I have an Intel Q6600 quad core 2.4Ghz processor in my editing machine and am running a test render to a 1280x720 WMV file right now. Task manager Performance shows 4 cores at work running 67-80%.

I'd still get the very fastest quad core I could, something faster than what I have to cover for future developments and even higher bitrates.

Thanks Bif

I located your post and see that the video card and drivers are going to be a significant factor in this research. My Pentium 4 (2.80Ghz) is adequate for the videos that I have tackled to date but the advent of HiDef is changing the system demands by a large leap.

Like you my interests are video and photography mainly the family type and, I am 80, it is mainly about kids and grandchildren.

Anyone with ideas can jump in anytime.

Cheers,
Boris

Boris,

I can give you a bit more specific information. A couple of HP machines with dual core 4200+ and 5000+ processors handled HDV from a Canon HV20 OK but nowhere near as fast as I was used to editing standard DV and miniDV. The rendering process (Produce or Create Disk in PD7) was somewhat slow, though, and if more than one "effect" was added to some clips rendering those took a lot longer.

When I started using Canon HF100's (AVCHD) things took on a whole different aspect. The HP dual core 5000+ could just barely do it if the camera quality setting was taken down from 1920x1080 to 1440x1080 but was agonizingly slow and for me unworkable.

My (then) new quad core Q6600 2.4Ghz would not edit 1920x1080 until I replaced the video card with an Nvidia GeForece 8800GT 512MB one. Of the two pieces of software I've been working with, PD7 Ultra seems to be a bit less demanding of computer resources.

I consider the quad core I have now as just barely adequate for the HF100's files but I need to find out from Dell what the fastest quad core processor I can put on my current mother board would be. I sure wish what I have was a lot lot faster.

So that's where I come from when I say I'd go for the very fastest I could make myself afford.

I guess at 70 I'm just a kid to you...Hope my info is useful to you.

From my research so far it would appear that systems are getting optimized in pairs for best results:
1) Intel and nVidia, or
2) AMD and ATI

Back to more research... ain't it fun !!

Cheers,
Boris

Boris

I'm not so sure about that, AMD bought ATI maybe a yr or so ago so they obviously would like to bundle for market share.

CUDA appears to be the next major step in reducing processing time for HD videos, this technology is currently from Nvidia. CL with PD7 has indicated a version in Q4 of 08 based on some CL press releases. I have not seen that ATI has a CUDA equivalent. They have various different interfaces but they haven't introduced a unified GPGPU model that they've committed to for years like Nvidia has committed to CUDA.
For CUDA enabled Nvidia video cards:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_learn_products.html
Cyberlink release
http://www.cyberlink.com/eng/press_room/view_1828.html

The performance gains are potentially too great with CUDA and PD7 to ignore when thinking about a new system. I myself run a Nvidia 8800GTS and 2.6GHz quad core AMD.

80 or 90yrs yound and digging in all these techy details, pat yourself on the back friends!

Jeff

Good stuff Jeff and Bif,

I have been coasting with my video and photo capabilities based on cameras like the Canon G3, Panasonic DMC-LX2, and my ‘old’ Canon Optura mini DV tape based. My son is using the Nikon D90 SLR and there are a dozen other video and digital cameras in our tribe.

This thread is helping me to bring myself up-to-date by forcing further research… very much appreciated and probably my last one – I am getting too old for this. Keep the information coming, I am sure others are following with some interest.

Cheers,
Boris