Shop now Shop now Shop now Wedding Guest Edit Shop All Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Learn More Shop now Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Oasis Listen with Prime Shop now Learn more
Customer Discussions > photography discussion forum

PC Specifications for HD video editing.

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-50 of 52 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 9 May 2013 18:29:32 BDT
Its a pity you can't get a permanent contrast gradient diagram on the side of the screen to optimise the angle whenever you want.

Posted on 11 May 2013 20:49:47 BDT
Steve James says:
Dr A, I'm not sure if this could be useful to you. I am actually registered blind, but have a tiny amount of vision in one eye, but that does vary from day to day. So I purchased a "24 Colorcard" which I can use to check whatever screen I am using, and indeed have that next to the screen and pull up an image of the color card to match against the original. I also now use the color card in whatever light I am shooting in to give me a balance in that light.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2013 23:20:31 BDT
Thanks Steve,
I shall look into that.

Posted on 11 May 2013 23:39:16 BDT
Neill says:
TJB, I'm relieved that you bought one with a decent graphics processor (gpu). The spec for a video editor will be exactly the same as a decent gaming doubt people said, buy a gaming machine.

Jethwa was showing off and deliberately trying to go over your head.

You don't need a watercooled rig to run games or video editing software. Only on the most heavily overclocked machines do you need water cooling. Generally, just a upgraded heatsink fan will work wonders and good ventilation/cable routing makes a world of difference.

For anybody who was looking for a monster spec gaming rig as of this question Jun2012.

Intel Core i5-3570K 3.40GHz but you could use a much lower dual core processor as the GPU is the real workhorse.
Thermalright True Spirit 120 REV A [BW] Performance CPU Cooler
ASRock Z77 Extreme4 Intel Z77 motherboard
Komputerbay 16GB (2x 8GB) DDR3
GTX 660TI ........get the cheapest one with good reviews. If you can afford higher, it's up to you but this is good enough.
OcUK Battle 650W Dual Rail High Efficiency Modular '80 Plus' Power Supply
Corsair Vengeance C70 Midi Tower Gaming Case
Blu ray RW

With that lot you can still decently overclock and keep the processor nice and cool.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 May 2013 19:39:36 BDT
Steve James says:
Hi TJ,

Getting back to your original question, you said:-

"When I purchased my first pc in 2003, the main specification was the clock speed of the processor, the faster the better. But now I notice that published clock speeds seem to be slower, but this is offset by incorporating far more RAM."

One point about that, the issue of slower clock speeds is that they don't necessarily need to be as fast because the data transport mechanism, the Front Side Bus, or FSB speed is now considerably faster, so the data can be handled far more quickly. In the old days this could be as low as 65Mhz but is now around 800Mhz which means the PC can be considerably faster than one would expect from a slower clock speed specification.

Anyway congratulations on your machine, it does sound rather good!

In reply to an earlier post on 12 May 2013 20:32:29 BDT
T.J.Byford says:
Hello, Steve.

Thanks for this explanation. This is the first time someone has explained to me what is really going on and which is what contributes significantly to improved performance. I am much less perplexed now!

Incidentally, I've bought a 1TB ClickFree C2 USB 3 automatic backup drive. Speed for me, is more to do with how long it takes to do particular tasks that I can relate to. I believe this is fast: it took just 41 minutes to search for and backup 149GB of data files comprising music, images and video. Over USB2 I suspect this would have taken all night.

Is the 800Mhz figure you refer to the same as the memory chips which I note are rated at 1600Mhz in my new machine, or am getting confused again?

Posted on 12 May 2013 22:27:25 BDT
Steve James says:
Hi TJ,

Yes, that is a pretty fast drive! To say the least!

In answer to your question, yes basically RAM speed is now expressed in Mhz so that it can be coupled with a suitable chipset with a matched FSB speed. At one time RAM modules were rated in Nanoseconds, but this changed some years ago when Intel developed an FSB standard of 100Mhz for, I think, the series 7 chips prior to the Pentium. If you think an old 8081 Processor had the princely speed of about 4Mhz, at the time this was a massive leap forward, and now we have as in your RAM chips 1600Mhz.

The slowest part of the computer is the hard drive itself which takes Microseconds for data to be read or written as opposed to the nanoseconds of the RAM chips.

For practical purposes of buying a new machine it means we are now looking at Processor Speed 3.2Ghz, RAM size ie amount of RAM 16Gigabytes and FSB speed 800 MHz and the RAM speed to match or exceed that.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 May 2013 22:48:29 BDT
T.J.Byford says:
Hi, Steve.

PC Specialist suggested I have an SSD, with a hard drive for storage. The SSD contains the OS and programmes, and is only 120GB, but this is sufficient given I only use it for the number crunching when working on video, the finished work is then transferred first to the internal HD, 500GB, thence to external HD's. These are now the bottleneck as they are USB2, so it won't be long before I add some USB3 units.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 May 2013 23:18:10 BDT
Steve James says:
Hi TJ,

I could not agree more! SSD is definitely the way to go! In fact I have been thinking about upgrading this desktop with an SSD as the OS and program device and just keeping the 1 Terrabyte hard drive as a data drive.

USB 3 is definitely far faster than USB 2 and I expanded those on here to 4 ports at USB 3 and 4 at USB 2.

Lol! This is certainly one highly specced laptop you've got yourself. But really it is needed if you are doing photo processing and also the video work.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 May 2013 23:48:23 BDT
T.J.Byford says:

You know far more about computers than I ever will, I just use them, but concerning SSD drives, I did read that they should not be defragged, and asking PC Specialist about this, they said definitely not. In fact, they said leave it alone completely, don't even use any software for cleaning up, boosting, or whatever else it may claim it does to improve pc performance. But then I suspect you knew this already. And to make sure I didn't, they guy talked me through some changes to the machine to make sure I couldn't!

As you've guessed I am very pleased with it. Moving up to it from a much slower dual core, 4 gig of RAM, of which I know only around a little over 3 is used, to an i7 quad core, 16 gig RAM, and much faster memory modules, and SSD, it is so quick at times that I miss it has actually carried out the command. I am so used to seeing the little green bar graph move to the right as imaging adjustments are made, that if I blink I miss it. Equally impressive by its power, is I can see every adjustment literally happening in real time if want as I move the sliders. No clicking, waiting, and then deciding I hadn't dialled in enough, or too much.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 May 2013 23:55:26 BDT
Forgive my ignorance but what is SSD?

Posted on 13 May 2013 01:34:22 BDT
Neill says:
Solid State a hard drive with no moving parts. They boot up phenomenally fast. I've never had one but generally it takes about 3-5 seconds for an ssd pc to boot windows from cold.

Posted on 13 May 2013 02:13:00 BDT
Neill says:
By the way steve, modern intels don't use FSBs, they use QPIs.

Whereas the cpu speed on a core2 duo ould be, like in my case, at overclock 375Mhz fsb with an 8x multiplier making the cpu clock speed 3.0ghz. i7s and the like have a standard multiplier of about 20 and the QPI value of around 200 giving you 4.0ghz.

With c2d chips I would always seek synchronicity with fsb speed and memory clock but with ivybridge chips, I'd buy the best compatible ram for the mother board and let the motherboard set it at auto and check the speeds and voltages in the bios to see if anything was amiss.

TJB, glad you got that machine...16gb of ram will keep that machine running well for a good few years. I wish you were a gamer too. Your machine would play skyrim like a dream.

And don't worry about's generally marketing gumph designed to have you craving higher performance and new kit. It's not total mythology but you wouldn't have to worry too much about bottlenecks unless you spend £1800 on building your own machine. Upgrade/spec obsession can be a dangerous thing and it leads to alot of expense and disappointment.

In reply to an earlier post on 13 May 2013 09:42:12 BDT
T.J.Byford says:

So is a QPI of 4GHz good? I am assuming QPI could mean "Quality Performance Indicator"? The i7 in my machine is from the latest 3d generation.

The SSD, as you say, boots phenomenally fast. And it closes down a lot faster as well.

FYI, the Windows Performance Index base score for my new machine is 7.2 and this relates to the graphics card. The processor scores 7.4, memory 7.7 and, yes, you've not doubt guessed it, the SSD hits the top mark of 7.9.

I gave up playing arcade games years ago when young kids around 6 or 7 years old kept saying "hey, mister, you missed that"! It was too embarrassing. Whilst I am not up to playing modern computer games, I do marvel at what they can do, but I'm not keen on the level of violence shown in many. But this is no doubt a generation thing. I have tried, but don't do too well, racing games and aircraft flight simulation, both a far cry from my first game - the ping pong ball and bat I played on the TV. Wish I'd kept it as I gather that they are highly sought after now.

In reply to an earlier post on 13 May 2013 12:57:11 BDT
Thanks Neal
Obvious when you think about it, I suppose.

In reply to an earlier post on 14 May 2013 22:21:58 BDT
Steve James says:
Hi TJ,

Yes, definitely don't touch the SSD with defrag, but I'm pretty certain Windows 7 locks that out automatically if it detects an SSD. The reason is that it causes excessive wear on an SSD. The one thing that puzzles me is how that excessive wear comes about and what is the life expectancy of an SSD. That might be something Neal might be able to enlighten us about.

I have an i7 quad desktop, with 16 gig of RAM and that is fast, but I still get the pauses as the green bar moves albeit a great deal faster than on my old machine.

In reply to an earlier post on 14 May 2013 22:37:18 BDT
Steve James says:
Hi Neal,

You are of course quite correct, the QPI has overtaken the FSB, it is the old Northbridge /Southbridge divide. I worked in a bank Neal, we only changed over to XP Pro in 2010 and only then started putting One Gig of RAM in any of the machines. My apologies to TJ for the old information although there are still many machines about where what I said is true.

I haven't checked this Neal, but wondered if perhaps you could answer as the the life expectancy of an SSD in comparison to a standard Hard Drive. From what I have seen there is a level of wear with SSD drives which is one of the reasons one does not defrag them and I understand that is to do with excess wear on them so how does that come about?

Posted on 14 May 2013 22:55:29 BDT
Last edited by the author on 14 May 2013 22:57:30 BDT
Neill says:
TJB, the clock speed would be 4.0ghz, qpi is probably 200. The wikipedia is far more detailed than I need to know until I have to overclock one but read up at your leisure.

To be honest, I don't think racing games give you the best gaming experiences. By far the most enjoyable experiences are games like Bioshock which was truly ground breaking a few years ago and your gtx 660 would probably run it on the highest settings...but be warned, it's a horror survival type game. If you have a dodgy ticker, games like bioshock, Stalker and Fallout 3 can give you serious scares if you play in the dark with headphones on. Although your screen size is less likely to cause this.

As far as SSDs and de-fragging goes, don't even attempt it. If windows allows you to, it would probably wreck the drive. It would certainly be no good for it and reduce it's life expectancy. There is a better argument for keeping the operating system and essential programmes on the SSD and anything else on an internal HDD plus back up to an external HDD. Important stuff should be backed up to cd/dvd/blu-ray because burglars would be less likely to steal those in the event.

SSD is still relatively new and users are dependent on hype and reviews and the odd impartial article. So we have to tread carefully with SSDs. They are NOT invincible. Would I use them? Yes. Would I trust them? No. Important stuff goes on the most reliable storage possible.

This article is excellent on SSDs, defragging and life expectancy.

Posted on 14 May 2013 23:06:44 BDT
T.J.Byford says:
Steve, Neal.

Thanks for your various comments. Regarding back-up, I have always been in the habit of backing up to external HD's, and CD's/DVD's. I've never yet had a hard drive fail me, although it is always a question of when, not if, as given long enough, one surely will. From what I've read, SSD's are getting more durable, but as you say, Neal, they are still relatively new and haven't been around long enough. I suppose it is like rechargeable batteries, they have a charge/discharge cycle and then, woof, they're dead.

Posted on 14 May 2013 23:11:08 BDT
Zelazowa says:
A friend of mine in his mid 20s is a real CWK. Recently he replaced the DVD/CD RD on his MAC with an SSD but has still retained the HDD. The OS now works via the SSD and the difference is phenomenal. He does a lot of graphics work and video and produces superb sports films with sound tracks specially composed. He retains the HDD as a more reliable source for memory storage.

Posted on 14 May 2013 23:11:20 BDT
Neill says:
Steve, XP pro in 2010....I feel your pain. This is a problem with Windows systems and industry. Windows is just trying to churn out new OSs to make money while making old forms of office obsolete. But 90% of companies require other software to be stable and functioning without an unstable testing phase every 3 years. Microsoft is failing dismally at providing good operating systems for business. Windows 8 is this years Vista IMO. If I had a new rig with windows 8, I'd either install windows 7 or install one of the bits of software that allows you to run 8 as a normal desktop.

In reply to an earlier post on 15 May 2013 00:01:40 BDT
Last edited by the author on 15 May 2013 00:01:52 BDT
I read in the paper that many offices were buying licences for Windows 8 but were downloading Windows 7. I made sure I got a lap top with 7

In reply to an earlier post on 16 May 2013 20:57:04 BDT
Steve James says:
Neal, Stability is the bye word in banking, there are so many applications made to measure for each individual bank and they have to be completely stable despite what Microsoft thinks. ATM systems throughout the world have only just fully upgraded to XP and no-one is even considering Windows 7 at the moment, although security testing goes on.

If you go back in time with Microsoft, to the DOS operating system, it was a similar tale there. DOS 1 and 2 were pretty useless and running in conjunction with the CPM operating system, then DOS 3 came out and was excellent, 4 was rubbish and rapidly replaced by 5 which was stable, 6 came out and was again not so good, but rapidly upgraded. And so it continues through to today! I would rather have XP than 8 on any machine. I use 7 on this PC and it does seem ok, but everything else I have is on XP Pro.

Posted on 17 May 2013 06:59:07 BDT
Neill says:
XP has been stable for ATMs for a good 4 years so If the banks are only just upgrading, that's because they are skimping on tech.

Banking systems shouldn't even be using windows based systems I'm amazed more hackers haven't ripped off more banks...maybe because US government is more amusing to hack.

To me, different operating systems have different uses. 7 is good but doesn't load older games because of the installer. ie the installer from windows 98 era. Compatability mode doesn't work for that an xp mode limits RAM, much the same as other virtual machine systems.

In future, I will always have multiple OSs running side by side. XP, 7, Ubuntu etc.

In reply to an earlier post on 17 May 2013 07:37:28 BDT
Steve James says:
Hi Neal,

There is no doubt they are skimping on tech, and I'm certain that ATM's were being moved over to XP as late as 2011, and I'm pretty sure there are probably one or two in outlying places which haven't yet been upgraded. The actual control of money is handled by Main Frame and Windows is not involved in that side of things. But yes it is surprising Hackers haven't been more successful.

Not being a Game enthusiast I haven't felt the need for multiple OS, just happy if Iplayer and Youtube work efficiently, and I can process images relatively quickly.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the photography discussion forum (778 discussions)


This discussion

Participants:  13
Total posts:  52
Initial post:  23 Jun 2012
Latest post:  18 May 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions