intel i7 860 for video editing?

[pansertjald]

Hey guys.

So my dad would like to do some video editing. He only has a laptop with an i5 in it.

I still have my old i7 860. Would this still be fine enough for just a little video editing. Its some of our old summer vacation videos.

He really don't want to go out and buy new stuff, for a little video editing.

The old hardware is i7 860 with a corsair h80. MAXIMUS III FORMULA, 8 GB corsair Dominator, Gigabyte 580 GTX, Samsung evo 850 250 GB, 2x WD Green 500 GB, Corsair vs550W

[MrPaladinGuy]

Hey guys.

So my dad would like to do some video editing. He only has a laptop with an i5 in it.

I still have my old i7 860. Would this still be fine enough for just a little video editing. Its some of our old summer vacation videos.

He really don't want to go out and buy new stuff, for a little video editing.

The old hardware is i7 860 with a corsair h80. MAXIMUS III FORMULA, 8 GB corsair Dominator, Gigabyte 580 GTX, Samsung evo 850 250 GB, 2x WD Green 500 GB, Corsair vs550W

It's fine, as long as the software supports w/e OS he's using.

Technically anything's fine, it would just perform worse in regards to how long it takes to encode/transcode/render and software responsiveness.

[Afrospinach]

What do you mean enough? It is actually quite surprising how much slower those old processors are compared to today in spite of pretty incremental improvements. I cannot believe how badly my 3570k blasted my xeon w3570(hah) which is basically an i7 960 or there abouts, which was concurrent with the 860 architecture iirc when intel was still sort of figuring out their shit with sockets.

Point is you are going to get substantially better performance out of newer hardware, how critical is that? It is not like you will not be able to do this stuff on that machine. I still think my x58 platform is A ok, still capable, even if it does get shown up on loading screens etc.

[pansertjald]

We will give it a try and see how much the hyper threading will do

[Krush1m]

I had an i7 920 for 7 years and it still rendered/encoded fine, just took forever because it was an older/slower processor (OC'd @ 4.01 Ghz)

New stuff is always gooing to be better, but it'll be fine.

[pansertjald]

Waiting for some new parts for it. Need a new PSU and i went with a Bitfenix NEOS case and a Seagate FireCuda 1TB buffer: 64 MB so i REALLY hope that Fascinate is right about these new Hybrid drives. Im keeping the EVO 850 for myself

[Akainakali]

i REALLY hope that Fascinate is right about these new Hybrid drives. Im keeping the EVO 850 for myself

Depends on what it is you expect it to do. IF what you use it for fits well with how they work, they can be a significant improvement over an unenhanced HDD, but they are not equivalent to an SSD and have a number of noticeable limitations.

They have a small amount of Flash (usually about 8 gigs IIRC), so what they do is migrate the most frequently/recently used data to that flash "cache" and you'll get equivalent performance to an SSD but ONLY for the data in the cache. First time you read something, it's got to copy the data from the HDD portion to the flash portion and obviously that isn't going to happen any faster than at HDD speeds.

The biggest improvement for an SSD isn't actually the throughput (which doesn't matter as much as people tend to think it does), it's the essentially zero access time vs the mechanical process of spinning the disk into position, moving the head across the platter and rotating through the disk to the end of the data and possibly repeating the process multiple times if it's a fragmented file.

Obviously you aren't going to see that benefit from anything that isn't in the flash "cache".

They can help with write performance, because the computer can write to the flash "cache" and then it can be migrated on to the HDD portion at leisure.

They're decent as boot drives, because they can migrate the frequently used OS files to it and that can help a lot with boot times.

OTOH, if you're having to pump through files that are > 8gb and that are always different, you aren't going to see nearly as much benefit since you're going to swamp the flash "cache" and won't derive any benefit from a new file being present in the flash "cache".

I'd just google reviews on some of the hybrid drives, they can give you a better/more detailed breakdown. Short answer is they definitely have some advantages, but they aren't a replacement for an SSD.

[Flaks]

So I have that CPU in my desktop and wanted to upgrade my graphics card. I'm wondering if it'll be able to handle a gtx 960 or maybe an rx 460. From what I've been able to tell, the motherboard doesn't have the PCIe lanes or something to handle the newer gen cards or I'd go for a 1050 ti. Running a dell studio xps from 2009 which still runs pretty solid. Upgraded it once with a 450W power supply and a radeon 7770 back in 2012 but would love to keep it up to date. Will probably get some more RAM and an SSD in there if I can get some help on the GPU upgrade (if the PC is capable) from you guys.

[Krush1m]

So I have that CPU in my desktop and wanted to upgrade my graphics card. I'm wondering if it'll be able to handle a gtx 960 or maybe an rx 460. From what I've been able to tell, the motherboard doesn't have the PCIe lanes or something to handle the newer gen cards or I'd go for a 1050 ti. Running a dell studio xps from 2009 which still runs pretty solid. Upgraded it once with a 450W power supply and a radeon 7770 back in 2012 but would love to keep it up to date. Will probably get some more RAM and an SSD in there if I can get some help on the GPU upgrade (if the PC is capable) from you guys.

I had a GTX980 on my i7 920, although it was overclocked, so it wasn't a huge bottleneck. 960/480 should be fine, depending on resolution, you probably won't see it.

[Flaks]

I had a GTX980 on my i7 920, although it was overclocked, so it wasn't a huge bottleneck. 960/480 should be fine, depending on resolution, you probably won't see it.

Do you if there's any possibility of a 1050ti working with it? I haven't been able to find anything conclusive about it and would love a current gen card at a cheap price.

[Akainakali]

So I have that CPU in my desktop and wanted to upgrade my graphics card. I'm wondering if it'll be able to handle a gtx 960 or maybe an rx 460. From what I've been able to tell, the motherboard doesn't have the PCIe lanes or something to handle the newer gen cards or I'd go for a 1050 ti. Running a dell studio xps from 2009 which still runs pretty solid. Upgraded it once with a 450W power supply and a radeon 7770 back in 2012 but would love to keep it up to date. Will probably get some more RAM and an SSD in there if I can get some help on the GPU upgrade (if the PC is capable) from you guys.

Basically you'd have to have a computer without expansion slots for it to not be able to take a new graphics card. The PCIe lanes available are determined by the CPU and they've all had had at least x16 lanes for as far back as I can recall.

However, a lot of "big name" computers (Dell, HP, etc...) do use non-standard cases/layouts that might have very limited/no space for a graphics card and/or an inadequate PSU for a graphics card.

Even if your computer doesn't support the current PCIe standard (PCIe 3), it's backwards compatible. It will just be limited to what the bandwidth is for that version and testing has shown that you have to get down to a REALLY narrow pipe before it is a substantial performance hit.

One of the advantages to a low end card like the 1050ti, is that it doesn't need more power than the PCIe slot can deliver (75w) and if you've upgraded the PSU to a 450, you should have more than sufficient power for a card like that. So it's basically a question of IF you have space and obviously you've had a GPU you upgraded with previously.

[Flaks]

Basically you'd have to have a computer without expansion slots for it to not be able to take a new graphics card. The PCIe lanes available are determined by the CPU and they've all had had at least x16 lanes for as far back as I can recall.

However, a lot of "big name" computers (Dell, HP, etc...) do use non-standard cases/layouts that might have very limited/no space for a graphics card and/or an inadequate PSU for a graphics card.

Even if your computer doesn't support the current PCIe standard (PCIe 3), it's backwards compatible. It will just be limited to what the bandwidth is for that version and testing has shown that you have to get down to a REALLY narrow pipe before it is a substantial performance hit.

One of the advantages to a low end card like the 1050ti, is that it doesn't need more power than the PCIe slot can deliver (75w) and if you've upgraded the PSU to a 450, you should have more than sufficient power for a card like that. So it's basically a question of IF you have space and obviously you've had a GPU you upgraded with previously.

The 7770 is bigger than the 1050 ti so it should fix. It's good to know that the pcie lanes are backwards compatibile as mine might be pcie 1 even. I may even consider upgrading my CPU but don't know the last thing about how old/cheap I can go; all I know about is the sky and kaby lake versions but have heard that even an i5 2500 would be sufficient. Thanks for the help.

Also don't know the last thing about upgrading ram and limiting factors. I have 2x 4GB in the computer right now. Guessing I'll have to pick up 2x 8GB as I don't see slots for 1x 8GB along with the 2x 4GB I already have. Last thing I'm definitely getting is an SSD in there along with the HDD it already has. Should be easy enough.

[Akainakali]

The 7770 is bigger than the 1050 ti so it should fix. It's good to know that the pcie lanes are backwards compatibile as mine might be pcie 1 even. I may even consider upgrading my CPU but don't know the last thing about how old/cheap I can go; all I know about is the sky and kaby lake versions but have heard that even an i5 2500 would be sufficient. Thanks for the help.

Also don't know the last thing about upgrading ram and limiting factors. I have 2x 4GB in the computer right now. Guessing I'll have to pick up 2x 8GB as I don't see slots for 1x 8GB along with the 2x 4GB I already have. Last thing I'm definitely getting is an SSD in there along with the HDD it already has. Should be easy enough.

If you are talking about doing all this you are probably basically better off building a new computer from scratch. It probably isn't going to be all that much more expensive and you'll have a much better system.

Odds are you can't replace the motherboard since the "big name" computers vendors often have them custom designed for that particular case.

Your CPU, you can probably find an upgrade for on ebay. However for a system that old, you're probably going to pay far more than it would be worth, simply because most of the people who are upgrading a system that old CAN'T get a new system/chip.

It probably uses DDR3 ram which is easily available enough. Memory is almost always installed in pairs or more and low end systems often have a reduced/minimum number of slots. So yes you'd have to get 2 x 8gb dimms.

Check your case first, some small "business" type computers may have enough room for only 1 drive, though it's more common for there to be room for more.

[Afrospinach]

Your CPU, you can probably find an upgrade for on ebay. However for a system that old, you're probably going to pay far more than it would be worth, simply because most of the people who are upgrading a system that old CAN'T get a new system/chip.

They are also all overclockable since you can crank the base clock. Not worth spending a cent on a new CPU since they all also overclock similarly.

[Akainakali]

They are also all overclockable since you can crank the base clock. Not worth spending a cent on a new CPU since they all also overclock similarly.

I'm not quite sure what your point is there, but if it's what I think it is, namely that the CPUs when overclocked perform similarly. I'd say you're mostly right. However the computer in question is from 2009. So it well predates the sandy bridge/Ivy bridge chips which are the reference point beyond which the performance stared to stagnate. So the OP will probably see a significant improvement in performance. It's not like the prior to current gen CPUs are dirt cheap in comparison to the latest.

My point there was that people looking for an upgraded CPU for a system/socket that old, usually have some reason why they can't use a newer/current system and have to have whatever generation CPU that the old computer had. So the prices on them tend to be at least somewhat inflated.

[Afrospinach]

Sorry, should clarify - not worth spending a cent on a new CPU for that platform as they all tend to reach the same clocks even just using the base clock.

A new CPU for a better platform? Worth considering but like I said earlier is it something he needs as it is a bigger investment.

I had a big long post but you already said it all in the meantime, I guess that bit no longer made sense lol.

[Flaks]

Sorry, should clarify - not worth spending a cent on a new CPU for that platform as they all tend to reach the same clocks even just using the base clock.

A new CPU for a better platform? Worth considering but like I said earlier is it something he needs as it is a bigger investment.

I had a big long post but you already said it all in the meantime, I guess that bit no longer made sense lol.

No CPU, gotcha. How about DDR4 RAM? Wouldn't mind better clock speeds on it as from what I've read, higher mhz there translates to quicker access on cache memory which equals marginally better frames. Would it be compatible with a computer that came stock with DDR3? Also, which one would you recommend? I went to PC part picker and found the team black DDR4 2400 mhz 2x 8GB for $95 and a 1050 TI from it for $120.

I've opened it up once before to upgrade the GPU, PSU so I know the inner workings of it a bit but I'll have to check again for hard drive space. Even if it doesn't have enough room for an extra drive I think I'll change it to a 512 GB Samsung 850 EVO as long as everything carries over from my current hard dive. I don't generally need too much space I back things up on an external HDD.

If I could get all 3 parts for under $300 it would be amazing but $350 would be fine. I know that between the SSD going for $180 it'd be tough so let me know if you would suggest something comparable. I've read good things about Samsung SSDs so that's why I picked that one.

[Afrospinach]

No CPU, gotcha. How about DDR4 RAM?

DDR4 ram is a different standard, does not fit on the 860 board. You seem pretty keen on spending money on this computer, I suggest you get someone to quote you a budget build for some perspective because honestly you are primed to nickel and dime your way into new system territory. I think the 860 is still capable but it will get absolutely hosed by current gen stuff, you don't want to get ram here, cpu there only to find that you are a few bucks shy of a ryzen 1600 or something.

[Flaks]

DDR4 ram is a different standard, does not fit on the 860 board. You seem pretty keen on spending money on this computer, I suggest you get someone to quote you a budget build for some perspective because honestly you are primed to nickel and dime your way into new system territory. I think the 860 is still capable but it will get absolutely hosed by current gen stuff, you don't want to get ram here, cpu there only to find that you are a few bucks shy of a ryzen 1600 or something.

Was just curious. I don't mind saving money so I hear ya. I mean, I'm willing to cut corners on the above mentioned things and would love to bring it down below $200 but I don't know how feasible it is for those 3 components. Smaller SSD would be ok and I'm definitely wait it out since I already have a laptop for most of my needs. I guess since the question was centered around things working with the i7 860 I'm not really looking to upgrade it; was just tossing out some ideas.

[Akainakali]

There really isn't any major advantage to going with DDR4 ram vs DDR3. Your comments about the memory speed affecting things are relevant to the Ryzen chips, but not the intel.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8959/d...ta-and-crucial

The reason for DDR4 is basically that DDR3 has hit it's limits and DDR4 is designed with the next few years in mind. So there's no significant advantage to going with it currently.

In most cases the memory speed/performance is a fairly negligible factor regardless.