Intel or AMD for video editing?

[Deleted member 24505]

Very useful so thanks for that. I've recommended the i7 12700K and the Asus Rog Strix Z690 DDR4 as per @Tigger set up. I'm also going to suggest at least a 1TB NVMe.

He will have the option to add more NVME in the future.

 

[Splinterdog]

He will have the option to add more NVME in the future.

Good point! He has four to choose from, if I'm not mistaken. Actually, I'm now tempted to go Intel for my next build, whenever that may be. The last Intel build I did for myself was a Pentium IV 3.2Ghz of which i was very chuffed. But I'm not married to any brand really, but recently price has been king.

 

[thesmokingman]

A customer has asked me to put a machine together for video editing and he's suggested an Intel Core i7 10700K, but he's open to suggestions.
I may be a little biased towards Ryzen and would probably suggest a Ryzen 7, but then I watched this video suggesting that Intel would be preferred because of the IGPU. But if we're adding a GPU anyway, how much of a difference is the IGPU going to make if you set it up for the discrete GPU to render?

Overall more cores is king, however it really is dependent upon what app is the primary focus. Is this an actual production machine or a toy?

 

[Splinterdog]

Overall more cores is king, however it really is dependent upon what app is the primary focus. Is this an actual production machine or a toy?

A production machine for professional video editing.
And please, no one suggest any Apple products for this job, otherwise I'd have to take a long walk off a short plank

 

[thesmokingman]

A production machine for professional video editing.

Any animation or modeling or just for cutting? For cutting it doesn't really matter AMD or Intel. Intel has caught up top parity or slightly higher. However for animation/modeling more cores is king and that's where threadrippers dominate. The last money producing production machine I made used a 32 core TR and a pair of gtx cards. You're not going to find a single cpu that will win in every situation no matter what anyone tells you. You just have to decide which app the box will spend the majority of its time in, or which is the biggest billable and lean that way.

 

[eidairaman1]

5800 OEM

 

[Sybaris_Caesar]

I believe these graphs will answer your question. The GPU used was an RTX3080:

View attachment 236214View attachment 236215



Source

That does actually. Intel is wicked quick in x264 and fast enough in other codecs.

Although I'll admit I'm not very knowledgeable in video editing, doesn't live playback mean the playback during the editing process. Faster playback means it quickens the editing process but last I checked hardware encoders like Intel QuickSync and Nvidia NVENC do a horrible job when outputting the finished file. Excluded AMD uhh.. whatever their always name-changing encoder is cause nobody supports it and nobody uses it. The quality usually isn't up to the par of software encoding (a la brute CPU encoding), file sizes are abysmally larger than source file itself.

@Splinterdog, ask your friend if he's fine with the compromise. Though I can't actually think of any use case where it's fine to sacrifice storage and quality (albeit not much) for time saved while encoding.

 

[thesmokingman]

^^yea, nobody uses that accelerated quicksync crap for production anyways. Nothing beats CPU rendering/encoding for QL.

 

[Sybaris_Caesar]

Although Intel gets my final vote anyway since Alder Lake demolishes Ryzen in encoding even without QuickSync

 

[thesmokingman]

Although Intel gets my final vote anyway since Alder Lake demolishes Ryzen in encoding even without QuickSync

View attachment 236281View attachment 236282View attachment 236283View attachment 236284View attachment 236285

Ugh that is hardly demolishing. But for real rendering, I don't even consider desktop cpus unless... its not really for a production machine and its really someone's toy who likens themselves a production machine.

 

[claes]

^^^if this is actually for production and not for YouTube you want workstation components

 

[thesmokingman]

^^^if this is actually for production and not for YouTube you want workstation components

Concur. Though you could be like those crazies on GN and build a full-on renderbox to cut youtube videos lmao!

Dug up that ole video, cue'd to the crux of why one would build a monster like this. Ofc you don't have to spend 24K, one could build a similar rig dialed back for 5K. The last one I built was like 12K all in.

 

[OliverQueen]

The iGPU on the intel CPU's would help if the GPU has not got a hardware encoder supported by the application/s used. NVENC is faster than QuickSync & most of the Nvidia mid-range & up GPU's have hardware NVENC encoding on the card. As an example, my RTX2070 encodes using NVENC, on average, 5x faster than the iGPU (using QuickSync) on my 8700 with 1080p media.

 

[talonsolomon]

While the i7 10700K is a good choice, Ryzen 7 processors also offer excellent performance. The video offering Intel because of the IGPU makes sense, but if you are already using a discrete GPU for rendering, the impact of the IGPU becomes less significant. Focus on factors such as the number of cores, clock speed, and overall performance. Consider your budget as well. Both options can provide great results, so it all depends on personal preference and specific requirements. I had a great experience with the i7 12700K and the Asus Rog Strix Z690 DDR4, as they provide excellent performance and reliability for Vidpros video editing tasks. Good luck with your choice.