Inspiring

Question

Intel or AMD?

Forum|Forum|8 years ago
August 4, 2017
9 replies
55119 views

Hello!

I'm looking for some advice and thoughts on how Adobe Premiere Pro and After Affects perform with recent AMD processors compared to Intel processors. It was my understanding that in the past, Intel was the way to go -- AMD processors apparently lacked certain instruction sets that were useful in Premiere and After Affects?

However, in reading some recent threads on this hardware forum, I've gotten the impression that the AMD Ryzen processors -- while perhaps not quite as good as the best Intel processors -- are significantly better than previous generation AMD processors. Generally speaking, can the most recent AMD processors now be used with solid results in Premiere and After Affects? Or is Intel still the way to go?

If you have any general guidelines (or thoughts about the latest round of AMD and Intel processors that are in the process of being announced), I would appreciate it! Thanks!

Hardware or GPU

This topic has been closed for replies.

metalvinny

Participant

I've got an AMD Ryzen 1700x and I've had nothing but problems with Premiere and After Effects. Everything works fine on my machine EXCEPT those programs. When editing on two monitors, the display monitor just displays a white screen with no video playback. For the moment, I'm back to one monitor. An adobe engineer spent 2 hours remoting into the pc and could not figure out why. The workaround he discovered was to login to the system with the administrator user and not my user profile. That has since stopped working. Get intel.

gigeli82367597

Inspiring

It happens on Intel too, the two monitor setup is complicated, i had the problem of having to show the desktop ( click in bottom right corner button ) then display premiere so i could use the program.

Now i don't have this problem but i didn't changed Premiere, just drivers.

The rule with this editing software is if it works, don't change it, i'll stick with 2018 premiere until i finish everything, then i'll try new versions.

F

Fizzlefest

Inspiring

According to the system requirements for the October 2018 release, only Intel chips are supported? No more AMD?

"Intel® Intel 6^thGen or newer CPU"

Full list of system requirements...

Adobe Premiere Pro CC System Requirements

R

RjL190365

Legend

Actually, or an AMD Ryzen equivalent. Earlier AMD CPUs such as the FX series may not run Premiere Pro CC 2019 properly or at all.

E

emil tanem

Inspiring

Regarding HDD setup, I believe this is what you should aim for withing your budget:

OS and applications: M.2 ssd

cache: 2 or 3 regular ssd in raid 0.

media: 4 to 8 hdds in raid 0.

I’m using 8x3TB barracuda drives because thy are fast, but may be that todays 8TB are faster? Respons time is key here, not top speed.

* you will need backup: either double up number of drives and go with a redundancy raid setup, or keep all media on an extra set of extetnal hdds (what I do)

export hdd: yes, send your exports to another disc. any 130mb/s or more hdd will do. This isn’t necessary but it does give a very slight improvement in export speeds.

now this was a amd/intel thread and I’m still looking for an answer..

D

DavidPoulton

Participant

UPDATE: June 2018. as a current video producer that uses AMD, my advise is -stay away from AMD FX and AMD APU from 2016 and earlier because they are poorly optimized for content creation. Yes, you could get by if you are using A10+ or FX 8530+ with premiere CC 2014 or earlier, but if you want the latest CC, there are still utilization issues with the 1st edition Ryzen. my recommendation is to aim for a Ryzen 2,000 series CPU or APU 5 - 7 or the latest Thread ripper 1.5 edition. Or you could wait another year when they finalize Ryzen because by then AMD could surpass Intel. I currently use AMD A8 9600 (2016 APU) and it's terrible to work with.

agacharts15245011

Participant

IF CPU == intel THEN GoFast();

ELSE Lack();

K

KeelerJAuthor

Inspiring

On a different note, does anyone have guidelines for an ideal number of PCIe lanes offered by a processor? Every time I think I have a proper understanding of PCIe lanes, I read something else that confuses me. I'm looking to run a single graphics card (probably a GTX 1060 with 6GB of memory), and possibly/probably a Samsung M.2 drive and a sound card. How many PCIe lanes would I need for this?

Also, am I correct that some motherboards have chipsets that essentially give you extra PCIe lanes? Thanks!

Bill Gehrke

Inspiring

You would have 16-lanes for the GPU and 4-lanes for the M.2 card and I do not know about the sound card as most people on the forum do not use one, they just use the motherboard sound. I never have used one in my almost 20 years at this.

K

KeelerJAuthor

Inspiring

Thanks, Bill! So I would want at least 20 lanes if not more. I've read that the quality of motherboard sound has risen in recent years, so perhaps sound cards aren't really necessary now. However, I did install a modest sound card in a video editing computer several years ago (the motherboard was circa 2008), and the improvement in sound quality was impressive.

I

ingeborgdot

Inspiring

The Ryzen 7 is the best bang for the buck right now. Why would Puget systems test an over $1000 CPU against a 3 to 4 hundred dollar CPU? An overclocked Ryzen 7 will really do well against the i7 in it's price range and even better.

I just built 2 machines. One is an i7 7700 and the other is the Ryzen 7 1700X. I'm blown away by the Ryzen. They have done very well with this build for sure. The Ryzen will handle 4k very well and even better than a 7700k. You'll have to go up a step in intel line which will also jump a bunch in price to beat the Ryzen 7.

K

KeelerJAuthor

Inspiring

Thanks, ingeborgdot! The direct comparison of a Ryzen 7 1700x to an i7 7700 is helpful. What clock speed are you running on your Ryzen 7? I'm searching for a stable computer that will work hard for a long time to come, so it's unlikely that I would experiment with overclocking.

I

ingeborgdot

Inspiring

I have a slight OC. I am running at 3.8 but started with stock which was still almost as good. I know others have gone higher than 3.8 but I don' need anymore than that right now.

Trevor.Dennis

Community Expert

Puget Systems is a good place to read Premiere Pro specific hardware articles. So far they have tested the i9-7900X against Ryzen 7 1700X and 1800X, but I am holding out for some hands on with Threadripper, and more information on the other i9X chips. My gut tells me that X299 is still the way to go, but I have not seen a motherboard that really takes my fancy yet. With X399 ASRock has two boards in the Professional Gaming and TaiChai that have useful storage capabilities. So I am sitting on the fence with money burning a hole in my pocket, but I want to get this right.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CC-2017-1-2-CPU-Comparison-Skylake-X-Kaby-Lake-X-Broadwell-E-Kab…

K

KeelerJAuthor

Inspiring

Thanks, Trevor Dennis! I appreciate the link to the Puget Systems article. After reading that one, I found a similar article discussing how the different processors perform in After Effects and was impressed by the performance of the i7 7700K and 7740K. I see that these processors only support 64GB of RAM, but then that is also the case with the Ryzen 7s.

It appears that the 7700K and the 7740K fall short of the Ryzens and other processors when it comes to rendering previews and exporting files, though in my case I'm looking for solid performance with playback during editing and am less concerned with export times. Would you recommend a 7700K or a 7740K for someone planning to use Premiere Pro and After Affects primarily with 1080 HD?

Trevor.Dennis

Community Expert

KeelerJ wrote
Thanks, Trevor Dennis! I appreciate the link to the Puget Systems article. After reading that one, I found a similar article discussing how the different processors perform in After Effects and was impressed by the performance of the i7 7700K and 7740K. I see that these processors only support 64GB of RAM, but then that is also the case with the Ryzen 7s.

Good gracious. I knew the Kaby Lake X CPUs were compromised, but I didn't realise how badly. With 64Gb maximum memory, 16 PCIe lanes and the resulting restriction on storage options, I am not sure why anyone would pay $350 and upwards for an X299 motherboard? I've stepped back from reading every last article I can find, and have forgotten some of what I read, but I have a sort of intuitive veer towards X299 from some of the things I have read — I just can't remember what that was though. It's a bugger getting old.

So I am just going to stay sat on my fence until we have more information. That looks like it might be a longer wait than I was hoping with some of the i9X chips pushed back to October now. We should see the more interesting 7920X this month though. Meanwhile, the tech sites all put up Threadripper unboxing articles yesterday, with full reviews promised not to far away.

We have also heard that X399 can't boot from NVMe raid0, but I can't see that putting people off too much. Although I have not seen whether you can still boot from a single NVMe drive. I would certainly hope so.

AMD X399 Supports Bootable SATA RAID, But Not NVMe RAID

RoninEdits

Inspiring

many people are using amd ryzen just fine, so the old "intel only" rule is gone. right now its amd for value, intel for top performance. amd is still slightly slower at around 10-20% vs its intel counterpart, but often costs much less. off the shelf computers may not reflect those prices as intel plays dirty with pc vendors like hp and dell to undermine amd.

K

KeelerJAuthor

Inspiring

Thanks, RoninEdits! So generally speaking, a higher-end AMD Ryzen can be expected to perform solidly if not pushed with difficult 4K or higher projects? From what I'm reading, I get the impression that if you're working with 1080 HD, probably any decent Ryzen or i7 would handle the job?

RoninEdits

Inspiring

So generally speaking, a higher-end AMD Ryzen can be expected to perform solidly if not pushed with difficult 4K or higher projects?

yes. the various acticles on puget's site as trevor pointed out can help show specifics of what ryzen can handle.

I get the impression that if you're working with 1080 HD, probably any decent Ryzen or i7 would handle the job?

HD timelines in premiere and AE typically top out around 4 cpu cores. the amd ryzen 6 core cpu is a good budget and value option that will handle HD and some 4k. the amd ryzen 8 core would be better for 4k and could better handle background rendering. if you wanted an intel i7, you might wait a while till intel releases their 8th gen desktop lineup with 6 core cpu's (which previously topped at 4 core cpu's).

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded