Recommendation for somewhat quiet <$6000 system that handles Davinci Resolve at 4K with ease

[sdanzig]

Recommendations for the following, please?

Approximate Purchase Date: March, 2017
Budget Range: $5000-$6000
System Usage: 4K video in Davinci Resolve/Adobe Premiere/After Effects, RAW Photo Editing (Capture One), Java/Scala distributed programming in a Virtualbox Linux machine
Monitor: Yes
Need to buy OS: Yes
No preferred website, although I do have Amazon Prime
Location: Binghamton, NY, USA
No parts preference, although I think it's time I move away from Mac.
Overclocking: Yes
SLI/Crossfire: No
Monitor Resolution: 3840x2160
Additional comments:
I'd like the computer to be quiet as possible, at least when being used for just web browsing. I do want it to handle Davinci Resolve at 4K with ease. And I'd want a minimum of 6TB, with room for expansion. I have an external bluray burner, which I've used, although internal might be nice. I think the Alienware/Republic of Gamers cases are horribly ugly.
Why am I upgrading:
I'm an indie filmmaker/software engineer with an early-2009 Mac Pro tower. I have three drives totaling 6TB, and 22GB of RAM, which lets me run Adobe Premiere/After Effects/Speedgrade usably, but it still can be very choppy with slow rendering. Davinci Resolve doesn't run at all. After waiting long enough for Apple to come out with a more reasonably designed overpriced system, I'm ready to go PC.

 

[bambiboom]

I'm really loving the discussions here at Tom's Hardware, thanks guys! So I've been doing a bit more digging on my end, and here are my thoughts:

I'm actually liking the one GPU solution for now, because I'm still only using Davinci Resolve Lite, which can only use one. So two 1070's is definitely out. When I move onto more ambitious projects, I'll likely consider another, but one is fine for now. And with that regard. I don't really see myself ever getting more than two. And probably wouldn't need to for at least two years. I definitely feel some sticker shock with the increase of cost for the Titan, and while one 1080 is probably enough for a while based on reviews I'm seeing, especially with all the CPU I'll have, I feel that two will definitely be enough for the long haul. I'm thinking sticking with the 1080's is a good way to reign in the costs, plus avoid the same sticker shock down the road. Come to think of it, the 1080 Ti might be worth considering as well, since I hear it might be announced in March. I dug into the Quadro as well and didn't think it's worth considering.

I'd like to throw another software in the mix that I realized I'll be using a lot of... Blackmagic Fusion. I think it seems pretty even across the board in terms of CPU/GPU usage, so I'm not sure it affects the discussion much.

I like RAM. In my experience as a computer programmer/gamer/video editor, life always got a lot better by doubling my RAM, and everything else was debatable. So I'm liking the idea of 128GB.

The Fractal Design case sounds impressive, like it's made out of vibranium or something. I'm assuming some people go for SSI motherboards primarily for more expandability?

One more thing... I don't know how easy it is to use, but I do have a couple of external apple cinema displays to use:
A 27 inch with thunderbolt:
https://www.amazon.com/Apple-MC914LL-27-inch-Thunderbolt-Display/dp/B004YLCKYA
A 24 inch with display port:
https://www.amazon.com/Apple-Cinema-Display-24-Inch-MB382LL/dp/B0013FMLXK

I'm wondering how much this helps or hurts the discussion, as one may serve well as a handy second monitor.

sdanzig,

GPU: The reason for suggesting a pair of GTX 1070's is that in GPU rendering, the GPU components are cumulative and offer a much better cost /performance.

Octanebench is a benchmark especially oriented to evaluate GPU's for performance in GPU rendering.

Compare these Octanebench results:

1X Titan X Pascal 149 $1,600 (= $10.07 per point)

2X Titan X (116) : 288 $3,200 (= +9% performance @ $11.11 per point)

2X GTX 1070: 263 $900 (= -9% performance @$3.42 /pt)

I couldn’t find results using two GTX 1080's but a single GTX 1080 scores 140 and a single Titan X score 149.

You can see at a glance that 2x GTX 1070 is producing a very high percentage of 2X Titan X performance at 36% of the cost. The reason is performance in GPU rendering is related towards the total GPU's, CUDA cores, and memory, so in this suggested system, there are two GTX 1070's which = 2X GPU / 16GB RAM / 3,840 CUDA cores. This compares to the fastest GPU, the Titan X which = 1X GPU / /12GB 3,584 CUDA cores. For a bit a bit over 1/3 the cost there are 200% GPU's / +33% RAM / +7% CUDA cores. The amount and speed of memory is very important in video editing, so the 16GB instead of 12GB is a significant factor.

I couldn’t find results using two GTX 1080's but a single GTX scores 140 and a single Titan X score 149, so I would say that two GTX 1080 will about equal two Titan X. Several tests I saw showed GTX 1080 surpassing the Titan X in some parameters, importantly in compute, single and double precision which is important in rendering. The Titan X appears to be highly games FPS optimized and not as good for rendering as a GTX 1080. In rendering from 3D models I use a Tesla M2090 6GB GPU computing co-processor. the Quadro K2200 4GB + Tesla M2090 6GB scores as well in Oectanebench as a Quadro M5000 8GB.

If the system is one that intends to expand over time, it would be well to build a system with a single CPU and GPU but in which a second of each may be added later to accommodate both GPU and CPU rendering, which is the tactic I used for my rendering system (HP z620 / 2X Xeon E5-2690 8C/ Quadro K2200 + Tesla M2090 /64GB).

How about:

BambiBoom PixelCannon Videoresolvolicious iWork TurboExtreme SignatureX Blast 9800 II ®©$$™®£™©™_1.20.17

Case /Motherboard / CPU coolers / Power supply : Supermicro SuperWorkstation SYS-7038A-I Dual LGA2011 900W Mid-Tower Workstation Barebone System (Black) > $680 (Thunderbolt support)

http://www.supermicro.com/products/system/tower/7038/SY...
http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=SY-7038AI

CPU: 1X Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4 Twelve-Core Broadwell Processor 2.2/2.9GHz 9.6GT/s 30MB LGA 2011-3 CPU, OEM >$1,040

https://ark.intel.com/products/91767/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2650-v4-30M-Cache-2_20-GHz

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=E5-2650V4

Memory: 128GB (8X 16GB) SAMSUNG 16GB 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM ECC Registered DDR4 2400 (PC4 19200) Server Memory Model M393A2G40DB1-CRC> $1104 ($138ea.)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=12K-00WZ-00010&cm_re=8GB_DDR3-1866_ECC_unbuffered-_-12K-00WZ-00010-_-Product

GPU: 2X GPU 2MSI GeForce GTX 1080 DirectX 12 GTX 1080 GAMING 8G 8GB 256-Bit GDDR5X PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support ATX Video Card> $1,260 ($630 each)

GPU ALT 1MSI GeForce GTX 1080 DirectX 12 GTX 1080 GAMING 8G 8GB 256-Bit GDDR5X PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support ATX Video Card> $630

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127950&cm_re=gtx_1080-_-14-127-950-_-Product

Disk 1: SAMSUNG 950 PRO M.2 2280 512GB PCI-Express 3.0 x4 Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) MZ-V5P512BW> $400.

M.2 to PCIe Adapter: M2P4A (PCIe X4 to M.2 (NGFF) SSD Adapter) > $54

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA12K3U60461&cm_re=samsung_950_pro_512gb-_-20-147-467-_-Product

Drive 2,.3: 2X Seagate Constellation ES.3 ST4000NM0033 4TB 7200 RPM 128MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Enterprise Internal Hard Drive Bare Drive > $334 ($167 each) (Files, Backup, System Image)

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178307&cm_re=Es.3_4tb-_-22-178-307-_-Product

Optical Disk: LG Black 16X Blu-Ray BDXL SATA Internal rewriter with 3D Playback, Model BH16NS40 > $100

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827136264

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit English (1-Pack), OEM > $139.

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=MSFQC08289
_______________________________________

TOTAL =$5,111 With 1X GTX 1080 =$4,481

The CPU choice can use some additional study as this is a compromise that assumes the systems may use both CPU and GPU rendering. For single images I recommend CPU rendering and for video /animation GPU is the only way to go.

This could be done with good results with the single E5-2650 v4 and single GTX1080. In the future as the projects become more complex, a second CPU can be added and the 128GB of RAM redistributed to have 64GB for each processor, add a second GTX 1080. The total cost for that upgrade is therefore $1,050 + $630.

On Passmark Performance Test a single E5-2650 v4 on a Supermicro X10 Dri motherboard has a CPU score of 16876 and a pair makes 22220. Another little cost /performance note: the 2X Xeon E5-2650 v4's for $2,080 score 22220 and in the HP z620 the 2X Xeon E5-2690's for $310 score 22625

2X Xeon E5-2650 v4: = 22220 @ $2,080 $.09 per point
2X Xeon E5-2690 := 22625 @ $310 (= +2% performance @ $.01.37 per point)

Which means the E5-2650 v4 cost (nearly 9X per Passmark CPU point). That is, the 2% performance disadvantage costs + $1,770.

Very interesting project!

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[sdanzig]

I really am thinking of King Dranzer as the little red devil on my shoulder telling me how much power I want! And I do. I think I'm comfortable with the Samsung 950 or 960. 512GB is probably fine for apps. I like the idea of starting with a 4TB WD Gold for its reliability, then possibly getting another down the road along with a RAID controller. I'm considering, however, how much speed I'd get if I went for a Samsung 960 PRO Series - 1TB PCIe NVMe - M.2 Internal SSD in addition to the 512GB SSD boot drive. I typically have one major project going on at a time, and, if it's a 4k short film or smaller, I could fit all the media plus the scratch disk in that one TB. I'm betting SSD would be worlds faster and quieter than two WD's, and from the endurance estimates I see, I think it'd last long enough. It might qualify as another "down the road" upgrade though.

Certainly the big question is with CPU and GPU. I've been looking into both.

For GPU, yes, I plan on sticking with Resolve for the long term. I never was planning to use it for video editing, which it's mediocre for... just color grading, like most people. But Davinci Resolve doesn't run at all on my computer, and is kind of the last straw for motivating me to upgrade. bambiboom, I mentioned, Davinci Resolve Lite, which I'd be using at first, only supports one GPU, so I'm inclined to start with just one graphics card at first, and I don't think a single 1070 would be sufficient. I see CUDA cores matters substantially. the Titan X Pascal has 3584 vs the 1080 with 2560...and the 50% more memory. If I'm starting with one card, I guess that's worth it. If I was going for two right away, I might consider two 1080's, or try to hold out for the 1080 Ti, but... eh, I think the little red devil wins on this one.

For CPU...

First off, this caught my eye:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2690-V4-ES-QHV5-SR2N2-2-4GHz-14Core-35MB-LGA2011-3-Processor-CPU-/201694415496 ... do you think the $699 "engineering sample" would work on the SSI board? Also, Bambi, was that value of $310 a typo or something? I'm confused.

I really am not seeing a reason why I shouldn't go with bambiboom's idea of starting with just one CPU. I can even consider King's more powerful option, the Intel Xeon E5-2683 V4 2.1GHz 16-Core Processor, for $500 more, then just wait for its price to go down a bunch before considering upgrading and getting another. I'm curious... is it better to have two 8 core CPUs than one 16 core CPUs? Would both setups use all the cores similarly?

I'm still iffy about getting a TV for a main monitor. On that Samsung King is recommending, it's using a VA-type panel, which means color is sensitive to viewing angle. I'd imagine that a color would look different on the edges than the center. This review also shows pretty bad "gray uniformity": http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/ku6300 ... and I don't want blacks appearing darker than they actually are. Knowing what my colors will look like is important to me, so I want IPS. I don't think I want to spend more than $1k on it, but I have research to do.

I'm wondering about the case. King is suggesting the SSI motherboard, which requires a case that supports it... like the Phanteks one. But I do like the Fractal Design Define XL R2 as a way to dampen noise from the 7200RPM HDD/fans. I don't necessarily need an SSI I think, right? I won't be getting more than 2 CPUs and 2 graphics cards, probably 8 memory chips, and, well, maybe I can see possibly up to 2 SSDs, 4 HDDs, the Bluray drive, a RAID controller, thunderbolt expansion card maybe, and maybe one more card. The Supermicro X10DAi would be fine, no? https://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/xeon/c600/x10dai.cfm

 

[King Dranzer]

I really am thinking of King Dranzer as the little red devil on my shoulder telling me how much power I want! And I do. I think I'm comfortable with the Samsung 950 or 960. 512GB is probably fine for apps. I like the idea of starting with a 4TB WD Gold for its reliability, then possibly getting another down the road along with a RAID controller. I'm considering, however, how much speed I'd get if I went for a Samsung 960 PRO Series - 1TB PCIe NVMe - M.2 Internal SSD in addition to the 512GB SSD boot drive. I typically have one major project going on at a time, and, if it's a 4k short film or smaller, I could fit all the media plus the scratch disk in that one TB. I'm betting SSD would be worlds faster and quieter than two WD's, and from the endurance estimates I see, I think it'd last long enough. It might qualify as another "down the road" upgrade though.

Certainly the big question is with CPU and GPU. I've been looking into both.

For GPU, yes, I plan on sticking with Resolve for the long term. I never was planning to use it for video editing, which it's mediocre for... just color grading, like most people. But Davinci Resolve doesn't run at all on my computer, and is kind of the last straw for motivating me to upgrade. bambiboom, I mentioned, Davinci Resolve Lite, which I'd be using at first, only supports one GPU, so I'm inclined to start with just one graphics card at first, and I don't think a single 1070 would be sufficient. I see CUDA cores matters substantially. the Titan X Pascal has 3584 vs the 1080 with 2560...and the 50% more memory. If I'm starting with one card, I guess that's worth it. If I was going for two right away, I might consider two 1080's, or try to hold out for the 1080 Ti, but... eh, I think the little red devil wins on this one.

For CPU...

First off, this caught my eye:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2690-V4-ES-QHV5-SR2N2-2-4GHz-14Core-35MB-LGA2011-3-Processor-CPU-/201694415496 ... do you think the $699 "engineering sample" would work on the SSI board? Also, Bambi, was that value of $310 a typo or something? I'm confused.

I really am not seeing a reason why I shouldn't go with bambiboom's idea of starting with just one CPU. I can even consider King's more powerful option, the Intel Xeon E5-2683 V4 2.1GHz 16-Core Processor, for $500 more, then just wait for its price to go down a bunch before considering upgrading and getting another. I'm curious... is it better to have two 8 core CPUs than one 16 core CPUs? Would both setups use all the cores similarly?

I'm still iffy about getting a TV for a main monitor. On that Samsung King is recommending, it's using a VA-type panel, which means color is sensitive to viewing angle. I'd imagine that a color would look different on the edges than the center. This review also shows pretty bad "gray uniformity": http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/ku6300 ... and I don't want blacks appearing darker than they actually are. Knowing what my colors will look like is important to me, so I want IPS. I don't think I want to spend more than $1k on it, but I have research to do.

I'm wondering about the case. King is suggesting the SSI motherboard, which requires a case that supports it... like the Phanteks one. But I do like the Fractal Design Define XL R2 as a way to dampen noise from the 7200RPM HDD/fans. I don't necessarily need an SSI I think, right? I won't be getting more than 2 CPUs and 2 graphics cards, probably 8 memory chips, and, well, maybe I can see possibly up to 2 SSDs, 4 HDDs, the Bluray drive, a RAID controller, thunderbolt expansion card maybe, and maybe one more card. The Supermicro X10DAi would be fine, no? https://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/xeon/c600/x10dai.cfm

Being a Red Devil who pops out every now and then here is my recommendation

As you wanna stick with Resolve get TITAN X PASCAL over GTX1080.Big gain on a long run. Money spent on it will provide satisfactory results.

You can get that 16 core CPU for now and when you plan on getting the second CPU there will be a definite price drop in it.

Wouldn't recommend getting separate SSD only for booting Windows. As the server board will take 1/5min to boot no matter what SSD you use.

About that TV when you increased your budget I advised SONY 55X800D check it out it comes with SONY X1 processor and Triluminos display it gives perfect colors with great contrast ratio.

Motherboard there is Supermicro one available which is EATX will list it.

 

[King Dranzer]

Get this board instead of ASUS one

http://pcpartpicker.com/product/tjZ2FT/supermicro-motherboard-mbdx10dax

 

[bambiboom]

I really am thinking of King Dranzer as the little red devil on my shoulder telling me how much power I want! And I do. I think I'm comfortable with the Samsung 950 or 960. 512GB is probably fine for apps. I like the idea of starting with a 4TB WD Gold for its reliability, then possibly getting another down the road along with a RAID controller. I'm considering, however, how much speed I'd get if I went for a Samsung 960 PRO Series - 1TB PCIe NVMe - M.2 Internal SSD in addition to the 512GB SSD boot drive. I typically have one major project going on at a time, and, if it's a 4k short film or smaller, I could fit all the media plus the scratch disk in that one TB. I'm betting SSD would be worlds faster and quieter than two WD's, and from the endurance estimates I see, I think it'd last long enough. It might qualify as another "down the road" upgrade though.

Certainly the big question is with CPU and GPU. I've been looking into both.

For GPU, yes, I plan on sticking with Resolve for the long term. I never was planning to use it for video editing, which it's mediocre for... just color grading, like most people. But Davinci Resolve doesn't run at all on my computer, and is kind of the last straw for motivating me to upgrade. bambiboom, I mentioned, Davinci Resolve Lite, which I'd be using at first, only supports one GPU, so I'm inclined to start with just one graphics card at first, and I don't think a single 1070 would be sufficient. I see CUDA cores matters substantially. the Titan X Pascal has 3584 vs the 1080 with 2560...and the 50% more memory. If I'm starting with one card, I guess that's worth it. If I was going for two right away, I might consider two 1080's, or try to hold out for the 1080 Ti, but... eh, I think the little red devil wins on this one.

For CPU...

First off, this caught my eye:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2690-V4-ES-QHV5-SR2N2-2-4GHz-14Core-35MB-LGA2011-3-Processor-CPU-/201694415496 ... do you think the $699 "engineering sample" would work on the SSI board? Also, Bambi, was that value of $310 a typo or something? I'm confused.

I really am not seeing a reason why I shouldn't go with bambiboom's idea of starting with just one CPU. I can even consider King's more powerful option, the Intel Xeon E5-2683 V4 2.1GHz 16-Core Processor, for $500 more, then just wait for its price to go down a bunch before considering upgrading and getting another. I'm curious... is it better to have two 8 core CPUs than one 16 core CPUs? Would both setups use all the cores similarly?

I'm still iffy about getting a TV for a main monitor. On that Samsung King is recommending, it's using a VA-type panel, which means color is sensitive to viewing angle. I'd imagine that a color would look different on the edges than the center. This review also shows pretty bad "gray uniformity": http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/ku6300 ... and I don't want blacks appearing darker than they actually are. Knowing what my colors will look like is important to me, so I want IPS. I don't think I want to spend more than $1k on it, but I have research to do.

I'm wondering about the case. King is suggesting the SSI motherboard, which requires a case that supports it... like the Phanteks one. But I do like the Fractal Design Define XL R2 as a way to dampen noise from the 7200RPM HDD/fans. I don't necessarily need an SSI I think, right? I won't be getting more than 2 CPUs and 2 graphics cards, probably 8 memory chips, and, well, maybe I can see possibly up to 2 SSDs, 4 HDDs, the Bluray drive, a RAID controller, thunderbolt expansion card maybe, and maybe one more card. The Supermicro X10DAi would be fine, no? https://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/xeon/c600/x10dai.cfm

sdanzig,

The key in a workstation is to direct the performance capability towards the characteristics of the software and then analyze the cost to that performance. The proposed system does have a dual character as there are both GPU- intensive and CPU-dependent applications. For Resolve, the principal application, see the article on their website "DaVinci Resolve System Requirements" this written by the software designer and in the middle of the page in a font 5X the size of the body text is the statement, " It’s ALL About The GPU". GPU rendering means that the more GPU's- the more CUDA cores and video memory the better. There are results on OctaneBench using 15X GPU's. That 2X GTX 1070 equals 91% of the perfomance of a Titan X Pascal for 1/3 the cost, I see that as a sign that,"it's all about the GPU" just as the makers state.

However, the XAVC codec compression / decompression and After Effects is CPU- intensive but appear to be poorly threaded. AE is very unhappy with dual processors. This is the reason my first suggestion used a single 10-core with a very high single-thread performance- fewer but faster cores. If you were using very CPU-oriented rendering that was well-threaded an completely scalar- and Solidworks visualization is the only one I know that is- a big pile of slow CPU cores working over two CPU's is going to be wasted. the other important aspect of the CPU choice is to separate real-time performance and what I call passive performance- you want the performance to be fast for the tasks that are done sequentially by user input - you're sitting there doing it- and the tasks where the the system can sit in the corner and work on it by itself means that time is somewhat less critical. How much does an extra hour mean if you're not sitting there watching it?

This is why I have two systems- one is a 3D modeling /graphic design system and the other has 16 cores and two GPU's (Quadro + Tesla) with 10GB of memory and 2,300 CUDA cores. I can model or run Adobe CS6 applications on the E5-1660 v2 (6C @ 3.7/4.0) system while the 32-thread system can run CPU renderings at 3.3-3.4Ghz.

Yes, the two E5-2690 8C @ 2.9/3.8GHz did cost $154 + $152 = $306. New, they cost $2,050 each. The two systems, 2015 HP z420 + 2012 HP z620, together cost about $3,400.

Avoid any CPU that is ES- engineering sample. These are experimental and sometimes have lower clock speeds, features disabled, or may have run under stress for weeks.

The other important components of the proposed system is the RAM and disk subsystems. M.2 is so fast, the access time is almost instantaneous and the transfer rate mean those huge swaps to RAM and save are very, very fast. In both systems, I have a fast M.2 (Samsung SM951 256GB) that has a partition for OS /Programs and a small partition (30GB) for the active projects, this is followed by a reasonably fast SSD (Intel 730 480GB and Samsung 850 Evo 250GB) that have all the libraries, reference, files, and the previous versions of projects The storage drive has a backup partition, the archive, and media files. For ultimate performance there is the option of a RAID 1+0 in some form off an LSI 9361-8i or similar RAID controller or Thunderbolt IC array, but really NVMe M.2 is very, very fast.

The other aspect to performance is that speed is not the most important criteria. It's ALL about the image quality. Gaming GPU's are oriented entirely towards frames per second. The GTX is a "content consumption" GPU whereas your systems is a "content creation" system. Yes, Quadros are more expensive for a slower processing, but have 30-bit color, and x16 anti-aliasing and in a system running Xeons and ECC RAM, the results are noticeable- there can be multiple lighting sources, color gradients lose the rainbowing, and shadows, particles, and reflections are life like- subtle and lose the jagged edges, which is much more distracting when in motion. This is why I make all single image rendering in a larger scale (3180 X 2140) CPU rendering as the higher double precision puts everything in the exact place.

High performance equals speed only to a certain extent, the end result is image quality + reliability. If that can be achieved at lower cost so much the better.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[sdanzig]

Get this board instead of ASUS one

http://pcpartpicker.com/product/tjZ2FT/supermicro-motherboard-mbdx10dax

Yeah, I was looking at that, and I see the DAX is better than the DAI. However, I see on Amazon something in the comments about that motherboard not being a standard EATX, with the holes lining up only in newer Supermicro cases. I really don't know what sort of drilling I'd be signing up for. I don't suppose there's a "just as good" option in ATX-land?

Also, the Sony 43 inch TV looks better, but still has issues with viewing angle. The 49 inch version actually does use an IPS panel, and I might have gone for that, but.. 49 inches for a monitor... Sure, it'd be fun to mount my main display on a wall and have a roomier computer desk, but ... I'm not sure if I can accommodate that. Even the 43 inch might have been too big. Even with an IPS, I still don't trust a TV, meant for enjoying movies, to not have blacks that are darker than they actually are. My films can be quite dark and shadowy, so accurate blacks are important.

Bambiboom,

Now I understand why the Quadros are worth considering. Damn marketing failed to convey to me that "30 bit" was the same thing as "10 bit". I saw one suggestion of just using a cheap Quadro (M2000 or even a K620) to drive the display, then getting a 1080 (yeah, I'm considering it again) or Titan X as the work horse. I'm not sure of the implications of what can be used by what, especially if I get a third GPU (another 1080/Titan X) down the road.

 

[King Dranzer]

@bambiboom

As per my knowledge 30bit color = 10 bit color per component(10bpc). (correct me if I am wrong)
And TITAN X PASCAL does support 10bpc as well as 16x anti-aliasing. So going for Quadro over TITAN X PASCAL doesn't makes sense.

 

[sdanzig]

@bambiboom

As per my knowledge 30bit color = 10 bit color per component(10bpc). (correct me if I am wrong)
And TITAN X PASCAL does support 10bpc as well as 16x anti-aliasing. So going for Quadro over TITAN X PASCAL doesn't makes sense.

I looked everywhere, and didn't find anything about the Titan X Pascal being 10 or 30 bit before my last post. Where did you see that?

 

[King Dranzer]

Here is the link:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/nvidia-geforce-titan-x-pascal-review,5.html

Read the High Dynamic Range (HDR) Display Compatibility in the lat

 

[King Dranzer]

Copied the below from Wikipedia(source)

Deep color (30/36/48-bit)

Deep color consists of a billion or more colors.[15] The xvYCC, sRGB, and YCbCr color spaces can be used with deep color systems.[16]

Deep color supports 30/36/48 bits per pixel across three RGB colors, also referred to as 10/12/16 bits per channel/color/component/sample. With an alpha channel of the same precision this becomes 40/48/64 bits per pixel. Video cards with 10 bits per component (30-bit color RGB), started coming to market in the late 1990s. An early example was the Radius ThunderPower card for the Macintosh, which included extensions for QuickDraw and Adobe Photoshop plugins to support editing 30-bit images.

 

[sdanzig]

Nvidia has supported 30-bit for a while, but not for OpenGL, which supposedly Adobe Premiere uses, at least as far back as 2011:

http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3011/~/10-bit-per-color-support-on-nvidia-geforce-gpus

And I haven't been able to find a damn thing suggesting that this has changed, including a couple of discussions which link to that article, dated late 2015 and I think one in 2016. This thing you link to might be just for non-OpenGL only. Then again, it might be a no-risk thing, because if I just get the Titan X Pascal, and it turns out it doesn't support 10 bit color, I can buy the Quadro later, as long as the monitor supports it. And for now, 8 bit for premiere/resolve is probably fine.

 

[nikoli707]

i would just call puget and have them design something for you. and these geforce/radeon builds are comical. heck even a mac will work good but puget would give you more horsepower.

 

[King Dranzer]

They also charge good price for that so would have to compromise somewhere.

Still would try to provide best build that tom's can offer.

 

[sdanzig]

They also charge good price for that so would have to compromise somewhere.

Still would try to provide best build that tom's can offer.

Going with Puget seems boring and looking at their component prices (an extra $300+ for a Titan X Pascal), plus their fee, whatever that would be, it seems like a bad move. Also, I think I'm pretty damn close to getting what I think will be the perfect system for me. Going to include King Dranzer and Bambiboom in the special thanks section of my next film!

 

[King Dranzer]

Sdanzig what did you decide on your monitor.

Did you check the SONY 55X850D($998). And second option SONY 43X800D($648)
X950D comes with SONY X1 processor which is one the processing units available in the market. It is big but the colors are accurate with HDR and SONY Triluminos and high Contrast ratio this TV is the best you can get for that budget. There is no monitor or TV at that price range which can produce this accurate colors.
If you wanna save few bucks you can go with X800D which is also good as it comes with HDR and Triluminos display and good enough Contrast. It lacks the processing power that X1 processor provides.

 

[King Dranzer]

Space can be bit problem with 55" TV but if you could mount it on wall(if you have space for it) it is worth it in my opinion.

Then again I am not gonna force you on it. It is your decision.

 

[sdanzig]

Sdanzig what did you decide on your monitor.

Did you check the SONY 55X850D($998). And second option SONY 43X800D($648)
X950D comes with SONY X1 processor which is one the processing units available in the market. It is big but the colors are accurate with HDR and SONY Triluminos and high Contrast ratio this TV is the best you can get for that budget. There is no monitor or TV at that price range which can produce this accurate colors.
If you wanna save few bucks you can go with X800D which is also good as it comes with HDR and Triluminos display and good enough Contrast. It lacks the processing power that X1 processor provides.

I was pretty impressed by a review of the BenQ PV3200PT, as it's made for video editors (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/benq-pv3200pt-32-inch-uhd-pro-monitor), but then at the end, I realized it's specific to TV/streaming (Rec709) and not really so great for film. Sooo... then I looked at the ASUS ProArt, a pricier HP DreamColor, and an NEC option which seems too expensive to consider. I guess I'll consider the Dell..

Out of the Sony TVs you listed, the only one that might fit is the X800D 43" with the VA panel. Everything else is just too big or too uneven. But the 800 is still not an IPS, so it'll have viewing angle problems, and I think it's going to have inaccurate contrast too, which is going to make me adjust shadows in my movies brighter than they should be. And that could kill the mood of a whole scene. Therefore, I appreciate I'm not going to be forced to buy a Sony TV

 

[King Dranzer]

DELL is the best option you have then.

 

[King Dranzer]

Are you looking at DELL 43" Monitor or any other specific one.
Can you list the one you are considering

 

[sdanzig]

Are you looking at DELL 43" Monitor or any other specific one.
Can you list the one you are considering

It looks like definitely the UP3216Q. Like the HP DreamColor, it's also a bit pricey, but, 32 inches is I think the right size for me. I honestly have a bias against Dell, ever since their quality took a nosedive in the late 90's... but, this does seem to be a well-respected monitor, yourself included.

 

[King Dranzer]

In my opinion DELL monitors comes with best quality in market. Would recommend to give them a second chance.

 

[sdanzig]

Here's what I have so far... the only thing I really don't like is that apparently I have to drill holes because the X10DAX isn't fully EATX compatible:

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Xeon E5-2660 V4 2.0GHz 14-Core Processor ($1388.99 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-U9DXi4 37.8 CFM CPU Cooler ($56.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Supermicro MBD-X10DAX EATX Dual-CPU LGA2011-3 Motherboard ($439.64 @ Amazon)
Memory: Kingston 32GB (1 x 32GB) Registered DDR4-2133 Memory ($226.67 @ Amazon)
Memory: Kingston 32GB (1 x 32GB) Registered DDR4-2133 Memory ($226.67 @ Amazon)
Memory: Kingston 32GB (1 x 32GB) Registered DDR4-2133 Memory ($226.67 @ Amazon)
Memory: Kingston 32GB (1 x 32GB) Registered DDR4-2133 Memory ($226.67 @ Amazon)
Storage: Crucial MX300 525GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($133.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Storage: Samsung 960 Pro 1.0TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($629.99 @ B&H)
Storage: Western Digital Gold 4TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($220.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Video Card: NVIDIA Titan X (Pascal) 12GB Video Card ($1200.00)
Case: Fractal Design Define XL R2 (Black Pearl) ATX Full Tower Case ($104.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Power Supply: Corsair RMx 1000W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($139.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: LG BH16NS40 Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer ($98.80 @ OutletPC)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit ($88.58 @ OutletPC)
Monitor: Apple LED Cinema 27.0" 2560x1440 Monitor (Purchased For $0.00)
Monitor: Dell UP3216Q 31.5" 3840x2160 60Hz Monitor ($1299.00 @ Adorama)
Other: Asus ThunderboltEX II/DUAL Thunderbolt Adapter THUNDERBOLTEX II DUAL ($82.44)
Other: Bplus M2P4A (PCIe X4 to M.2 (NGFF) SSD Adapter) ($54.00)
Total: $6845.07
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-01-22 14:36 EST-0500

I considered going back to the Phanteks case, which seems to be well-loved, but the Z10PE-D16 SSI board doesn't seem to support Thunderbolt at all. I'm hoping either you guys know of another *ATX board that can work, or... that I can manage to drill the necessary holes without destroying anything. I suppose an easy way out is to accept one of the newer Supermicro cases which supposedly are compatible, but Supermicro claims it's EATX to begin with, and it supposedly isn't... I don't see a lot of guidance from their end.

 

[King Dranzer]

There is nothing much to change in your list. Most probably you won't be needing to drill any holes with that FD Define XL R2 Case.

That DELL is the best professional grade monitor available in market with most accurate colors you can get on any monitor.

Seriously don't know why ASUS server boards do not have thunderbolt support.

There is Intel SSD with 1.2TB and PCIe support. If you wanna check it. Bit more space and highly reliable for workstation purpose.
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/T27CmG/intel-internal-hard-drive-ssdpedmw012t4x1

 

[sdanzig]

Well, I got most of that list. A lot of people seemed nervous about dual titans with only 1000W... I'm hoping it's enough for me when I upgrade, but I'm trusting the King. Also, my fingers are crossed on what could be a big haul. I scored a pair of legit 2683v4's for $900 each from a reputable company on eBay. Saved decent money in other places too. I'm hoping it all turns on when I get it.

I realized I'm probably not getting a wireless lan out of this. I'm debating what sort of wireless NIC I might want to get.

 

[King Dranzer]

If you wanna upgrade PSU in future when you add second GPU(TITAN X PASCAL) then get the below PSU.
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/dFdFf7/corsair-power-supply-cp9020070na

Provided that RM1000x PSU instead of HX1200i to save some money for now.

In future when you upgrade the GPU then you can upgrade the PSU. Or if you wanna save spending extra in future for GPU then get HX1200i.