Xivilain writes:
> mapesdh you completely forgot about manhuco's budget. ..
Actually I noticed his comment afterwards & sent him a PM with more info.
> Four way SLI GTX 580's is not what he's asking for. He didn't ask about X79
> or GTX Titans either. ...
I'm merely pointing out
options. Sheesh...
Not mentioning more powerful alternatives within the same budget would be silly.
I mentioned 580s because if he wants CUDA acceleration in AE then he
can't use the 970! Has that sunk in yet? The 780 Ti or Titan are
the fastest alternatives, but two 580s would cost less and be quicker than
either, assuming one can find 3GB versions (1.5GB 580s work fine and are
even cheaper, but too limiting in many cases).
> I didn't say more cores wouldn't make a difference. Its only if you
The apps he mentions do use multiple cores; AE certainly uses more than 4
if available. You said, "Also, the i7-5820K is hardly an improvement over
the i7-4790K.", a statement which is simply false, though the degree of
speedup does depend on the task. The 4790K is strong for single-threaded
loads, but that hardly describes the typical pro-app environment. Check
toms' own
review for numerous examples. Note that I'm assuming in each case
the CPU would be oc'd to a reasonable level, but even at stock speed there's
a significant difference between the two for threaded tasks.
> didn't say he wants to run multiple GTX 970s.
In the context of someone using apps like AE, that's exactly what future
proofing typically means.
> Z97 would be sufficent. ...
Nope. Not for this scenario. For gaming, sure, but not for pro apps of this
kind, that's just not true at all. 'Sufficent' to me just means it'll do
"for now", with no room for growth, but straight away there are huge
limitations in CPU performance, memory capacity, GPU expansion, etc.
I'd use Z97 for an all-new gaming system in a hearbeat, but for a pro apps
system it's not suitable; limited to 4-cores, no PCIe expansion headroom,
not enough RAM for 4K or even heavy HD with AE. I've seen typical AE renders
of complex scenes grab 40GB RAM.
The problem with X99 is DDR4 costs too much, so time and again I see
people considering builds with restricted RAM amounts because they can't
afford 32GB+. That's a bad idea if one wants a good AE system.
Personally I don't like the 5820K anyway, given it's also compromised in its
PCIe provision, which sucks. I really don't get why Intel decided to meddle
in this way.
> ... X99 would work too. ...
Yes, but expensive. If the budget isn't high enough, then RAM capacity is
often compromised, ruining AE performance for a start.
An alternative compromise would be a 5820K, 32GB RAM and two 580s. Better
CUDA speed than a 970 could offer anyway. The saving vs. a 970 should be
enough to cover the higher RAM amount (no need for super fast RAM, capacity
is more important).
> Which fits your budget? That's your ultimate question.
And that's why I mentioned X79. It's a perfectly viable compromise.
The ideal setup for this kind of work is a dual-XEON system, but they're
expensive. Oc'd consumer 6/8-core is a good stepping stone. I'm not saying
he
should buy X79, I'm saying it's something worth considering if
top performance is a priority within a fixed budget. Ending up with a 16GB
system for AE is a really bad idea.
Consider the mbd: I get ASUS P9X79 WS boards for about 150 UKP each.
That's a very good deal indeed for such a feature set. A good X99 board
costs a lot more.
> Don't let an elite computer builder slam down on us general folk with their
ROFL! That's staggeringly funny. Have you even read my other posts? I make
massive use of used parts, etc. I'm about as far away from an elite builder
as it's possible to be.
😀 Yes I build 'fast' systems, but very rarely do
I buy anything new, that's not my target market. If someone has the money
to afford a top-spec, all-new X99 build with an 8-core, 64GB, etc., that's
the sort of person I would immediately be pushing more in the direction of
buying a proper, new 2-socket XEON build with 20+ cores and 256GB ECC.
Stop presuming what you don't know, read up first. Almost none of the parts
in my quad-580 system were bought new, certainly not the 580s. The only new
items in the entire unit are the fans (oh, and the RAM). I saved more than $300
equivalent on the PSU alone, bought via normal auction for 107 UKP. Check my
gaming PC, exactly the same approach, except for the recent 980 upgrade, and
even that was largely offset by a $130 profit after selling the previous two 580s.
> ... I mean, sure those setups are AWESOME and would make people crap their
> pants when they see them. ...
I don't see how. My system references have nothing to do with trying to
impress anyone. They are example, practical solutions for building a
powerful AE/video system on a lesser budget, but they come with caveats
which I've described in detail elsewhere, such as power, heat & noise
issues. Wading through these issues to provide practical info for pro
users is what I do.
For AE, on the same budget, if it's a choice between a 5820K/X99/16GB and
GTX 780 Ti, vs. a 3930K/X79/32GB and two or more 580s, then the latter is a
compelling option (AE needs a lot of RAM, 16GB isn't enough); it'll be
decently faster for RayTrace3D, by quite a margin, offer the same CPU
performance, and it'll run much better for AE with 2X more RAM. And remember,
the 970 and 980 cannot be used for CUDA in AE atm, it's not supported yet.
Or of course one can mix & match, 3930K + 780 Ti, etc.
> Who doesn't like fast... everything? But for everyone else, with a "100
> rupee wallet" capacity ...
A 5820K + GTX 970 is hardly 100 rupee...
😀
> we just can't afford those things.
On the contrary, that's why I talk about buying used items all the time,
or new items sold via normal auction. Check my other posts; ye gods dude,
I am by no means an 'elite' systems builder! 8D Blimey, wish I was...
My
speciality is in helping people get the most out of the 2nd-hand
market to build high-spec systems on a tight budget.
There are obvious incentives & advantages to adopting the latest tech,
but getting an X99 board with only 16GB and a PCIe-restricted 6-core
does compromise a lot IMO. For apps like AE, it will be slower and more
expensive than an X79 with a used 6-core SB/IB and 2X more RAM. Whether
or not the tradeoffs in either direction are worth it is a personal choice
on the part of the end user.
And what part of Maxwel V2 CUDA did you not understand? AE does not support
the 900 series cards atm, so buying either of them for AE is a total waste of
time just now. Plus, given the other apps he mentions, a Quadro is a better
choice for a whole range of reasons anyway, with 580(s) for 780/Ti(s) for
extra CUDA.
I've built a number of these systems and have worked with several pro
users exploring performance issues. 4-core consumer desktops with gamer
graphics are cheap, but they can severely limit what can be done with
heavier workloads, etc. For the apps the o.p. mentions, dropping down to 4
cores isn't worth it IMO.
Ian.
PS. I agree with melonhead that for an amateur working with video, a Z97 setup
would work well, but I inferred from the op that ther requirements go quite far
beyond the level of mere amateur, especially the wide range of pro apps mentioned.
Certainly, a Z97 could not remotely cope with 4K work. For this reason I had hoped
X99 would support more than 64GB with the consumer CPUs, but alas Intel decided
not go that route, which is very annoying.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram