Computer specs for Videostudio

[dans]

It's been a while since I've responded to this thread, so I'll share what i've learned.

I've done a lot of research, and it seems like Davinci Resolve is really the only modern editor to heavily utilize the GPU during rendering. All of them use it to varying degrees during editing and playback of coarse. So, for VS until Corel tells us otherwise, CPU, RAM, & storage are whats important.

general computer stuff that some may or may not know:

• Cores vs Htz - There really isn't a best, it's all a trade off. If the software can properly utilize multiple cores, then more slow cores can be better than fewer fast ones. This is why some semi-po users are using high core count xenon chips even though the cores are slower. To make a definitive decision, benchmarks are needed.
• Ram - more is almost always better, but speed and Latency also play a big part.
• Storage - Disk i/o seems to be what limits a lot of casual users. Pretty much all high end editors are using high performance SSDs, or raided mid-grade SSDs.

For those that are interested, I too am getting ready to build a new machine, as my current one is on it's last legs. This is what I'm tentatively planing, I just need to run it past my brother (The super tech guy in the family).
http://pcpartpicker.com/list/NsKM8K

[TonyP]

Nice system build! I am waiting for the end of the year before deciding on my next build. AMD has never given me any problems and have been a cost effective way of building and upgrading my computer builds. Their Zen chip is suppose to be very good. Only time will tell.
Everything you said is true, but to a point. Disc I/O, might as well go SSD, but there are new "drives" on the horizon that go much faster, but like SSD's when first released, they are a bit expensive. I need at least a 1TB system drive.
RAM... while faster RAM can help, it won't be as noticeable as say a CPU and SSD. Heck, for the most part SATAIII drives keep up with playback of 4K video with no problem. SSD for C:, mechanical for all the rest. Pros use RAID for redundant backups and faster I/O because of the size of the files they are working with. With VS, it would be, at least to me, overkill.
It's true, VS does not really take advantage of the GPU. Even the "pro" software don't. On effects or transitions is where most of the the GPU is used. But then, the software they are using is far more expense, even the plugins that would take advantage of the GPU.
I am a proponent of OpenCL since any Nvidia or AMD card can use this.

As for Davinci Resolve. I too have it. While there is a learning curve in editing and color grading, VS can do a lot of what it can do. Of course, there is a lot DR can (or Lightworks, or Hitfilm, etc..) do over VS. But they appeal to a different "crowd" and require lots of time learning the software.

[dans]

Nice system build! I am waiting for the end of the year before deciding on my next build. AMD has never given me any problems and have been a cost effective way of building and upgrading my computer builds. Their Zen chip is suppose to be very good. Only time will tell.

Thanks Tony,

My current machine is an AMD (Phenom II X6 1090T), it's still a very good machine, It just can't hold up to my current needs. My last project for example, was taking roughly 50GB of 100Mbps UHD source, and condensing it down to a 4GB 1080p final cut. It took 4 or 5 hours to make proxy files, and almost 3 for the final render.

After spending a couple of hours reviewing components and options with my brother yesterday, this is the machine I decided on. http://pcpartpicker.com/list/hFwWXH I took advantage of some 4th of July sales and ordered all the components today, so hopefully I will have it up and running in a week or so.

[TonyP]

That's a great machine build! Prices for computer parts in the States are WAY cheaper than here in Europe with the horrid VAT tax. I look at the prices here and choke. I have my friends back in the States that will mail what I need. I "Newegg" it to their home and they post it for here in Poland.
My machine still works adequate for me for the moment. Since my projects are short, even working in 4K is OK. Machines right now are where machines were when AVCHD first came out. Transcoding was the norm since computers couldn't handle the high compression data rate without transcoding (proxy). Same now with 4K.
I am saving for a new machine and waiting to see what Panasonic's GH5 will have. Rumor is 6K or something... 4K at 60fps.... I will need "Deep Blue" to edit then!

[dans]

I am saving for a new machine and waiting to see what Panasonic's GH5 will have. Rumor is 6K or something... 4K at 60fps.... I will need "Deep Blue" to edit then!

I think the big thing with the GH5, will be Dual IS. I know 6k is rumored, but I don't know if the m43 technology is there yet.

[TonyP]

..and I hope IBIS. Whatever sensor size it has, I will wait and see what they come up with. I haven't been disappointed yet with Panasonic.

[pogonips]

It seems like I always see in just about everyone's preferred hardware list that 'the more RAM the better', but as far as I can tell, in the VS Pro X (any version) editor, it does not use any memory beyond 4 GB. If editor performance is your priority, it seems like there's not much return on investment for lots of RAM.

[TonyP]

I bought 16gigs of RAM because it was cheap. I've never come close to using that much. Never. I would guess a lot depends on how long your project is, more RAM is better. IMO 6-8 gigs would be more than enough for editing and photo work unless you work with huge RAW files.

[dans]

It seems like I always see in just about everyone's preferred hardware list that 'the more RAM the better', but as far as I can tell, in the VS Pro X (any version) editor, it does not use any memory beyond 4 GB. If editor performance is your priority, it seems like there's not much return on investment for lots of RAM.

You need to remember VS isn't the only thing consuming RAM. The only thing I have open at the moment is chrome, and my machine is consuming 4.9Gb.

[TonyP]

I've had Pinnacle Studio 19Ultimate, VSP X9Ultimate, PaintShop Pro x8Ultimate and Firefox open at the same time.
Max mem usage barely touched 8 gigs.

[pogonips]

No, I mean I believe the VS editor code is not capable of using memory beyond 4 GB (like old 32 bit code). This is the impression I got from Corel support. I don't think they have written newer code to access more than 4 GB. I have tested this by booting my computer, starting only VS and then loading projects that are over an hour long with lots of still images and video into the editor. When I check the Windows task manager/performance monitor, it never shows use of memory over 4 GB with VS but disk activity maxes out. By comparison, if I load Photoshop and then load a large number of images, the performance monitor quickly shows memory use of much more than 4 GB.

[TonyP]

Ahhhhh.... "now I see" says the blind man. You could be right. Only Corel can answer this one whether it's a 32bit program masquerading as a 64bit program. It does take Vitascene V2 64bit plugin (you don't want to know why I have to use it... has something to do with Vitascene overwriting anything Vitascene in my other editors making it unusable).
Disk activity could be the "virtual memory" that is used for 32bit programs, which would be much slower in use than actual RAM.

What Pinnacle did before changing the memory access coding for 64bit (I've had it over 4gigs of RAM in it's current incarnation), they called the program "optimized for 64bit". Each "module" could access up to 4gigs of RAM, instead of the entire program. You could be using FX or whatever and it could use RAM for itself. Maybe that is what is happening in VS?
I don't worry much though. Most of my projects I keep to well under 10 minutes, so even when it was "32bit", nothing appeared to be using the hard drive as virtual memory.

[Phil]

After using my new PC for a few weeks (8 core 4.7gHz, 32GB Ram, 4GB GPU and SSD), I can say that satisfactory playback, editing and rendering exists when using 1080p AVCHD files (no proxies needed).

HOWEVER, I feel Corel VSP Ultimate x9 lacks something and even though there have been many VSP issues after talking over from Ulead, they have not invested in performance issues.

Despite the high spec PC and fresh install of VSP x9, there are still random crashes using FX or audio filters, there is still lagging in the timeline when some filters are added to the video clips and there is lagging when playing certain HD clips from my Panasonic GH2. All in all, not good enough - and I haven't even started using 4K video yet!

After creating a ticket with Corel, they asked me to clean my Temp folder and rename the 19.0 folder. They now want to remotely take over my PC to figure out the problem.

No thanks.

It's time to seek out a new provider for my editing needs over the next few months.

[dans]

After using my new PC for a few weeks (8 core 4.7gHz, 32GB Ram, 4GB GPU and SSD), I can say that satisfactory playback, editing and rendering exists when using 1080p AVCHD files (no proxies needed).

HOWEVER, I feel Corel VSP Ultimate x9 lacks something and even though there have been many VSP issues after talking over from Ulead, they have not invested in performance issues.

Despite the high spec PC and fresh install of VSP x9, there are still random crashes using FX or audio filters, there is still lagging in the timeline when some filters are added to the video clips and there is lagging when playing certain HD clips from my Panasonic GH2. All in all, not good enough - and I haven't even started using 4K video yet!

After creating a ticket with Corel, they asked me to clean my Temp folder and rename the 19.0 folder. They now want to remotely take over my PC to figure out the problem.

No thanks.

It's time to seek out a new provider for my editing needs over the next few months.

Your "high spec PC", specifically your cpu is probably the problem. the FX-9590 Vishera (what I assume your running), is know to run very hot even when liquid cooled, and puts a lot of strain on the motherboard. because of this it has stability problems that usually leads to random errors & crashes.

[Phil]

Hi

Good assumption on the CPU type but not on the problem - I'm running on the 8 core AMD FX 9590 but I'm pleased to say that the motherboard is adequate and the running temperature is 22Celsius.

I had VSP x9 on my previous dual core PC with patches installed and the crashes were just the same and as random (creating a proxy, using an FX filter, using an audio filter). I had intended to upgrade my PC anyway and now seemed to be the right time and I now know where the fault now lies - with Corel and the three patches so rapidly issued.