Same situation here, actually I have exactly the same hardware as you are. I was looking at AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition ( 4 cores) which seems to be quite efficient in multi-threading applications and way cheaper than the i7 series. Unless you go to extreme series i7 then picking the right i5 might save you money and you want lose that much performance.

If you on to Intel chip then it might worth waiting a little bit for the new Intel series Sandy Bridge which will have significant processing power. i3 2100 or i5 2500 might give you considerable performance boost.

Check out this link for anandtechs 'bench' section where you can compare pretty much any 2 CPU's with synthetics, multithreaded tasks, gaming etc:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/88?vs=288

You might want to read the reviews on the new 'Sandy Bridge' chips Intel just released. They seem to be particularly good at video transcoding - though it is unclear to me whether PD9 supports this capability, though it probably will - and, in general, seem to be a significant and cost effective improvement over the existing Core i5, i7, etc., products.

These chips should hit your local computer store shortly as systems are being announced at this time. The reviews seems very positive about the price/performance of the Core i5 2500K.

If nothing else, given the attractive pricing on the new chips, older Core i5s and i7s will likely be significantly discounted soon (ignore what the local computer store sales guy has to say about that).

I had planned on ordering all my parts this week, but given the new parts, I'm going to wait a couple weeks for a Core i7 2600K + motherboard, 120 G OCZ PCI Express SSD for the C drive, 2 TB D drive for data, and 12 gig DRAM.

Then again, my existing desktop is about 8 years old, so I'm due.

Sandy Bridge is supported according to the brief I read this morning with the new update.

Dafydd

Ah! http://membership.cyberlink.com/prog/company/press-news-content.do?pid=2700

Excellent! That should really speed things up as they note in the press release!

Thanks All - Some good info here - might wait a couple of weeks myself to see what happens when Sandy Bridge hits the shelves.

Wow...this thread has me thinking about the first video capture board I purchased...the Iomega Buz!

What a piece of junk that was!

Quote: Hi,
Have been using PD for some years currently on PD8 Ultra (3022). Since moving to new camera and HD it has become apparent I need a system upgrade to make use of HD files and PD9. (System too slow working with HD files) Current DXdiag attached.
What I am after is hints , comments, suggestions etc re new hardware
(The only thing I do with the PC other than basics is video production -home stuff , not professional - so want to keep the costs down)

I have in mind

Intel i7 (any speed) for the Hyperthread technology (Extra question here- if I go for i5 (no hyperthread) does PD9 still make use of the 4 available cores or does it need Hyperthread? ie if no hyperthread does PD9 only use one core?)

Win7 Home premium 64 bit

min 8Gb RAM

nvidia video card - not sure which yet but don't want to overspec hence overspend - thinking of the GT430 1GB as seems reasonably priced.

Any comments welcome as well around anything AMD Processor/ATI RADEON GPU as these also seem reasonably priced compared to INTEL/NVIDIA. Anyone with any issues on this hardware with PD9?

Thanks

The I5 is a dual core, 4 thread processor; hence, yes it does have hyperthreading.

With that being said ... I would go for a 4 core (plus) if you can afford it. Dell Studio 1558 (laptop) * I5-520 * AMD HD 5470 * 4GB RAM - 1066MHz DDR3 * 320GB 7200RPM Hard Drive * Windows 7 Pro 64 bit * BluRay Burner

Does anyone know if these new processors do away with the need for a high end GPU card (more$) = higher rated power supply = more$
Eg can all the processing can be done on the CPU and a low end card for display purposes only.
Reading other forums mainly gaming where there is a need for all this high end stuff seems to suggest you can't pick and choose where the processing is done on the new chips and a high end GPU is still required ?
Does Cyberlink have an opinion on this.

Thanks Again

PS that said I'm still thinking of getting the new i5-2500 as bench tests seem to indicate it is almost as good as the current high end i7-9xx

I read a review on the Sandy Bridge CPU/Graphics processor. It stated that if you choose to use a discrete video card and bypass the CPU/graphics processor that you also lose Quick Sync Video acceleration. This is something you have to think about when considering a system build. If your a serious gamer you will benefit from a separate video card and have access to CUDA or Stream but according to the review Quick Sync is much faster for video rendering.

Here's a link to the review if you want to read it.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-core-i7-2600k-core-i5-2500k,2833.html Q9300 2.5 GHz
4 GB Ram
Nvidia 9800 GT

Thats good to know - I conclude slightly different: no need to waste money on a high end gamer card just to better transcoding|!

I think I'm more confused now - have to stop reading bench test sites and just go and buy something I think

If I read this correctly if a separate GPU is installed - then you can't use or access QuickSync? Does this mean you have to have buy the H67 motherboard rather than the P67 and no separate GPU at all?
Or if the P67 is installed then a higher end GPU is still required to get the performance.


If the PC was required to run games as well would it be possible to install a GPU and have it shutdown so the QuickSync works for Video Rendering etc.

Just to add my experience.

I have an older PC: Q9550@2.83GHz and (had) 8600GT Video card. Running W764bit 6Gb RAM. I could run PD and edit 1080p60 files from TM700. Splash and WMP played the files smoothly enough with v. occasional stuttering. GPU rendering worked well: about half the time for CPU rendering.

BUT when I was GPU rendering the card obviously was getting close to it's limits: I couldn't really play any other HD video smoothly and moving stuff around my dual HD screens had that annoying "lagging/choppy" effect. It annoyed me a bit so seeing it it holidays I changed the video card to a GTX460 1GB.

Well....must say a good investment. Not only is the GPU rendering for AVCHD four times faster (including 1080p60 @32Mbps) it is seamless in ongoing graphics duties while it is rendering.

Interesting observations though:

Old card the CPU usage was about 30% when GPU rendering with GPU at 90%
New card CPU usage is 80% when GPU rendering with GPU at 40%. This still results in AVCHD 1080p60 being rendered quicker than real time (ie 30min project takes about 25mins to render). Both cards were running the latest nVidia drivers so it beats me how they sort out resource management. Panasonic SD9, Panasonic TM700, Panasonic SD600, GoPro HD Hero.

Houseofmac,

What you are saying is exactly the dilemma I was trying to get across. I know with integrated graphics in the motherboard it was possible to disable the integrated graphics in the system BIOS, but I don't know if this is possible with Sandy Bridge since the graphics is part of the CPU die. Q9300 2.5 GHz
4 GB Ram
Nvidia 9800 GT

I must say the Nvidia 460 gtx has received rave reviews and was the reason I went with the 460 and the same as pjc3 I am very happy with mine.

Cheers

Robert2 S My youtube channel====> http://www.youtube.com/user/relate2?feature=mhsn

All the Sandy Bridge reviews I've read use external graphics, so its pretty clear you can disable on chip graphics if that's what you want.

@James W
Further reading indicates if you install a GPU card the onboard graphics are disabled. ie you have to rely on the quality/specs of the external GPU.
From what I can gather this is only an issue for high end gaming.
That said I'm thinking now
i7-2600K (HD 3000 graphics with better overclocking if required)
H67 motherboard for the Intel graphics. (no external GPU).
If I ever feel the need for some serious gaming it's just a matter of installing a GPU (and maybe extra power wattage)
Or as usually happens this new PC will get handed down to my son and he can buy the GPU
He's getting my current one as he has already loaded some game on it that won't work on the last PC I gave him.

Thanks all for the input - much appreciated

HP is currently offering I7-2K based laptop offerings with HD 3000 graphics capabilities and bluray burners for under $2K.

Maybe tax return ... Dell Studio 1558 (laptop) * I5-520 * AMD HD 5470 * 4GB RAM - 1066MHz DDR3 * 320GB 7200RPM Hard Drive * Windows 7 Pro 64 bit * BluRay Burner

Just a comment regarding people using laptops for editing HD video, you really are flipping a coin as to whether or not it will work to your satisfaction or not.

Editing HD video is about the most stressful thing you can do to your computer, laptops are getting there but nothing beats the power of a proper desktop with a proper graphics card. My youtube channel====> http://www.youtube.com/user/relate2?feature=mhsn

@HouseofMac

I've concluded the exact same thing reading through all the info that's come out since the SB release.

i7-2600K chip for the more advanced HD 3000 graphics, on an H67 board with no discrete GPU... I don't do any gaming so the integrated graphics should be enough for me.

This was an interesting article - Lucid are developing software to enable desktops to power down the GPU and thus enable the use of QuickSync on the IGP, for systems that have GPU's. (note - still on H67 boards only, not P67)

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/20217

Once that's available, you'd be able to install a GPU if you felt you needed more horsepower.

Time to go shopping.