CPU for video rendering

[piowoc73]

Hi,

here is what I currently have:
ASUS P9X79 PRO LGA 2011 Intel X79
Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 6-Core 3.2GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 2011 130W BX80619i73930K Desktop Processor
SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7970
32GB RAM

but it's not enough to render some sequences in Adobe Premiere Pro.

So, what I figured out is that the bottlenecks are my GPU (no CUDA and questionable OpenCL support) and my CPU.
I am planning on upgrading the GPU to EVGA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, but I need your advice about CPU.

Should I consider one of the Xeon processors?
My understanding is that I should be able to install any Xeon E5 series up to version 2 (but not version 3 and up) on my motherboard.
Some of them can be found used at pretty good price points, so the only question is if I will really see any real life improvement in Adobe Premiere Pro, or other Adobe CC applications.
From what I read what really counts is the number of cores, so my current CPU has 6 of them, but with Xeon I could go up to 12, or higher without replacing my motherboard. The clock frequency of the Xeon cores are much lower though than for my i7-3930K, so I am not sure if this makes any sense.

Your advice will be appreciated. Thanks!

 

[StormBrew]

Hi,

here is what I currently have:
ASUS P9X79 PRO LGA 2011 Intel X79
Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 6-Core 3.2GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 2011 130W BX80619i73930K Desktop Processor
SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7970
32GB RAM

but it's not enough to render some sequences in Adobe Premiere Pro.

So, what I figured out is that the bottlenecks are my GPU (no CUDA and questionable OpenCL support) and my CPU.
I am planning on upgrading the GPU to EVGA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, but I need your advice about CPU.

Should I consider one of the Xeon processors?
My understanding is that I should be able to install any Xeon E5 series up to version 2 (but not version 3 and up) on my motherboard.
Some of them can be found used at pretty good price points, so the only question is if I will really see any real life improvement in Adobe Premiere Pro, or other Adobe CC applications.
From what I read what really counts is the number of cores, so my current CPU has 6 of them, but with Xeon I could go up to 12, or higher without replacing my motherboard. The clock frequency of the Xeon cores are much lower though than for my i7-3930K, so I am not sure if this makes any sense.

Your advice will be appreciated. Thanks!

I think you're main issue is the GPU, not necessarily the CPU. Intel's i7 5820k (the older brother of your processor) only yields a 10% increase in performance. The Xeon's will be a large improvement, but depending on your system, it may be better to wait and see how your performance does after upgrading to the Titan Z. Despite this, I have found that the
E5-2680V2 without a doubt performs much better than the i7 3930k. In Cinebench the scores are nearly doubled. I found a 2680 online for roughly $210. Not too bad of a deal. The clock speed should be fine, and I would compare your CPU, to the scores listed below.

In Cinebench R15, the 2690's score was: 2657 | The 3930k's @ 4.2Ghz score was: 1075.

Overall if you do purchase these components, I would highly reccomend testing an upgrade with just the GPU first, and see if it marks the improvement you need. If not, the 2680 is very cheap, and will perform very well in rendering.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Xeon E5-2680 V2 2.8GHz 10-Core Processor ($212.00)
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D9L 46.4 CFM CPU Cooler ($54.96 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Asus P9X79 PRO ATX LGA2011 Motherboard
Total: $266.96
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-05-19 23:48 EDT-0400

Sources:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2680-V2-ES-2-8hz-25MB-L3-8-Core-Max-Turbo-3-4Ghz-130W-CPU-/351733803895?hash=item51e4f7eb77:g:ue8AAOSwSgJXNtk3
https://us.rebusfarm.net/en/tempbench?view=benchmark

 

[bambiboom]

Hi,

here is what I currently have:
ASUS P9X79 PRO LGA 2011 Intel X79
Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 6-Core 3.2GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 2011 130W BX80619i73930K Desktop Processor
SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7970
32GB RAM

but it's not enough to render some sequences in Adobe Premiere Pro.

So, what I figured out is that the bottlenecks are my GPU (no CUDA and questionable OpenCL support) and my CPU.
I am planning on upgrading the GPU to EVGA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, but I need your advice about CPU.

Should I consider one of the Xeon processors?
My understanding is that I should be able to install any Xeon E5 series up to version 2 (but not version 3 and up) on my motherboard.
Some of them can be found used at pretty good price points, so the only question is if I will really see any real life improvement in Adobe Premiere Pro, or other Adobe CC applications.
From what I read what really counts is the number of cores, so my current CPU has 6 of them, but with Xeon I could go up to 12, or higher without replacing my motherboard. The clock frequency of the Xeon cores are much lower though than for my i7-3930K, so I am not sure if this makes any sense.

Your advice will be appreciated. Thanks!

piowoc73,

The situation with multi-threading in Prem1ere Pro is in transition: the v 2014 had "render frames simultaneously" which could use every core available, but that was deleted for v 2015 and now, we're tols v 2016 will have a batter version.

Tests seem to suggest ( see the Puget System articles on the subject) that the multi-threaded capabilities of content software may peak at 5-8 cores and Adobe software doesn't like dual CPU. I've been using a dual 6-core system, but a couple of days ago bought as replacement a Xeon E5 2687w (8-core @ 3/1 /3..8GHz) and believe I'll have better results.

Overall, with Premiere, core count- up to a point-is preferable to clock speed. The CPU choice depends to a great extent on the priority of of multi-threaded use. You alluded to the lower clock speed as the core count increases. In my use, single-threaded performance is more important- 3D CAD and my primary system uses an Xeon E5-1660 v2) 6-core A 3.7 /4.0GHz) with a Passmark single-threaded rating of 2116, while the E5-2687w is rated at 1888 - good for an 8-core.

At the moment, I think an 8 core has the best balance for a multi use system. There are a number of used Xeon E5-2600 8 and 10 core that are fantastic bargains these days- E5- 2680 for $150, E5-2690 for $275/ The V2's usually have higher clock speeds and more cores, but the price does also jump up, an E5-2680 v2 10-core is in the $800-$1000 range. If that is within your budget, that would be my recommendation. On a budget, I'd say E5-2690 (8-core @ 2.9 /3.8GHz) for about $300 or E5 2687w 3.1/3.8 for $350. By the way, be careful about "ES"- engineering sample CPU's. These are cheaper, but were development issues possibly with lower clock speed and features turned off. I wouldn't buy one.

Another tactic is to consider a used workstation with one of the E5 2600 8 or 10-core 1st version CPU's in it. On some level, a separate system that can sit in the corner and process /render is the fastest system of all as it releases the primary system to continue editing, 3D modeling, animation, and etc. I did this with a Dell Precision T5500 that I bought for $171 and upgraded to 2X Xeon X5680 6-core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz, Quadro K2200, 47Gb RAM, PERC H310 RAID controller and Samsung SSD for a bit over $1,000 total. You could buy an HP z420 for $500, put an E5- 2600 8 or 10 core, a used GTX 970 and have a good workhorse processing /rendering engine that sallows the real-time work to continue on a very fast 4 or 6 core.

The GPU is important in Preimere to use CUDA acceleration and good results are probably proportional to the number of CUDA cores and video memory. the new Pascal GTX 1070 might be consideration- it's supposed to be faster than a GTX Titan X, but I've heard of very good results even with GTX 970. If the budget is higher though my preference has always been to use Quadros, but that is based on having tried a GTX 285 about 4 years ago that was very fast, but often crashed when rendering within a minute of completion and had sometimes a severe artifacting problem I called "raining little black lines". I only ever had a few usable renderings and the total time meant I had spent two-three hours on each one. I changed to an FX 4800 and the problem was solved. These days, I think Adobe and Autodesk both are tending towards DirectX and running well on GTX.

Knowing the budget would be a help to make more specific recommendations.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[piowoc73]

Hi,

here is what I currently have:
ASUS P9X79 PRO LGA 2011 Intel X79
Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 6-Core 3.2GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 2011 130W BX80619i73930K Desktop Processor
SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7970
32GB RAM

but it's not enough to render some sequences in Adobe Premiere Pro.

So, what I figured out is that the bottlenecks are my GPU (no CUDA and questionable OpenCL support) and my CPU.
I am planning on upgrading the GPU to EVGA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, but I need your advice about CPU.

Should I consider one of the Xeon processors?
My understanding is that I should be able to install any Xeon E5 series up to version 2 (but not version 3 and up) on my motherboard.
Some of them can be found used at pretty good price points, so the only question is if I will really see any real life improvement in Adobe Premiere Pro, or other Adobe CC applications.
From what I read what really counts is the number of cores, so my current CPU has 6 of them, but with Xeon I could go up to 12, or higher without replacing my motherboard. The clock frequency of the Xeon cores are much lower though than for my i7-3930K, so I am not sure if this makes any sense.

Your advice will be appreciated. Thanks!

I think you're main issue is the GPU, not necessarily the CPU. Intel's i7 5820k (the older brother of your processor) only yields a 10% increase in performance. The Xeon's will be a large improvement, but depending on your system, it may be better to wait and see how your performance does after upgrading to the Titan Z. Despite this, I have found that the
E5-2680V2 without a doubt performs much better than the i7 3930k. In Cinebench the scores are nearly doubled. I found a 2680 online for roughly $210. Not too bad of a deal. The clock speed should be fine, and I would compare your CPU, to the scores listed below.

In Cinebench R15, the 2690's score was: 2657 | The 3930k's @ 4.2Ghz score was: 1075.

Overall if you do purchase these components, I would highly reccomend testing an upgrade with just the GPU first, and see if it marks the improvement you need. If not, the 2680 is very cheap, and will perform very well in rendering.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Xeon E5-2680 V2 2.8GHz 10-Core Processor ($212.00)
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D9L 46.4 CFM CPU Cooler ($54.96 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Asus P9X79 PRO ATX LGA2011 Motherboard
Total: $266.96
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-05-19 23:48 EDT-0400

Sources:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2680-V2-ES-2-8hz-25MB-L3-8-Core-Max-Turbo-3-4Ghz-130W-CPU-/351733803895?hash=item51e4f7eb77:g:ue8AAOSwSgJXNtk3
https://us.rebusfarm.net/en/tempbench?view=benchmark

Hi,

here is what I currently have:
ASUS P9X79 PRO LGA 2011 Intel X79
Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 6-Core 3.2GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 2011 130W BX80619i73930K Desktop Processor
SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7970
32GB RAM

but it's not enough to render some sequences in Adobe Premiere Pro.

So, what I figured out is that the bottlenecks are my GPU (no CUDA and questionable OpenCL support) and my CPU.
I am planning on upgrading the GPU to EVGA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, but I need your advice about CPU.

Should I consider one of the Xeon processors?
My understanding is that I should be able to install any Xeon E5 series up to version 2 (but not version 3 and up) on my motherboard.
Some of them can be found used at pretty good price points, so the only question is if I will really see any real life improvement in Adobe Premiere Pro, or other Adobe CC applications.
From what I read what really counts is the number of cores, so my current CPU has 6 of them, but with Xeon I could go up to 12, or higher without replacing my motherboard. The clock frequency of the Xeon cores are much lower though than for my i7-3930K, so I am not sure if this makes any sense.

Your advice will be appreciated. Thanks!

piowoc73,

The situation with multi-threading in Prem1ere Pro is in transition: the v 2014 had "render frames simultaneously" which could use every core available, but that was deleted for v 2015 and now, we're tols v 2016 will have a batter version.

Tests seem to suggest ( see the Puget System articles on the subject) that the multi-threaded capabilities of content software may peak at 5-8 cores and Adobe software doesn't like dual CPU. I've been using a dual 6-core system, but a couple of days ago bought as replacement a Xeon E5 2687w (8-core @ 3/1 /3..8GHz) and believe I'll have better results.

Overall, with Premiere, core count- up to a point-is preferable to clock speed. The CPU choice depends to a great extent on the priority of of multi-threaded use. You alluded to the lower clock speed as the core count increases. In my use, single-threaded performance is more important- 3D CAD and my primary system uses an Xeon E5-1660 v2) 6-core A 3.7 /4.0GHz) with a Passmark single-threaded rating of 2116, while the E5-2687w is rated at 1888 - good for an 8-core.

At the moment, I think an 8 core has the best balance for a multi use system. There are a number of used Xeon E5-2600 8 and 10 core that are fantastic bargains these days- E5- 2680 for $150, E5-2690 for $275/ The V2's usually have higher clock speeds and more cores, but the price does also jump up, an E5-2680 v2 10-core is in the $800-$1000 range. If that is within your budget, that would be my recommendation. On a budget, I'd say E5-2690 (8-core @ 2.9 /3.8GHz) for about $300 or E5 2687w 3.1/3.8 for $350. By the way, be careful about "ES"- engineering sample CPU's. These are cheaper, but were development issues possibly with lower clock speed and features turned off. I wouldn't buy one.

Another tactic is to consider a used workstation with one of the E5 2600 8 or 10-core 1st version CPU's in it. On some level, a separate system that can sit in the corner and process /render is the fastest system of all as it releases the primary system to continue editing, 3D modeling, animation, and etc. I did this with a Dell Precision T5500 that I bought for $171 and upgraded to 2X Xeon X5680 6-core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz, Quadro K2200, 47Gb RAM, PERC H310 RAID controller and Samsung SSD for a bit over $1,000 total. You could buy an HP z420 for $500, put an E5- 2600 8 or 10 core, a used GTX 970 and have a good workhorse processing /rendering engine that sallows the real-time work to continue on a very fast 4 or 6 core.

The GPU is important in Preimere to use CUDA acceleration and good results are probably proportional to the number of CUDA cores and video memory. the new Pascal GTX 1070 might be consideration- it's supposed to be faster than a GTX Titan X, but I've heard of very good results even with GTX 970. If the budget is higher though my preference has always been to use Quadros, but that is based on having tried a GTX 285 about 4 years ago that was very fast, but often crashed when rendering within a minute of completion and had sometimes a severe artifacting problem I called "raining little black lines". I only ever had a few usable renderings and the total time meant I had spent two-three hours on each one. I changed to an FX 4800 and the problem was solved. These days, I think Adobe and Autodesk both are tending towards DirectX and running well on GTX.

Knowing the budget would be a help to make more specific recommendations.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

Yeah, I really appreciate your reply and I agree with you. My tactic is to try Titan X first and see how much improvement it will give me and then decide about Xeon, but having in mind pretty good deals available for Xeons out there it would make sense for me to replace the CPU as well.

Thank you all for the replies! It helped me a lot!

 

[piowoc73]

Hi,

here is what I currently have:
ASUS P9X79 PRO LGA 2011 Intel X79
Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 6-Core 3.2GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 2011 130W BX80619i73930K Desktop Processor
SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7970
32GB RAM

but it's not enough to render some sequences in Adobe Premiere Pro.

So, what I figured out is that the bottlenecks are my GPU (no CUDA and questionable OpenCL support) and my CPU.
I am planning on upgrading the GPU to EVGA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, but I need your advice about CPU.

Should I consider one of the Xeon processors?
My understanding is that I should be able to install any Xeon E5 series up to version 2 (but not version 3 and up) on my motherboard.
Some of them can be found used at pretty good price points, so the only question is if I will really see any real life improvement in Adobe Premiere Pro, or other Adobe CC applications.
From what I read what really counts is the number of cores, so my current CPU has 6 of them, but with Xeon I could go up to 12, or higher without replacing my motherboard. The clock frequency of the Xeon cores are much lower though than for my i7-3930K, so I am not sure if this makes any sense.

Your advice will be appreciated. Thanks!

piowoc73,

The situation with multi-threading in Prem1ere Pro is in transition: the v 2014 had "render frames simultaneously" which could use every core available, but that was deleted for v 2015 and now, we're tols v 2016 will have a batter version.

Tests seem to suggest ( see the Puget System articles on the subject) that the multi-threaded capabilities of content software may peak at 5-8 cores and Adobe software doesn't like dual CPU. I've been using a dual 6-core system, but a couple of days ago bought as replacement a Xeon E5 2687w (8-core @ 3/1 /3..8GHz) and believe I'll have better results.

Overall, with Premiere, core count- up to a point-is preferable to clock speed. The CPU choice depends to a great extent on the priority of of multi-threaded use. You alluded to the lower clock speed as the core count increases. In my use, single-threaded performance is more important- 3D CAD and my primary system uses an Xeon E5-1660 v2) 6-core A 3.7 /4.0GHz) with a Passmark single-threaded rating of 2116, while the E5-2687w is rated at 1888 - good for an 8-core.

At the moment, I think an 8 core has the best balance for a multi use system. There are a number of used Xeon E5-2600 8 and 10 core that are fantastic bargains these days- E5- 2680 for $150, E5-2690 for $275/ The V2's usually have higher clock speeds and more cores, but the price does also jump up, an E5-2680 v2 10-core is in the $800-$1000 range. If that is within your budget, that would be my recommendation. On a budget, I'd say E5-2690 (8-core @ 2.9 /3.8GHz) for about $300 or E5 2687w 3.1/3.8 for $350. By the way, be careful about "ES"- engineering sample CPU's. These are cheaper, but were development issues possibly with lower clock speed and features turned off. I wouldn't buy one.

Another tactic is to consider a used workstation with one of the E5 2600 8 or 10-core 1st version CPU's in it. On some level, a separate system that can sit in the corner and process /render is the fastest system of all as it releases the primary system to continue editing, 3D modeling, animation, and etc. I did this with a Dell Precision T5500 that I bought for $171 and upgraded to 2X Xeon X5680 6-core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz, Quadro K2200, 47Gb RAM, PERC H310 RAID controller and Samsung SSD for a bit over $1,000 total. You could buy an HP z420 for $500, put an E5- 2600 8 or 10 core, a used GTX 970 and have a good workhorse processing /rendering engine that sallows the real-time work to continue on a very fast 4 or 6 core.

The GPU is important in Preimere to use CUDA acceleration and good results are probably proportional to the number of CUDA cores and video memory. the new Pascal GTX 1070 might be consideration- it's supposed to be faster than a GTX Titan X, but I've heard of very good results even with GTX 970. If the budget is higher though my preference has always been to use Quadros, but that is based on having tried a GTX 285 about 4 years ago that was very fast, but often crashed when rendering within a minute of completion and had sometimes a severe artifacting problem I called "raining little black lines". I only ever had a few usable renderings and the total time meant I had spent two-three hours on each one. I changed to an FX 4800 and the problem was solved. These days, I think Adobe and Autodesk both are tending towards DirectX and running well on GTX.

Knowing the budget would be a help to make more specific recommendations.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

If I decided to upgrade the CPU to one of the LGA2011 Xeons would my existing CPU fan still work? Here is the model I currently have for my i7 3930K:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00631QFG8/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=

Thanks!

 

[bambiboom]

"If I decided to upgrade the CPU to one of the LGA2011 Xeons would my existing CPU fan still work? Here is the model I currently have for my i7 3930K:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00631QFG8/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=

Thanks!"

piowoc73,

Yes, as both CPU's are LGA2011, that big Noctua should be excellent.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

.