From: "Carey Dissmore" Received: from mail-it1-f173.google.com ([209.85.166.173] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.1.0) with ESMTPS id 7242683 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:17:34 +0100 Received: by mail-it1-f173.google.com with SMTP id r11so21301935itc.2 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:27:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=imugonline-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=lNV00F4gocjmvJv4lEyE/d9rM4/2ZpJvownWyo6nIkw=; b=FoqqwJ5CoKQvzlFu4objgLwH2QgBMqXo8dBUDpjhKVdHtOtV0luPWI/XX42aRnGWoY pBxLoh7HzOyQJd/92WpRHDIXi6xhseH7+jTRT/MCtQpXJvbyY8zrwIrHeFb2aopRNmkL Sg/C7Mo+3KR/dIYC5ZGemSrsOKlWbt3ISOcznkJvQuLbVgvLAxxjrZ6zSmue5rzKZaP6 MucpIhoO91j7fsplyTXmeUsDx0rWR4YnUjlynYBHDboHY5RHCGRaWtPB1LToCjTj56hh KgxDsEraoqpSvNZM536OKiZLHohPw48ufz0cEpvhT/sXQ8bmDIZX7ojZvpgXocBUwOEE hnsQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to :in-reply-to:message-id; bh=lNV00F4gocjmvJv4lEyE/d9rM4/2ZpJvownWyo6nIkw=; b=E65LunY9ZVlnMt8055QLo4JcjICsJMmVaWJ0NFf0J92waC7iLHvpud1TZDdoiqGo45 Wh1WmgLHM1TZ3BYOqGR8jc08NomQuTG7NKESHhJay5RprFEECpVWvnQhq4eA9puPEtMq 14bNv+j1q1jujX7xMagEGUvl/RFpjmJkqV6UzC7peMZgjtd93C2Xn6WsSQQDTOiD0+VK gVt//jYccb1nSzMIDuvhKI+QBM5Ao1Z7EMrclANcCsmmdKpFSMcb48k3LBQweL+8O9tx GITjWd/O7hZHw8Dt9cn7t+eiPfJdUHsMASn2LpSr5lP0W+SluP1kO6+ntTR+4vN9FzHm Dajg== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZUkif0Ks9ghNGLFyPMpsn2LYdGqzwSVpFSF8tCjQjVUqS7BWoi Oyl1mqkfUI6FpA1Dt8wYuO2v5Mxws5E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IbaVYt+juOMPVGJTEIjTLjIydYVkEbxgvY1JO6C0RbWf/rb0jnAkX8n52kBtzFBsNf2p+xZOw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:660c:74b:: with SMTP id a11mr5655913itl.27.1549895270906; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:27:50 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.1.84] (c-24-118-189-141.hsd1.mn.comcast.net. [24.118.189.141]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z10sm4454970iol.30.2019.02.11.06.27.49 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:27:49 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_42465EB1-699B-40D2-A4F9-8E9B0A5E1E23" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Subject: Re: [AE] Feedback on Workstation components Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 08:27:48 -0600 References: To: After Effects Mail List In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <1DAD2C48-B3BA-4CF5-931E-72176BF29B89@imugonline.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) --Apple-Mail=_42465EB1-699B-40D2-A4F9-8E9B0A5E1E23 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 A few comments:=20 Puget Systems REALLY gets it when it comes to addressing the needs of = our market. They have a model where they do a ton of research and = provide excellent support for their tested, configured system designs. = They share a lot of their data and findings on their website, which = benefits the community as a whole. They are uniquely positioned to do = this type of testing and I=E2=80=99m very thankful they share. For the = vast majority of people who do NOT have interest in building their own = systems, but nevertheless are realizing that a custom workstation is = truly the best path forward for their needs, I can=E2=80=99t think of a = better choice.=20 Now onto the geek stuff, (which Puget already knows): A - Building PC: I=E2=80=99m inclined towards PC building too, and have = built many workstation machines. I built my first PC around 2001 mostly = for gaming and offloaded encoding/rendering but I largely stuck with Mac = for post production work until about 2012 when I made the complete jump = to primary post production on Windows workstations. Teddy and I had a = good chat on the phone back then just to gut check my system = architecture before pulling the trigger on a $6k box build. I=E2=80=99ve = built and rebuilt many since.=20 B-Performance: It used to be that synthetic benchmarks were quite useful = in determining performance as it applied to video post work. You pretty = much always needed the highest performance hardware you could get and = there wasn=E2=80=99t a whole lot of differentiation about tasks, as it = all sort of lifted with the general performance of the machine. You = could look at relative performance and extrapolate your value or = expected performance for the apps and work you did and make a decision = about value for money/ROI/Cost-benefit with some simple math. =20 Those days are over. That won=E2=80=99t work anymore. The trend for = nearly a decade is that PC performance gains have forked in multiple = directions: CPUs have added cores, and clock speed increases have crept = higher but very slowly. Due to thermals, you are often left with a = choice of more cores vs more clock speed. GPUs have introduced massive = parallelism tuned for specific compute loads but data has to be moved = from memory/fast CPU access over the bus to the GPU and back so that is = a factor in determining which types of =E2=80=9Cloads=E2=80=9D are best = suited to GPU compute. The problem is that synthetic benchmarks can be = designed to torture test a specific type of computing load that shows = maximized performance of a particular component but it has never been = less relevant to apply those to your expectations in the apps you = ACTUALLY USE to do post production work.=20 Therefore, the ONLY benchmarks that are relevant are the ones that are = done by testing the apps you ACTUALLY USE to determine a particular = component or configuration=E2=80=99s value to you. Here=E2=80=99s some = apps that I use and what I have found they need from a machine.=20 For example here=E2=80=99s some differing compute loads and what types = of PC hardware/config will serve it well.=20 Storage (applies to all): Everything wants fast storage and IO. = Splitting up storage between media and boot and cache, each optimized is = good. Storage/cacheing has become an issue too and managing the flow of = data and using high performance caching devices separate from both = system drive and media storage is key to optimizing. As you look at the = applications below AE: In daily use, largely still single threaded operations with dashes = of multithreading throughout, and a splash of GPU compute here and = there, particularly on plugins/effects. Today, this means favoring = higher clock speeds over core count on the CPU. Get as much RAM as you = can justify because AE and RAM previews will use it. Generally AE-only = artists don=E2=80=99t need tons of data storage, but what they have = should be fast. Often they are best served by something like a 9900k = system and a modest GPU from NVidia.=20 Note that one of the challenges of optimizing AE for multithreading is = that not every type of compute task lends itself well to parallelism. = Sometimes you have to wait for the result of one computation to use the = result of that to start the next computation. This same performance = optimization issue also affects other similar apps like Fusion.=20 Premiere: A little more balanced between CPU cores and clock speed and = GPU. Having said that Premiere still favors clock speed over massive = core count, can take advantage of Quicksync on newer Intel CPUs BTW, and = uses GPU but does not rely heavily on it and primarily processes color = and effects on GPU (with some exceptions). Premiere doesn=E2=80=99t = require quite as much RAM as AE, but I guess it doesn=E2=80=99t hurt. = Having said that Premiere seems to need an awful lot of compute hardware = thrown at it to smoothly handle media at 4k. By comparison FCPX (which I = don=E2=80=99t use because it=E2=80=99s Mac only) is way more optimized = and gets better performance from lesser hardware. I think there=E2=80=99s = a lot of room for improvement for Premiere here but it probably means a = rewrite. Encoding: h264 or now h265 encoding is massively parallel and really = shows off what a lot of cores can do. Currently CPU dominated we=E2=80=99r= e starting to see this moving to GPU options as well. If all you did all = day was encode stuff, go for core count and fast IO. However, for most = of us, encoding occupies only a few minutes per day compared to creative = work. Resolve: GPU dominated (for color page operations anyway). Here, CPU = performance matters but a mid-line CPU is probably adequate but what you = want are GPU compute units. The best units you can afford, plus more of = them. 2 or 3 GPUs scale really well with Resolve, but in my testing = I=E2=80=99ve found it best to keep them matched. I did some mismatched = testing with different gen GPUs and it=E2=80=99s pretty variable and = inefficient. Not that every little bit doesn=E2=80=99t help=E2=80=A6but = one card ends up waiting on the other to finish a task. PCI-E lanes = required for multi-GPU support push the user to go with higher level = platforms like X299.=20 Cinema 4D: When rendering, massive CPU core count is your friend. But = when modeling, key framing, animating etc a lot fo that is more single = threaded but obviously previews can be run OpenGL (etc) on the GPU. = Other renderers are GPU-dominant. 3D is not my forte so I=E2=80=99m = going to let others cover this. But I said all of that as a preface to make this point: You can choose = any one activity or app and build a kick-butt machine tuned specifically = to the requirements of that activity, and walk away with maximized ROI. = An AE-only machine is going to look quite different than a Resolve-only = machine, and again quite different from a C4D optimized machine. But = often we need to engage in a mix of activities and the choice about = whether to try to build the ultimate =E2=80=9Cdo it all=E2=80=9D = workstation ($$$$) vs separating the tasks is something we all have to = look at in light of our own mix of work. Anyway, when I sat down I had no idea I=E2=80=99d write ll that but = alas, the coffee was good and plentiful. Plus, when you really get into = this stuff there are just a lot of considerations to get your head = around. By no means did I write a definitive guide here (is there such a = thing?) and understand why Chris Zwar=E2=80=99s is over 10,000 words. I = look forward to it. Carey Dissmore > On Feb 11, 2019, at 6:33 AM, Byron Nash = wrote: >=20 > Puget really impressed me with the depth and detail of their hardware = analysis for very targeted demographics. It's nice to have someone = really understand what the difference is between editing, motion = graphics and GPU rendering.=20 >=20 > On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 11:52 PM Teddy Gage > wrote: > Sure thing Chris, feel free to reach me at teddygage@gmail.com = . Goes for anyone- always happy to consult = or chat hardware or software. Have also been doing a fair amount of VFX = supervising recently for a couple TV shows.=20 >=20 > On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 11:14 PM Chris Zwar > wrote: > Hi all, >=20 > I started researching performance last year, with a view to writing up = an article and some thoughts for the ProVideo Coalition. Currently I'm = about 50% of the way through my plan and I'm over 10,000 words so it's a = bit slow going. Even so, I was wanting to reach out to list members who = are especially interested and knowledgable on performance related = matters. >=20 > Teddy & Stephen were both on my list of people to approach for input = and this thread just reinforces that! Are you two able let me know the = best way to contact you off-list please? > And if there's anyone else who has strong knowledge or strong opinions = on performance/ components then let me know too. >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > -Chris >=20 >=20 > On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 at 07:18, Byron Nash > wrote: > Those are good thoughts Stephen and I'll keep that in mind going = forward. I am planning to use a Blackmagic card for video output but the = monitors I have to use right now are 8bit HD. I'm starting to get into = 4K VFX for films on my machine but most of the rest of the team is = building HD promos/mograph content. My only pet peeve with the BM cards = is when you have a 4K screen it won't downscale through the card and = just goes black.=20 >=20 > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 11:10 AM Stephen van Vuuren = > wrote: > > In regards to 10bit output an option not being discussed is using a = Blackmagic or Aja PCI card or device. These will give you the option of = 10bit YUV or RGB output (monitor dependent). 4K capable versions of = these are available for as little as $200. >=20 > =20 >=20 > I mentioned external card but you are not budgeting for the 4K 10-bit = display that you will need to see the output. >=20 > =20 >=20 > I have a $199 BM MiniMonitor 4K and it=E2=80=99s great going out to a = 50=E2=80=9D HDR TV). But that does not get you 4K 10-bit on your desktop = display or apps that don=E2=80=99t support that card. You have to have a = second monitor where as Quadro allows you to have 4K 10-bit on your main = desktop monitor. >=20 > =20 >=20 > If you only have room for on 4K 10-bit, a card plus additional monitor = is not an option. And even if you do, my setup I would rather always see = 10-bit as much as possible in all my work and catch issues. >=20 > =20 >=20 > As video moves to 10-bit and HDR in 4K, even for low-end, 10-bit is = going to be a bigger deal. >=20 > =20 >=20 > From: After Effects Mail List >=20 > Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 12:25 AM > To: After Effects Mail List > > Subject: Re: [AE] Feedback on Workstation components >=20 > =20 >=20 > If you=E2=80=99re talking about a budget system Quadro cards aren=E2=80=99= t even in the conversation (5k was mentioned). If one of the main uses = of the machine will be Redshift you=E2=80=99re better off buying the = fastest GTX or RTX card(s) you can afford. The RTX cards may end up = being a better choice in the near future, if Nvidia=E2=80=99s and = Redshift=E2=80=99s recent announcements are to be believed. >=20 > =20 >=20 > In regards to 10bit output an option not being discussed is using a = Blackmagic or Aja PCI card or device. These will give you the option of = 10bit YUV or RGB output (monitor dependent). 4K capable versions of = these are available for as little as $200. >=20 >=20 > Dennis Wilkins >=20 > =20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Feb 7, 2019, at 8:49 PM, Stephen van Vuuren = > wrote: >=20 > =20 >=20 > Steve, >=20 > =20 >=20 > That link is for 10-bit DirectX output which is for games and Direct X = apps =E2=80=93 not relevant to this discussion. Adobe and most other pro = post apps don=E2=80=99t use or support DirectX. And just because a = driver or monitor flags 10-bit does not mean there is actually 10-bits = happening. >=20 >=20 > Better info is here: = https://imagescience.com.au/knowledge/10-bit-output-support = > =20 >=20 > From: After Effects Mail List >=20 > Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 11:40 PM > To: After Effects Mail List > > Subject: Re: [AE] Feedback on Workstation components >=20 > =20 >=20 > 10bit display support is all over the place on mac. MBP 2016 is = driving a 24=E2=80=9D external HDMI monitor in 10bit will driving the = native display in 8bit. recent model imacs with 5K displays running in = 10bit.=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > you can get nV cards on win to run in 10bit. here is how to run nV or = AMD on win10 in 10bit = https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Setting-Graphics-Card-Software-= to-Display-10-bit-Output-1221/ = > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > S >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Feb 7, 2019, at 10:25 PM, Stephen van Vuuren = > wrote: >=20 > =20 >=20 > >>> Unless you NEED 10 bit color output (unlikely) do not get a = Quadro. They are intended for industrial CAD / CAM workflows and are = 1/10th as fast for rendering CUDA Redshift. They are intended for use = cases where you need extreme floating point precision, like designing = critical infrastructure. Nobody is using Quadros for Redshift / Octane.=20= >=20 > =20 >=20 > I disagree that 10-bit is =E2=80=9Cunlikely=E2=80=9D. It=E2=80=99s = more of a ignorance of benefits that an unlikely scenario. I get a lot = of pro colorist and post house delivering stuff with banding, too much = shadow noise and color/gamma problems that have obviously been graded in = 8-bit on typical 1000:1 panels. See it all the time.=20 >=20 >=20 > Same as I see people mixing on headphones or uncalibrated speakers and = charge pro prices for the service. The defense is always the same = =E2=80=9Clooks/sounds great here!=E2=80=9D. >=20 > =20 >=20 > GeForce cards cannot display video in Premiere or images in Photoshop = in 10-bit, period or most any other pro app. You have to have a monitor = card going to a separate, second monitor. That card or box + monitor for = a 4K setup is not cheap. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Quadro cards offer native 10-bit OS level support with Quadros and Mac = is now fully supported. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Most people think they do don=E2=80=99t need 10-bit output but end up = delivering work that looks bad in 10-bit, 12-bit and HDR environments or = displays with wider than the 8-bit (and 6-bit+dithering panels out = there). >=20 > =20 >=20 > DCP is 12-bit. Rec2020 is 10-bit as is all Netflix, Amazon etc. HDR> = Hell, YouTube HDR is = 10-bit.https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7126552?hl=3Den = > =20 >=20 > If you=E2=80=99re delivering 10-bit and while it used to be rare, = these days almost everything I deliver is 10 bit or higher. >=20 >=20 > So I just don=E2=80=99t take people mastering final projects for = professional deliver very seriously that don=E2=80=99t have a fully = 10-bit or higher workflow. >=20 >=20 > Quadro plus a good affordable HDR 4K 10-bit monitor is the same or = less money than a GeForce + 10-bit video output plus dedicated 4K = display and offers better drivers, more stability and more flexibility = (like Photoshop work). >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > From: After Effects Mail List >=20 > Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 2:04 PM > To: After Effects Mail List > > Subject: Re: [AE] Feedback on Workstation components >=20 > =20 >=20 > Thanks for the input. It has confirmed my intuition to stay away from = the Quadro and Xeon for this build. Looking at either 2x 2080's or 1x = 2080ti now. Don't have funds for 2 of those. :-(=20 >=20 > No need for 10bit output here. Mostly making HD TV promos on this = machine. >=20 > =20 >=20 > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 10:58 AM Teddy Gage > wrote: >=20 > okay I'm seeing a lot of mixed advice. The problem here is that there = is a major real-world consequence of getting the wrong type of processor = these days, and it is REALLY important to buy the right system for YOUR = workflow >=20 > =20 >=20 > The big points -=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > - Unless you NEED 10 bit color output (unlikely) do not get a quadro. = They are intended for industrial CAD / CAM workflows and are 1/10th as = fast for rendering CUDA Redshift. They are intended for use cases where = you need extreme floating point precision, like designing critical = infrastructure. Nobody is using Quadros for Redshift / Octane.=20 >=20 > - The same goes for Xeons. Do not get a xeon system. Many builders try = to sell you on xeons because they can make more markup on it. They are = extremely expensive and offer little to no performance benefits vs. i7 = or i9. This is basically due to A) lack of overclocking ability and B) = way more expensive ECC RAM required (not necessary). The large number of = cores means each core is slower than the equivalent i7/i9. AE and most = tasks in Cinema are still single-threaded. The exception is if you plan = on doing a lot of CPU rendering in Arnold (which is going GPU soon = anyway), or high end simulation work in houdini etc.=20 >=20 > - Basically - the more cores you have, the slower each core is, this = is based on thermal and manufacturing limitations. AMD TR chips are good = but the same applies - only necessary for pure multithreaded CPU tasks.=20= >=20 > - Currently, for future-proofing, the only GPU I'd look at right now = is the GTX 2080ti - but try to find the "blower" models and not the = "open fan" designs, as those tend to just push hot air around inside = your case.=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > I'm not going into a specific parts list but from what you're saying = I'd be looking at a system with an i9 chip with 8-12 cores, high = megahertz boost / OC abvility (4.2-5 Ghz) very good all in one liquid = cooling (a 360mm radiator is essential), and one or two GTX 2080ti's. = And yes, RAM prices have blown up and stayed there due to manufacturing = shortages, supposedly.=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > I am currently rocking a machine I built with the core i7 7900X, 4x = 1080ti, 128 GB RAM for similar workflows and it does great. I will say = avoid Asus motherboards for now, they can have issues >=20 > -Teddy=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > --=20 > _____________________________ > Teddy Gage > President > Shotgun Inc. > 360 VR | MOGRAPH | VFX > SHOTGUNPOST.COM > BKLYN NY 11215 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_42465EB1-699B-40D2-A4F9-8E9B0A5E1E23 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 A = few comments: 

Puget Systems REALLY gets it when it comes to addressing the = needs of our market. They have a model where they do a ton of research = and provide excellent support for their tested, configured system = designs. They share a lot of their data and findings on their website, = which benefits the community as a whole. They are uniquely positioned to = do this type of testing and I=E2=80=99m very thankful they share. For = the vast majority of people who do NOT have interest in building their = own systems, but nevertheless are realizing that a custom workstation is = truly the best path forward for their needs, I can=E2=80=99t think of a = better choice. 

Now onto the geek stuff, (which Puget already = knows):

A - Building PC: I=E2=80=99m inclined towards PC building = too, and have built many workstation machines. I built my first PC = around 2001 mostly for gaming and offloaded encoding/rendering but I = largely stuck with Mac for post production work until about 2012 when I = made the complete jump to primary post production on Windows = workstations. Teddy and I had a good chat on the phone back then just to = gut check my system architecture before pulling the trigger on a $6k box = build. I=E2=80=99ve built and rebuilt many since. 

B-Performance: It used = to be that synthetic benchmarks were quite useful in determining = performance as it applied to video post work. You pretty much always = needed the highest performance hardware you could get and there wasn=E2=80= =99t a whole lot of differentiation about tasks, as it all sort of = lifted with the general performance of the machine. You could look at = relative performance and extrapolate your value or expected performance = for the apps and work you did and make a decision about value for = money/ROI/Cost-benefit with some simple math.  

Those days are over. = That won=E2=80=99t work anymore. The trend for nearly a decade is that = PC performance gains have forked in multiple directions: CPUs have added = cores, and clock speed increases have crept higher but very slowly. Due = to thermals, you are often left with a choice of more cores vs more = clock speed. GPUs have introduced massive parallelism tuned for specific = compute loads but data has to be moved from memory/fast CPU access over = the bus to the GPU and back so that is a factor in determining which = types of =E2=80=9Cloads=E2=80=9D are best suited to GPU compute. The = problem is that synthetic benchmarks can be designed to torture test a = specific type of computing load that shows maximized performance of a = particular component but it has never been less relevant to apply those = to your expectations in the apps you ACTUALLY USE to do post production = work. 

Therefore, the ONLY benchmarks that are relevant are the ones = that are done by testing the apps you ACTUALLY USE to determine a = particular component or configuration=E2=80=99s value to you. Here=E2=80=99= s some apps that I use and what I have found they need from a = machine. 

For example here=E2=80=99s some differing compute loads and = what types of PC hardware/config will serve it well. 

Storage (applies to = all): Everything wants fast storage and IO. Splitting up storage between = media and boot and cache, each optimized is good. Storage/cacheing has = become an issue too and managing the flow of data and using high = performance caching devices separate from both system drive and media = storage is key to optimizing. As you look at the applications = below

AE: In = daily use, largely still single threaded operations with dashes of = multithreading throughout, and a splash of GPU compute here and there, = particularly on plugins/effects. Today, this means favoring higher clock = speeds over core count on the CPU. Get as much RAM as you can justify = because AE and RAM previews will use it. Generally AE-only artists = don=E2=80=99t need tons of data storage, but what they have should be = fast. Often they are best served by something like a 9900k system and a = modest GPU from NVidia. 
Note that one of the = challenges of optimizing AE for multithreading is that not every type of = compute task lends itself well to parallelism. Sometimes you have to = wait for the result of one computation to use the result of that to = start the next computation. This same performance optimization issue = also affects other similar apps like Fusion. 

Premiere: A little more = balanced between CPU cores and clock speed and GPU. Having said that = Premiere still favors clock speed over massive core count, can take = advantage of Quicksync on newer Intel CPUs BTW, and uses GPU but does = not rely heavily on it and primarily processes color and effects on GPU = (with some exceptions). Premiere doesn=E2=80=99t require quite as much = RAM as AE, but I guess it doesn=E2=80=99t hurt. Having said that = Premiere seems to need an awful lot of compute hardware thrown at it to = smoothly handle media at 4k. By comparison FCPX (which I don=E2=80=99t = use because it=E2=80=99s Mac only) is way more optimized and gets better = performance from lesser hardware. I think there=E2=80=99s a lot of room = for improvement for Premiere here but it probably means a = rewrite.

Encoding: h264 or now h265 encoding is massively parallel and = really shows off what a lot of cores can do. Currently CPU dominated = we=E2=80=99re starting to see this moving to GPU options as well. If all = you did all day was encode stuff, go for core count and fast IO. = However, for most of us, encoding occupies only a few minutes per day = compared to creative work.

Resolve: GPU dominated (for color page operations anyway). = Here, CPU performance matters but a mid-line CPU is probably adequate = but what you want are GPU compute units. The best units you can afford, = plus more of them. 2 or 3 GPUs scale really well with Resolve, but in my = testing I=E2=80=99ve found it best to keep them matched. I did some = mismatched testing with different gen GPUs and it=E2=80=99s pretty = variable and inefficient. Not that every little bit doesn=E2=80=99t = help=E2=80=A6but one card ends up waiting on the other to finish a task. = PCI-E lanes required for multi-GPU support push the user to go with = higher level platforms like X299. 

Cinema 4D: When rendering, massive CPU = core count is your friend. But when modeling, key framing, animating etc = a lot fo that is more single threaded but obviously previews can be run = OpenGL (etc) on the GPU. Other renderers are GPU-dominant. 3D is not my = forte so I=E2=80=99m going to let others cover this.

But I said all of that = as a preface to make this point: You can choose any one activity or app = and build a kick-butt machine tuned specifically to the requirements of = that activity, and walk away with maximized ROI. An AE-only machine is = going to look quite different than a Resolve-only machine, and again = quite different from a C4D optimized machine. But often we need to = engage in a mix of activities and the choice about whether to try to = build the ultimate =E2=80=9Cdo it all=E2=80=9D workstation ($$$$) vs = separating the tasks is something we all have to look at in light of our = own mix of work.

Anyway, when I sat down I had no idea I=E2=80=99d write ll = that but alas, the coffee was good and plentiful. Plus, when you really = get into this stuff there are just a lot of considerations to get your = head around. By no means did I write a definitive guide here (is there = such a thing?) and understand why Chris Zwar=E2=80=99s is over 10,000 = words. I look forward to it.

Carey Dissmore



On Feb 11, 2019, at 6:33 AM, Byron Nash <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

Puget really impressed me with the depth and detail of their = hardware analysis for very targeted demographics. It's nice to have = someone really understand what the difference is between editing, motion = graphics and GPU rendering. 

On Sun, Feb = 10, 2019 at 11:52 PM Teddy Gage <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:
Sure thing Chris, feel free to reach me at teddygage@gmail.com. Goes for anyone- always happy to = consult or chat hardware or software. Have also been doing a fair amount = of VFX supervising recently for a couple TV shows. 

On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 11:14 PM Chris Zwar <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:
Hi = all,

I started = researching performance last year, with a view to writing up an article = and some thoughts for the ProVideo Coalition.  Currently I'm about = 50% of the way through my plan and I'm over 10,000 words so it's a bit = slow going.  Even so, I was wanting to reach out to list members = who are especially interested and knowledgable on performance related = matters.

Teddy = & Stephen were both on my list of people to approach for input and = this thread just reinforces that! Are you two able let me know the best = way to contact you off-list please?
And if there's = anyone else who has strong knowledge or strong opinions on performance/ = components then let me know too.

Cheers,

-Chris


On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 at 07:18, Byron Nash = <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:
Those are = good thoughts Stephen and I'll keep that in mind going forward. I = am planning to use a Blackmagic card for video output but the monitors I = have to use right now are 8bit HD. I'm starting to get into 4K VFX for = films on my machine but most of the rest of the team is building HD = promos/mograph content. My only pet peeve with the BM cards is when you = have a 4K screen it won't downscale through the card and just goes = black. 

On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 11:10 AM Stephen = van Vuuren <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

> In regards to 10bit output an option not being = discussed is using a Blackmagic or Aja PCI card or device. These will = give you the option of 10bit YUV or RGB output (monitor dependent). 4K = capable versions of these are available for as little as $200.

 

I mentioned external card but you are not budgeting = for the 4K 10-bit display that you will need to see the output.

 

I have = a $199 BM MiniMonitor 4K and it=E2=80=99s great going out to a 50=E2=80=9D= HDR TV). But that does not get you 4K 10-bit on your desktop = display or apps that don=E2=80=99t support that card. You have to = have a second monitor where as Quadro allows you to have 4K 10-bit on = your main desktop monitor.

 

If you only have room for on 4K 10-bit, a card plus = additional monitor is not an option. And even if you do, my setup I = would rather always see 10-bit as much as possible in all my work and = catch issues.

 

As video moves to 10-bit and HDR in 4K, even for = low-end, 10-bit is going to be a bigger deal.

 

From: After Effects Mail List = <AE-List@media-motion.tv>
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 12:25 AM
To: After Effects Mail List <AE-List@media-motion.tv>
Subject: Re: [AE] Feedback on Workstation components

 

If you=E2=80=99re talking about a = budget system Quadro cards aren=E2=80=99t even in the conversation (5k = was mentioned). If one of the main uses of the machine will be Redshift = you=E2=80=99re better off buying the fastest GTX or RTX card(s) you can = afford. The RTX cards may end up being a better choice in the near future, if = Nvidia=E2=80=99s and Redshift=E2=80=99s recent announcements are to be = believed.

 

In regards to 10bit output an = option not being discussed is using a Blackmagic or Aja PCI card or = device. These will give you the option of 10bit YUV or RGB output = (monitor dependent). 4K capable versions of these are available for as = little as $200.


Dennis Wilkins

 



On Feb 7, 2019, at 8:49 PM, = Stephen van Vuuren <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

 

Steve,

 

That link is for 10-bit DirectX = output which is for games and Direct X apps =E2=80=93 not relevant to = this discussion. Adobe and most other pro post apps don=E2=80=99t use or = support DirectX. And just because a driver or monitor flags 10-bit does = not mean there is actually 10-bits happening.


Better info is here: https://imagescience.com.au/knowledge/10-bit-output-support

 

From: After Effects Mail List <AE-List@media-motion.tv> 
Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 11:40 PM
To: After Effects Mail List <AE-List@media-motion.tv>
Subject: Re: [AE] Feedback on Workstation components

 

10bit display support is all over = the place on mac. MBP 2016 is driving a 24=E2=80=9D external HDMI = monitor in 10bit will driving the native display in 8bit. recent model = imacs with 5K displays running in 10bit. 

 

you can get nV cards on win to = run in 10bit. here is how to run nV or AMD on win10 in 10bit  https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Setting-Graphics-Car= d-Software-to-Display-10-bit-Output-1221/

 

 

S




On Feb 7, 2019, at 10:25 PM, = Stephen van Vuuren <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

 

>>> Unless you NEED 10 = bit color output (unlikely) do not get a Quadro. They are intended for = industrial CAD / CAM workflows and are 1/10th as fast for rendering CUDA = Redshift. They are intended for use cases where you need extreme = floating point precision, like designing critical infrastructure. Nobody is = using Quadros for Redshift / Octane. 

 

I disagree that 10-bit is = =E2=80=9Cunlikely=E2=80=9D. It=E2=80=99s more of a ignorance of benefits = that an unlikely scenario. I get a lot of pro colorist and post house = delivering stuff with banding, too much shadow noise and color/gamma = problems that have obviously been graded in 8-bit on typical 1000:1 panels. See it all the = time. 


Same as I see people mixing on headphones or uncalibrated speakers and = charge pro prices for the service. The defense is always the same = =E2=80=9Clooks/sounds great here!=E2=80=9D.

 

GeForce cards cannot display = video in Premiere or images in Photoshop in 10-bit, period or most any = other pro app. You have to have a monitor card going to a separate, = second monitor. That card or box + monitor for a 4K setup is not = cheap.

 

Quadro cards offer native 10-bit = OS level support with Quadros and Mac is now fully supported.

 

Most people think they do don=E2=80= =99t need 10-bit output but end up delivering work that looks bad in = 10-bit, 12-bit and HDR environments or displays with wider than the = 8-bit (and 6-bit+dithering panels out there).

 

DCP is 12-bit. Rec2020 is 10-bit = as is all Netflix, Amazon etc. HDR> Hell, YouTube HDR is 10-bit.https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7126552?hl=3Den

 

If you=E2=80=99re delivering = 10-bit and while it used to be rare, these days almost everything I = deliver is 10 bit or higher.


So I just don=E2=80=99t take people mastering final projects for = professional deliver very seriously that don=E2=80=99t have a fully = 10-bit or higher workflow.


Quadro plus a good affordable HDR 4K 10-bit monitor is the same or less = money than a GeForce + 10-bit video output plus dedicated 4K display and = offers better drivers, more stability and more flexibility (like = Photoshop work).

 

 

From: After Effects Mail List <AE-List@media-motion.tv> 
Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 2:04 PM
To: After Effects Mail List <AE-List@media-motion.tv>
Subject: Re: [AE] Feedback on Workstation components

 

Thanks for the input. It has = confirmed my intuition to stay away from the Quadro and Xeon for this = build. Looking at either 2x 2080's or 1x 2080ti now. Don't have funds = for 2 of those. :-( 

No need for 10bit output here. = Mostly making HD TV promos on this machine.

 

On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 10:58 AM = Teddy Gage <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

okay I'm seeing a lot of mixed = advice. The problem here is that there is a major real-world consequence = of getting the wrong type of processor these days, and it is REALLY = important to buy the right system for YOUR workflow

 

The big points - 

 

- Unless you NEED 10 bit color = output (unlikely) do not get a quadro. They are intended for industrial = CAD / CAM workflows and are 1/10th as fast for rendering CUDA Redshift. = They are intended for use cases where you need extreme floating point precision, like designing critical infrastructure. Nobody is = using Quadros for Redshift / Octane. 

- The same goes for Xeons. Do not = get a xeon system. Many builders try to sell you on xeons because they = can make more markup on it. They are extremely expensive and offer = little to no performance benefits vs. i7 or i9. This is basically due to A) lack of overclocking ability and B) way more expensive ECC = RAM required (not necessary). The large number of cores means each core = is slower than the equivalent i7/i9. AE and most tasks in Cinema are = still single-threaded. The exception is if you plan on doing a lot of CPU rendering in Arnold (which is going GPU soon = anyway), or high end simulation work in houdini etc. 

- Basically - the more cores you = have, the slower each core is, this is based on thermal and = manufacturing limitations. AMD TR chips are good but the same applies - = only necessary for pure multithreaded CPU tasks. 

- Currently, for future-proofing, = the only GPU I'd look at right now is the GTX 2080ti - but try to find = the "blower" models and not the "open fan" designs, as those tend to = just push hot air around inside your case. 

 

I'm not going into a specific = parts list but from what you're saying I'd be looking at a system with = an i9 chip with 8-12 cores, high megahertz boost / OC abvility (4.2-5 = Ghz) very good all in one liquid cooling (a 360mm radiator is = essential), and one or two GTX 2080ti's. And yes, RAM prices have blown up and = stayed there due to manufacturing shortages, supposedly. 

 

I am currently rocking a machine = I built with the core i7 7900X, 4x 1080ti, 128 GB RAM for similar = workflows and it does great. I will say avoid Asus motherboards for now, = they can have issues

-Teddy 

 

--
_____________________________
Teddy Gage
President
Shotgun = Inc.
360 VR | MOGRAPH | = VFX
SHOTGUNPOST.COM
BKLYN NY 11215


= --Apple-Mail=_42465EB1-699B-40D2-A4F9-8E9B0A5E1E23--