Which RAM is better for video editing.... Please help!!!!

[LunchBox]

Hi

I am in the process of Building a new computer built solely for video editing. I will be using Pinnacle Studios' "Pinnacle Liquid EditionPRO" for it. http://www.pinnaclesys.com/ProductPage_n.asp?Product_ID=2480&Langue_ID=7

OS will be a Microsoft's Windows XP Media Center 2005 Edition

My Question is about RAM... provided that $$$ will not be an issue...

I am not sure if i should get (4) 1 GB DDR400 or (4) 512 MB DDR500.
Which would be most beneficial for Video Editing...
faster RAM or more RAM ?

The rest of my Set-up:
Athlon 64 3500+ (939)
GIGABYTE GA-K8NXP-SLI
600Watt PS
(2) 250GB SATA HD
Nvidia 6800 GT

 

[Randell]

more ram, less caching

 

[Unit01]

more ram, less caching

what he said
not sure if video editing benefits much more from low latency ram, but in theory they should more than the general gamer would.
Try check out some articles that reviews the impact of ram latency on video editing. Long time ago since i bothered checking it.

 

[T2k]

Re: Which RAM is better for video editing.... Please help!!!

Hi

I am in the process of Building a new computer built solely for video editing. I will be using Pinnacle Studios' "Pinnacle Liquid EditionPRO" for it. http://www.pinnaclesys.com/ProductPage_n.asp?Product_ID=2480&Langue_ID=7

OS will be a Microsoft's Windows XP Media Center 2005 Edition

My Question is about RAM... provided that $$$ will not be an issue...

I am not sure if i should get (4) 1 GB DDR400 or (4) 512 MB DDR500.
Which would be most beneficial for Video Editing...
faster RAM or more RAM ?

The rest of my Set-up:
Athlon 64 3500+ (939)
GIGABYTE GA-K8NXP-SLI
600Watt PS
(2) 250GB SATA HD
Nvidia 6800 GT

1. Forget that Media Center Edition crap for any serious work
2. Mobo is fine, faster CPU always better
3. If it's solely for editing what's that fancy video card for? Pnnacle used to have some R9700 Pro bundle with taking advantage of its HW Video Shaders...
4. RAM SHOULD run on same speed as your FSB - for instance if you don't OC, DDR400 is fine for A64's 200MHz base.
5. LOT OF RAM - that's a must have in the world of video editing.

Welcome to this nice world, BTW. 8) Myself an Avid user but I used to use Pinnacle Targa 3000 Infinite Editions, still using Premiere or Edius with my Canopus DVRex-RT at home.

 

[T2k]

more ram, less caching

what he said
not sure if video editing benefits much more from low latency ram, but in theory they should more than the general gamer would.
Try check out some articles that reviews the impact of ram latency on video editing. Long time ago since i bothered checking it.

True. As I always say: don't fall for Intel's DDR2 speeds - that's a POS, very hiugh latencies.

 

[MasterBaiter]

We're using Adobe AE and Premier @ our school & they're killing our systems with 1 gig of memory. I would agree with all of the other comments... definitely get the most memory you can.

 

[LunchBox]

cool !!!

Thanks a bunch for the input. It really helped me a lot.

 

[Guden Oden]

True. As I always say: don't fall for Intel's DDR2 speeds - that's a POS, very hiugh latencies.

It's not "very high". It's somewhat higher than standard DDR at the same clock speed. Of course, DDR2 will scale higher in clock speed.

Anyway, as with any task involving huge data quantities, the performance limit will most probably be harddrive speed and not memory speed. I'm sceptical 100MHz of extra memory clock speed will make any noticeable impact, especially as it will mean

A - half the memory amount.
B - higher latencies in any case, DDR2 or not.
C - overclocking the memory subsystem, leading to possible system flakyness. DDR isn't exactly a bastion of stability at that speed.

More rather than faster would seem the way to go to me. Will cut down on harddrive activity = massive speedup compared to a marginal amount of extra bandwidth from 500MHz RAM.

 

[LunchBox]

^^^^

I see... So for Video Editing the really important thing to look for is High CPU and large amount of memory...

Second thing thing to look out for is FSB and RAM Synchronization and HD Speed...

Also to consider is Latency...

Thank you for all the advice... I really appreciate it.
_____________________________________________________________

Just to segway to another topic...

I've heard that Athlon 64 performs better if the memory is operating at 1T timings...

Will it give a better impact on Video Editing or will the performance not have an impact at all compared to memory with 2T timing.... ?

If it does... any suggestions on 1GB modules with 1T timing ???

just wondering.... and Thanks in advance!!!!

 

[Randell]

I've heard that Athlon 64 performs better if the memory is operating at 1T timings...

Will it give a better impact on Video Editing or will the performance not have an impact at all compared to memory with 2T timing.... ?

If it does... any suggestions on 1GB modules with 1T timing ???

just wondering.... and Thanks in advance!!!!

I would not have thought outside of benchmarking you would notice it in any meaningful way.

 

[jvd]

I would get ddr 400 with the tightest timings you could find .


I would also buy 1 gig ddr sticks . Not 512 meg sticks . For what your doing your going to want to have 3 gigs of ram at some point (when money allows it ) So its best to pick up sticks in 1 gig quanitys .

 

[MatiasZ]

Be sure to get a quality MB beacuse 3 Gigs of ram at 2-2-2 1T can be quite stressing. You should read reviews and see which one stands out best running at default (non OC) with higher timings and full slots (anandtech usually takes a look at those).

 

[Guden Oden]

I would get ddr 400 with the tightest timings you could find .

Useless. If harddrive speed is the limiting factor, RAM speed is going to have a marginal effect at most. RAM timings is something only geeks and eggheads need to worry about.

Besides, low-latency RAM is typically hugely expensive. It's a total waste of money for the vast majority of people.

 

[T2k]

True. As I always say: don't fall for Intel's DDR2 speeds - that's a POS, very high latencies.

It's not "very high". It's somewhat higher than standard DDR at the same clock speed. Of course, DDR2 will scale higher in clock speed.

It's unusually high, stop BSing. DDR2 has an extra additive latency on top of the 'base', thus read is CAS + additive latency, unlike DRR's CAS only.
IIRC a 4/4/4 DDR2 has ~15ns latency, compared to DDR's 9ns...

Anyway, as with any task involving huge data quantities, the performance limit will most probably be harddrive speed and not memory speed. I'm sceptical 100MHz of extra memory clock speed will make any noticeable impact, especially as it will mean

You're talking about something which we already left behind in this very topic. As we said above, the memory should run sync'ed with the FSB, period.

This also means there's no reason to go with a higher latency DDR2 memory, especially when you do such memory intensive tasks like video editing.

A - half the memory amount.
B - higher latencies in any case, DDR2 or not.
C - overclocking the memory subsystem, leading to possible system flakyness. DDR isn't exactly a bastion of stability at that speed.

WTF are you talking about?


BTW DDR is 10x more stable anywhere than DDR2, when it comes to OC. I never had any problem with my memory modules. Only idiots have problems when they buy a 400MHz piece and try to get it running on 500MHz instead of buying a 500MHz piece and get it up and running without any problem.
Also compatibility is another easy thing nowadays: don't buy fake garbages like OCZ and such noname crap. Loud marketing doesn't mean quality. I always use Corsair and I never had a single problem with my memories. I also like Apacer, Crucial, Kingmax by general, based on few experiences.

More rather than faster would seem the way to go to me. Will cut down on harddrive activity = massive speedup compared to a marginal amount of extra bandwidth from 500MHz RAM.

You're apparently out of touch - what kind of HDD activity you can save in case of video editing???
I suggest you to read the topic starter again...

PS: Some readings, only for you: Intel to Remove DDR2 Support from Forthcoming Mainstream Chipsets - I wonder, why...[/url]

 

[mito]

As important as having 1gb of ram, a raid setup will enhance system performance when loading and saving huge files.

 

[LunchBox]

As important as having 1gb of ram, a raid setup will enhance system performance when loading and saving huge files.

good point!!! thanx for the tip

 

[T2k]

I would get ddr 400 with the tightest timings you could find .

Useless. If harddrive speed is the limiting factor, RAM speed is going to have a marginal effect at most. RAM timings is something only geeks and eggheads need to worry about.

Well, you don't do too much encoding, do you? Your comment is only true for editing itself - but after you've done, you need to deliver your product.

Harddrive is nowhere near the limiting factor, let me tell you, when a 10 min long piece takes 30 minutes to transcode on an average desktop machine.
Here are your numbers: you have an edited 16:9 DV sequence but we want uncompressed 601 export, then MPEG2 program steam with 4:3 mask for the DVD auth sw - now your turn, do the math, show me how is your harddrive the limiting factor.

Edit: 16:9 -> 4:3

 

[Randell]

Here are your numbers: you have an edited 16:9 DV sequence but we want uncompressed 601 export, then MPEG2 program steam with 16:9 mask for the DVD auth sw - now your turn, do the math, show me how is your harddrive the limiting factor.

In yopur quest to score points, RAM timings here are still marginal and CPU more important in encoding.

 

[T2k]

Here are your numbers: you have an edited 16:9 DV sequence but we want uncompressed 601 export, then MPEG2 program steam with 16:9 mask for the DVD auth sw - now your turn, do the math, show me how is your harddrive the limiting factor.

In yopur quest to score points, RAM timings here are still marginal

True.

and CPU more important in encoding.

CPU is no more important than memory - keep in mind it's not about sheer CPU power but it's about CPU and memory subsystem relationship. That's why the A64 runs substantially better than its predeccessor: very low latency memory access.

 

[Randell]

but it's about CPU and memory subsystem relationship.

fair