1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Which one? i5 or i7 for editing videos

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by Chapapa07, Mar 27, 2014.

  1. Chapapa07

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Messages:
    41 (0.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Im going to start editing videos with camtasia studio, sony vegas, and videopad, I dont know if
    these programs take advantage of the extra horse power of an i7, Im on a tight budget so I really cant waste money.

    Btw, how much ram should I have?.

    Thank you for any help you can provide.
     
  2. Durvelle27

    Durvelle27

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,592 (3.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    650
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    If on a tight budget and programs you plan to use an take advantage of more cores than I recommend a FX-8320
     
    RCoon says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  3. MxPhenom 216

    MxPhenom 216 Corsair Fanboy

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,054 (6.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,270
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    i7 for sure, or like Durvelle said, go amd with a fx8320 or 8350. Should have 8-16GB of memory.

    Sony Vegas will definitely use the extra threads/cores. Especially if you use it for the encoding/rendering too.

    Pretty much any program you use these days to do video editing and then the encoding, the more cores you give it, the better.
     
    Chapapa07 says thanks.
  4. Chapapa07

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Messages:
    41 (0.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    I know it sounds dumb but I just trust intel... even if that means spending more money.

    Could you give me an example about how faster would i7 (i.e 4770) be vs and i5 (i.e 4670)?
     
  5. MxPhenom 216

    MxPhenom 216 Corsair Fanboy

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,054 (6.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,270
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Sure thing.

    [​IMG]

    i7 is quite a bit faster in this h.264/x.264 encoding benchmark. ~25% faster for the i7.
     
    RCoon, Sasqui, Chapapa07 and 2 others say thanks.
  6. minabasla New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2014
    Messages:
    4 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    depends on the video quality but I read so many review that the i7 is not noticeable from the i5 maybe it is from the i3 but i5 and i7 are just for the major grafix editing professionals so if your doing an easy job you might be wasting your money..

    -mina
     
  7. arskatb

    arskatb

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Messages:
    206 (0.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    45
    Location:
    Finland
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    RCoon says thanks.
  8. puma99dk|

    puma99dk|

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    3,441 (1.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    775
    if u ain't planing about overclocking this machine why not get the i7-4770 non -k version or a cheaper Xeon processor with HT?

    if it's not like u wanna try out AMD ofc.
     
  9. doscape

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Actually it's a waste of money to pay for the HyperThreading tech., these virtual cores don't help much for video editing, it's usually good for CAD applications.
    I would recommend to buy a fine graphics card, such as gtx660/hd7950 and a good power supply, at least 33A+ 500w, if you plan to get 2 video cards in the future, you should use a 700w + P.S.
    Amount of RAM can be critical, therefor I'd recommend putting at least 8gb (16gb is highly recommended). I also recommend on using a software(windows) mechanical hard disk raid 0 configuration for working space (2 x 500gb should be enough, you can even use old hard drives, make sure they are the same model or similar access times.
    You'd better get a 2500k(2nd hand cpui) and a Z68/Z77 motherboard and OC it to 4.5Ghz(Very Easy to do) instead of wasting money over I7 just for the HT function and a 100mhz(similarly compared). In most editing software, the POWER draw goes to the VIDEO CARD, a faster CPU is always better, but I7 is not faster than the I5, HT has very unworthy effect for the 100$-120$ difference, I'd pay for the HT not more than 10$, just to show off that I have more cores and a higher number sticker.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2014
  10. Durvelle27

    Durvelle27

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,592 (3.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    650
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    You can't be serious
     
    RCoon, Sasqui and MxPhenom 216 say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  11. arskatb

    arskatb

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Messages:
    206 (0.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    45
    Location:
    Finland
    oh pls.

    E5 would be perfect pick.
    Even with haswell integrated HD4600 u can use Inventory pretty smoothly.
     
  12. Sasqui

    Sasqui

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    7,722 (2.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,459
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
    AFAIK, yes, the encoding is all done using CPU. The graphics card only does the playback.

    There is a difference between the i5 and i7, but for the OP, it may not be worth the extra $
     
  13. blanarahul

    blanarahul

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2011
    Messages:
    116 (0.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Since you:

    a) Trust only Intel
    b) Won't be able to wait till 2nd half of this year
    c) Are on a Tight Budget

    The best solution is the i5 4670K.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2014
    Sasqui says thanks.
  14. doscape

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Depends the software he's using, PREMIERE mostly uses CUDA cores for example, overall memory bandwidth (the higher, the better) is the main catalyst when it comes to data processing.

    I am a highly experienced IT, you should learn than make yourself (I'm here in the forum, therefor I know), kids, I have built many gaming, music, video edition, CAD systems, and I am an enthusiast and an overclocker. Please listen to reason and don't make the guy waste his precious DOLLARS/EUROS whatever on the HT function only because you show him some unreliable benchmarks that do not replicate actual working conditions in real life scenarios.
     
  15. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,462 (6.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,188
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    Depends on the encoder. I would imagine that anyone in the right mind would use H.264 as a codec where most encoders that support it can utilize multiple threads.

    So yes, he's probably serious, but he's wrong. :)

    Edit: As he said, you can use CUDA or QuickSync to encode video, but CPU encoders tend to have more flexibility from my personal experience.
     
  16. doscape

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
  17. MxPhenom 216

    MxPhenom 216 Corsair Fanboy

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,054 (6.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,270
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Every benchmark in the world disagrees with you. Even my own hours of testing as well.
     
    Durvelle27 says thanks.
  18. Durvelle27

    Durvelle27

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,592 (3.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    650
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    He doesn't have to waist an extra amount of dollars as a lot of us pointed out. He could get a FX-8320 which does exceptional at rendering/editing while still costing less than a 4770 & 4670K
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  19. MxPhenom 216

    MxPhenom 216 Corsair Fanboy

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,054 (6.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,270
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Anyone on the internet can say they do this and that.....
     
    Sasqui, blanarahul and Durvelle27 say thanks.
  20. RCoon

    RCoon Gaming Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,446 (8.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,577
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    Coulda fooled me...

    Notice how there isn't a 4 threaded vs 8 threaded comparions in that benchmark you linked?

    You are condescending in your tone, and you are also reported.
     
  21. Vario

    Vario

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    3,014 (0.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    978
    Xeon E3 1230 (v1, v2 or v3) is perfect for your instance.

    4 cores with hyperthreading (8 threads) at the same price as an i5...

    Hard to find cheap ones online, Microcenter sells them for around $200 at the offline retail store. eBay has a lot of them for cheap, I sold my two there for around $200 each. I'd highly recommend the eBay option if you do not have a local Microcenter.

    I found a seller of Xeon 1230v2 (ivy) on eBay for $215 each with many in stock.
    Another sells Xeon 1230 (sandy) for $199. These are "New OEM".

    Search term was "Xeon 1230"

    Used Intel's are still very reliable, if you stumble on a good deal on a used one, I wouldn't worry about running it.

    Ivy is probably 10% faster. Both are very capable. I could clock the Ivy to 3.5ghz using my motherboard's overclocking feature (+2x multiplier bin). This makes it comparable to an i7. They support ECC memory if you desire, but only with certain motherboards (such as Supermicro workstation boards). You really don't need to overclock the last 3 generations of Intel.

    Xeon 1230v1 (Sandy) and v2 (Ivy) will work in almost every socket 1155 motherboard, consumer or professional.

    Xeon 1230v3 (Haswell) will work in 1150 motherboards.

    Xeon E3 1220's will also work fine and are also cheap on eBay. Xeon E3 12x5's (insert 2 or 3 or 4 in the x) have video function (denoted by the 5, 0 means no onboard video).
    http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/xeon/xeon-processor-e3-family.html

    These are also great for gaming. I can't tell much difference between my old Xeon E3 and the i7 I have now when both are in the 3.0-4.0ghz range.

    An ideal budget option would be a Xeon 1230v2 ($200) with a H61 Asus or Gigabyte Motherboard ($60), $260 total for unmatched power. AMD 8350 will not match this performance except in WinZip/7zip. For comparison purposes, a Xeon 1230v2 is equivalent to an i7-2600.

    To answer the ram question, 2x4GB (=8GB) is the perfect amount. DDR3, Clock speed: 1333 or 1600, Voltage: 1.5v. Latencies: between 9 and 11.

    sorry for multiple edits, I have the bad habit of vomiting out information onto a post, and then cleaning it up after.

    Just my opinion here:
    I am not an Intel over AMD fan, I am a price to performance fan. These are the best for the money, period. Buying an AMD will just cost you more in the long run because they will be obsolete faster. AMD single core performance is only slightly better than their 2009 Phenom II. 4 years from now, the FX will be completely obsolete. The Xeon will likely be quite usable. This is proven by the many 2008 era i7 920's that are still being used today! You also need a larger power supply, better cooling, etc for an 8350. Its really not a budget option.

    Source: i7 2600k vs FX8350
    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=287
    Source: i72600 vs Xeon 1230v2 (showing identical performance, albeit gaming CPU benchmarks)
    http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/Intel Xeon Processor E3-1230V2/compare
    Source: 8350 thread performance on Skyrim benchmark (showing poor single thread capability)
    http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/5
    to be fair, the reviewer shows it performs well with video encode, but not as well on average overall as current Intel. Video Encode: http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/11
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2014
    RCoon says thanks.
  22. Tatty_One

    Tatty_One Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    16,747 (5.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,541
    Location:
    Worcestershire, UK
    To get back to the Op's question, in premiere for example additional hyperthreaded cores will help but in my opinion, generally the performance difference between a FX 8350 and a 4770 does not warrant the additional price, i agree with most here that as a minimum you need 8GB RAM, preferably 16, large and fast drives and premiere does scream "Give me a decent grapics card with as many CUDA cores as you can afford" apart from that whats left in this thread is either petty bickering or in places (before I deleted them)..... unpleasantness......... Ohhhh by the way I am no expert so I rang my youngest daughter, she does some contract work doing video editing for the Discovery Network, so hopefully she has some idea of what she is talking about..... although if she is anything like her mother I doubt it!
     
    Aquinus, Sasqui and RCoon say thanks.
  23. Sasqui

    Sasqui

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    7,722 (2.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,459
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
    I love pragmatism.
     
    Tatty_One and RCoon say thanks.
  24. blanarahul

    blanarahul

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2011
    Messages:
    116 (0.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    How 'bout Xeon E3-1230v3? Costs the same as 4670K and has HT but you lose the iGPU and OC ability. However, you can OC the 4670K and get similar performance as the Xeon......

    It's your decision. I would go with the 4670K personally because of Quick Sync which is present on 4670K but absent on the Xeon.

    So you deleted my post. Good job. I shouldn't have replied to that troll anyway.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2014
    Vario says thanks.
  25. Tatty_One

    Tatty_One Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    16,747 (5.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,541
    Location:
    Worcestershire, UK
    Yours amongst others, I tolerate most things, insults and name calling are not in that portfolio :)
     
    blanarahul says thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page