential crashing issue:
1.) Set up your project folders ahead of time and avoid changing their names so PD doesn't have to look for your files every time you open your .pds project file. I like to date and name a main project folder, keep a main edit.pds file in it, and create a 1_finished, 2_inprogress, and 3_raw file folder inside the project folder.
2.) Turn off auto-save, as that can be one of the things that's inopportunely timed to make your system too taxed and crash, with the double whammy of corrupting your project file, which would cause you to have to start over unless you have a project file backup.
3.) To avoid all that wasted effort, click “SAVE” (or CTRL+s) after each action or two, then wait for it to save before doing more editing - it should only take a few seconds.
4.) Avoid too many clicks in a short amount of time; easy does it.
5.) Save a backup of your .pds periodically in case it gets corrupted or you save over something you didn't want to change. They're really small files and you can just name them edit1, edit2, edit3, ... . Keep an edit_backup.pds file, as well, in case your main pds gets corrupted during a save.

I just do these steps habitually as part of my workflow and if there's a crash, I just go back to my most recent save, which is usually only a couple actions away. I've been able to minimize crashes doing these steps, as well, so it's been a worthwhile, if still annoying, trade-off to use PowerDirector. You might wonder why I bother, but I haven't really been able to video edit the way I want to before PD, so I appreciate it, warts and all. I hope Cyberlink keeps improving the stability, though the focus seems to be on features and speed/power more than stability. Still, the end product is something I can use.

One thing I would love to be able to do is change the perspective of a video-in-video window by dragging the corners. Also, I'd like to be able to create a special features menu for disk-making.

I'd really like to read about your experiences with CS5 PPR.


m
0
l
May 7, 2011 5:37:45 AM

Thanks so much for taking time to write all these. I will keep this for the future reference...by the way... I invite you and mosox to my new thread that I just posted, "My computer wont turn on at my house". Thanks, markmywords.
m
0
l
May 17, 2011 10:29:46 PM

Late post.... I have my system with all the software installed for my editing. After all, I returned Asus P8P67, and got Asus P8Z68 Pro mobo. It works great and this is a list of what I have.

In addition to what I listed above,

Asus P8Z68 Pro mobo
Adobe CS5.5 Master Collection
Cyberlink PowerDirector 9 Ultra

I will be doing green screen editing with Premiere Pro, and for actual editing with layers of videos, I haven't decided if I want to stick with PPR or go for PD9. I will test out. If I go for PD9 for editing, I might have to chromo-key with PPR, place perfect green screen Jpeg file behind, render it, and then import it to PD9, and work with multiple videos for further editing. (PPR does SUPERB job in chromo-key job with Ultra-key technology)

If any of you are still on this thread, please give me a feedback. Thanks in advance.
m
0
l
May 20, 2011 2:59:39 AM

stevemobo said:
Late post.... I have my system with all the software installed for my editing. After all, I returned Asus P8P67, and got Asus P8Z68 Pro mobo. It works great and this is a list of what I have.

In addition to what I listed above,

Asus P8Z68 Pro mobo
Adobe CS5.5 Master Collection
Cyberlink PowerDirector 9 Ultra

I will be doing green screen editing with Premiere Pro, and for actual editing with layers of videos, I haven't decided if I want to stick with PPR or go for PD9. I will test out. If I go for PD9 for editing, I might have to chromo-key with PPR, place perfect green screen Jpeg file behind, render it, and then import it to PD9, and work with multiple videos for further editing. (PPR does SUPERB job in chromo-key job with Ultra-key technology)

If any of you are still on this thread, please give me a feedback. Thanks in advance.


Yeah, Asus P8Z68-V Pro! Great choice! It's running smooth as glass for me. Quick boots, no hiccoughs, flexible, powerful OC hardware and software features, fast in and out of sleep mode, drivers installed without issue, FAST with 2600k...

I haven't tried premiere pro, but Cyberlink PD9U64 is running beautifully on it and has the chroma-key feature, as well. I'm curious, is there an interface or capability preference you have in going with PPR for chroma-key?

Interestingly, the Virtu control panel's software list is a white list for GPU in i-mode and a white list for iGPU in d-mode, as reflected in PD9U64, which goes into the appropriate mode silently and automatically. The hints are the accelerator icons.
m
0
l
!