CyberLink Community Forum
where the experts meet
| Advanced Search >
I5 vs I7 and PD14 editing/rendering experience
Reply to this topic
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 3768 Offline
[Post New]
I see this i5 bash repeatedly in these forums, anyone care to share any real PD14 specific characterization?

http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/44106.page “Your i5 will struggle a bit”, this OP user has a I5-3570k with a passmark CPU mark of 7132
http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/49431.page “i5 will struggle with HD video.”, this OP user has a I5-3570k with a passmark CPU mark of 7132

Or, are these comments from contributors simply just an echo of CL website info with very little actual end use substantiation?
Full-HD quality H.264 and MPEG2 Profiles: Intel Corei5/7 or AMD Phenom II X4
AVCHD and BD burning Profiles: Pentium Core 2 Duo E6400, or AMD Phenom II X4
2K/4K/3D video editing profile: Intel Corei7 or AMD FX series with 64 bit OS 6 GB RAM
http://www.cyberlink.com/products/director-suite/spec_en_US.html

From what I've seen, PD14 overall editing and rendering experience simply scales fairly well as a function of CPU capability, which can be easily obtained from many sites. The chart attached (passmark.com data) shows the massive overlap in I5 vs I7 compute capability of CPU's currently on the market as of today. So, instantly down playing an I5 PD14 editing capability may come with little credence. Often many users have an I5 better than many I7’s as the above two sited posts. What further muddies the water is the AMD FX series capable of 2K/4K/3D per CL note above. This AMD CPU spec overlaps many I5 CPU's performance so why the constant I5 struggle comments? For these two quoted posts, the CPU performance is 7132, above the average of AMD FX CPUs (6600 passmark) which CL claims are acceptable for 2K/4K vs basic HD video struggle comments. The chart really goes to show the above specifications by CL are, well, irrational in part other than to point out the obvious that higher quality editing profiles requires better CPU’s. No CompSci degree required for that wisdom.

Obviously a few main differences also exist between the I5 and I7 chips which too have little impact on PD14 editing from my experience.

1) smaller total addressable RAM, usually caps at 32GB vs 64 and larger. For PD14, virtually no benefit for RAM larger than 32GB.
2) some differences in the data sets of chips, from what I've seen HT only a very moderate benefit to PD14. Usually less than 5-10% improvement in editing and rendering productivity.
3) DirectX 12’s API could offer the I7 a chance to prove itself with PD14, but then again, currently PD14 editing suite of tools only utilizes DX9 and some DX11 to my knowledge.

Yes, no doubt the I7 high end CPU's substantially outperform lower end CPU's but often for users it's a $/performance trade-off decision. So what is the issue that often echoes the, you've got a underpowered I5 good luck comment from so many contributors? For those posters, are any willing to share any real back to back comparison experience you've gained of similar capability I5 and I7 CPU's with PD14? From what I've tested, 3 similar capability I5/I7 CPU’s from a passmark.com CPU mark rating in the range of ~3000 to ~8000, perform the same as long as CPU rating is the same, nothings a differentiator, but those that continue to make this comment must have applicable experience so I’m sure many would enjoy the insight.

Jeff
 Filename
PD14_I5_I7.png
[Disk]
 Description
 Filesize
27 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
103 time(s)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Sep 03. 2016 00:26

Reply
CS2014
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: USA-Eastern Time Zone Joined: Sep 16, 2014 16:44 Messages: 626 Offline
[Post New]
I have an i5-4460 Haswell, 3.2 GHz CPU.

CPU-Z.... states "Intel Core i5 4460". Does this suffix number - is it just an identification number or does it indicate a performance characteristic of the i5?

Maybe the 4460 is the PasMark? If it is, then my ID is somewhere around 35. What does the CPU ID mean or tell me about my CPU?

CS

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at Sep 02. 2016 23:30

PD13 Ultimate - Build 3516, WIN 8.1, 64 Bit, 16G RAM, Intel Core i5 4460, CPU @ 3.2GHz, NVIDIA GeForce GT720, Graphics Memory(total avail.)-4093MB
LG WH14NS40 Blu-Ray Drive
Reply
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 3768 Offline
[Post New]
Quote: I have an i5-4460 Haswell, 3.2 GHz CPU.

CPU-Z.... states "Intel Core i5 4460". Does this suffix number - is it just an identification number or does it indicate a performance characteristic of the i5?

The numbers along the horizontal axis of the png image - are listed as 40, 50 , 60.... are they to be scaled with a multiplier of 100? If so then my 4460 lies somewhere between the 40 and 50 or am I reading too much into trying to read that graph?


CS

Yes, the 4460 defines a specific version of the i5. In this case a 4th generation with a given clock speed, 3.2GHz. For the chart, you would be a data point on the orange curve at 6603 on the vertical axis. So just below the red line (7132) a little.

The horizontal axis is just a CPU identifier, nothing more. So every dot on the plot simply represents a CPU that you can go and buy today if you wish.

Jeff
Reply
CS2014
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: USA-Eastern Time Zone Joined: Sep 16, 2014 16:44 Messages: 626 Offline
[Post New]
I edited as you were answering, sorry for the confusion on my part.

CS PD13 Ultimate - Build 3516, WIN 8.1, 64 Bit, 16G RAM, Intel Core i5 4460, CPU @ 3.2GHz, NVIDIA GeForce GT720, Graphics Memory(total avail.)-4093MB
LG WH14NS40 Blu-Ray Drive
Reply
CS2014
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: USA-Eastern Time Zone Joined: Sep 16, 2014 16:44 Messages: 626 Offline
[Post New]
Why would my 4460 be data point 6603 on the vertical axis instead of 4460 on the same axis?

CS PD13 Ultimate - Build 3516, WIN 8.1, 64 Bit, 16G RAM, Intel Core i5 4460, CPU @ 3.2GHz, NVIDIA GeForce GT720, Graphics Memory(total avail.)-4093MB
LG WH14NS40 Blu-Ray Drive
Reply
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 3768 Offline
[Post New]
As I indicated in the OP, I used a generic CPU benchmark performance scale from passmark.com so it's available to anyone.

The 4460 is Intels naming convension, that's all, a model number. Simply go lookup your CPU at passmark.com or click the following link, http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-4460+%40+3.20GHz&id=2230 the large number in red, 6603 is the rated performance of your CPU based on Passmark speed test, the higher a number the better.

Jeff
Reply
CS2014
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: USA-Eastern Time Zone Joined: Sep 16, 2014 16:44 Messages: 626 Offline
[Post New]
Looks like there are many i5s mixed in the list - some rated above the i7 - at least some of the i7s. Also looks like when you get to the PassMark rating of i5-4690K @ 3.50GHz - I don't think there's anymore i5s rated above the i7s (after just a quick look).

Nice list to look at when considering CPUs - <a>http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html</a>



CS

Edit - corrected 'about' to 'above' and corrected spelling of just

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Sep 03. 2016 09:43

PD13 Ultimate - Build 3516, WIN 8.1, 64 Bit, 16G RAM, Intel Core i5 4460, CPU @ 3.2GHz, NVIDIA GeForce GT720, Graphics Memory(total avail.)-4093MB
LG WH14NS40 Blu-Ray Drive
Reply
ynotfish
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: N.S.W. Australia Joined: May 08, 2009 02:06 Messages: 9696 Offline
[Post New]
Hi Jeff -

You've excited a response, so far, from two less technically inclined members laughing

It is all quite confusing & there's obviously no "one-size-fits-all" answer, aside from the general trends you've mentioned.

That performance overlap between i5s & i7s is born out in these charts too - https://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks

Cheers - Tony
Visit PDtoots. PowerDirector Tutorials, tips, free resources & more. Subscribe!
Full linked Tutorial Catalog
PDtoots happily supports fellow PowerDirector users!
Reply
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 3768 Offline
[Post New]
Quote: Hi Jeff -

You've excited a response, so far, from two less technically inclined members laughing

It is all quite confusing & there's obviously no "one-size-fits-all" answer, aside from the general trends you've mentioned.

That performance overlap between i5s & i7s is born out in these charts too - https://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks

Cheers - Tony

Two excited responses, I really didn't expect much more from those that provide the i5 bashing. I was really posting the thread so those that get the i5 bash might stumble across the post in their search for resolution and seek appropriate comparison and computer advice if they feel underqualified before simply succumbing to spending more.

I do see CL updated the specs for PD15, oddly, no obscure classifications anymore, the way it should have been. A faster CPU always a user PD editing beneficial experience, regardless of i5/i7 status.

Also, take a look at the CL updated "Hard Disk Space" specs for PD15, oh, all those 100GB on C:/ forum advocates for PD working "cache" statements that were also invalid but passed on like some PD ritual. Just read another suggestion for that last week, I think I even saw 3x-8x input file size suggestion too. Wonder how many faithful will keep the rhetoric alive. Yes, to create a 25GB, 50GB, 100GB or the 128GB BD, even if a direct burn to disc, PD15 still needs Hard Disk space available, just not on C:\. Never has been, always a user option on location.

Jeff
 Filename
PD15_Specs.png
[Disk]
 Description
 Filesize
283 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
75 time(s)
Reply
[Post New]
Thanks Jeff and Tony-
I've been considering upgrading my i5 4690 which I've had since I started with PDR12. I've added an SSD, 16gb ram, and moved to Win 10. Most of my editing is HD and I use Magic+PD for 4k realtime editing. No GPU card only Intel Graphics.
Works fine for me. Smooth editing and reasonable render times.
Would love to have latest top end i7 and GPU because I love toys but have decided to spend the bucks on latest DJI Mavic Pro 4k drone!!

Al

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at Oct 14. 2016 03:16

Power Director 13&14 Ultimate, Photo Director 6, Audio Dir, Pwr2Go 10
Win 10 64, Intel MB DH87MC, Intel i5-4670 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 16Gb DDR3 1600, 128Gb SSD, 2x1Tb WDBlue 7200rpmSATA6, Intel 4600 GPU, Gigabyte G1 GTX960 4GB, LG BluRay Writer
Reply
Reply to this topic
Powered by JForum 2.1.8 © JForum Team