What graphics card do you use in self-build pc's? Also, Intel vs AMD (non urgent)

This is in no way an urgent post - I'm simply planning ahead - in fact, Summer of 2016.

Recently, my pc blew up and the shop where I bought the pc was pretty much useless - even thought it was all under guarantee. It's made me rue the kit I have now. I like to have technology I can trust and have confidence in.

Now I'm planning on another new pc self-build and to use this current pc as a backup in case of disaster.


For my 'tog work, I use mainly Adobe CC and ProShow.

I think by May 2016 I will have around £1300 to spend on a new self-build pc. I have a number of high-end parts already which will be reused.

I understand that by Summer 2016 there will be motherboards with multiple M.2/U.2 PCI/E storage - that's blinking fast hard drive storage to the un-initiated. I'm intending to go for 4K, multiple SSD, AMD Octo-core with max RAM and near max M.2/U.2 storage for OS/Adobe CC/Scratch disk --- and RAID 0/10 if it turns out there's an appreciable performance increase (ie >20% - which at present I'm very much doubting.)



With that in mind, (even if the above went over your head), I'm wondering what graphics card other people here have invested their hard-earned cash in?



I do understand the inter-play and trade-off between cpu and gpu..... I'm just wondering what sort of priority/expense others have put into a gfx card?


Additionally, and importantly, has anyone preferred Intel over AMD because of Adobe CC?


I will also be investing time and money in improving my camera skills. After all, that is the foundation upon which all this fancy pc-do-goodery is based on.


Thank you enormously for reading me. It's nice to share these concerns.
Kevin

My last build was over 7 years ago - dual quad core Xeon. Still going strong. In the ensuing years I have been upgrading HDD, from 160GB initially to 2TB now. I have 6 HDD of various sizes.

Initially I used Nvidia graphics card, but soon change to ATI 6800 series, as there was a lot of software problems. Later I acquired another ATI - 5400 series initially as a backup, but lately as an additional card (I have 3 monitors).

If you are going to build your own PC and want stable hardware, then I suggest Xeon based MB, as these are server grade, designed to work 24x7 for decades. Here is what I would assemble today
. Dual Hex/Oct Xeon MB with at least 8 RAM slots (mine has 16). There is no need to go in for expensive higher clocked processors as parallel processing of many cores will speed up the tasks, of course if the software supports it. For RAW processing, I use Nikon Capture NX-D which uses all available cores. For Satellite Image processing I write my own parallel code.
. Two ATI graphics cards
. 16-64 GB RAM (I have 8). Depending on the MB and memory controller, you will need to have either sets of two for 2-way interleaved and sets of 4 for 4-way interleaved memory access. Again getting slower ECC RAM is better option than having expensive higher speed RAM with only parity check.
. 1000 to 1200W PS. The current graphics cards consume a lot of power, so it is better to be prepared. In my case I have 1000W. I have monitored the input power and found that the modern PS are quite efficient and if the system used 500W, the input is rarely more than 700. With three monitors and 2 graphics cards I peak at 800W in GPU intensive processes.
. 1 or 2 SSD, and 1 2TB HDD in the system for OS, scratch files and local storage. For large storage I would use an external RAID array or 4-16 HDD depending on my requirement. This is better than local storage, as you can access well designed storage on your local network, no need for the computer to be on. In my case as my son and I work from home access to secured storage all the time over the home network would be a definite advantage. Another plus point is that the storage is now independent of the computer, so it can be upgraded and/or modified with ease.

Though I have not used RAID personally, but in corporate environment, using RAID 10 (0 +1), or if added redundancy is required RAID 10+10 gives the ideal performance boost with redundancy. If you invest in dedicated RAID cards (and better still stand alone REID box), the storage will normally be OS proof.

One thing I forgot to mention is, that unless you are heavily into games (which use GPU in graphics cards extensively), or do a lot of GPU intensive processing - 3-D graphics shading/modelling, there is very little to be gained by buying top-of-the-end cards. In normal 2-D work, both my cards the ATI 6800 and 5400 refresh HD display at the same speed, nor does any task slow down due to slower graphics card. Yes when I tested some 3-D games, the difference was there, the image refresh in the monitor connected to 5400 was much slower than that connected to 6800. The downside to faster cards is not only the price but a bit increase in power consumption - you will need better PS and better cooling.

Kevin67 said:

With that in mind, (even if the above went over your head), I'm wondering what graphics card other people here have invested their hard-earned cash in?

Click to expand...

Consider the GeForce GTX 760. Excellent card that will crush PS CC but won't crush your budget. Assumes you won't be doing heavy duty video editing. If you will be, and ONLY if you will be, should you consider something like the GeForce GTX 690.
....

Thanks for that, Paul. I'll do some extensive reading with that in mind. (As it happens I will also be doing some video editing.)

I recently put together a modest i5 box and fitted a Quadro K600. And, yes, I am aware of the controversy / feelings regarding the pricing vs. performance of the Quadros compared to nVidia's other offerings but

1. I'm gambling that 10 bit monitors will become affordable in the next 18 months to 2 years, and

2. it was only £85, new & delivered, from eBay.

Thanks, Mark. That gives me lots of confidence to wait a while (even though tech is always moving on....)

Presently I have a Quadro K2000D.

My rising concerns are processing 4K video - even though I won't do it often, I'd like to buy something that once built, stays that way for a few years. Perhaps surprisingly I hate technology but you just can't get away from it these days... I'm not a guy that likes to keep fiddling with the base unit, unlike a few people I know who just can't manage to even close the case once in a while!

Thanks again!

Kevin67 said:

Thanks, Mark. That gives me lots of confidence to wait a while (even though tech is always moving on....)

Presently I have a Quadro K2000D.

My rising concerns are processing 4K video - even though I won't do it often, I'd like to buy something that once built, stays that way for a few years. Perhaps surprisingly I hate technology but you just can't get away from it these days... I'm not a guy that likes to keep fiddling with the base unit, unlike a few people I know who just can't manage to even close the case once in a while!

Thanks again!

Click to expand...

In case you want a long lasting system use Xeons instead of I7.

4K video will normally require at least 10 times the processing power compared to HD (or that much longer), and if the frame rate is higher so much more (or so much longer). And then it all depends on whether video processing will take full advantage of multi core architecture and whether it will use integer or FP (floating point) math. If later then you need FP unit which I think is missing in the second unit of the processor. What that means is if there are 4 cores, then there are 4 processors, but there may also be 4 more integer units that can do processing - 8 in all, but they will not do FP. In case the software can use all the cores efficiently, say 80% then it will be wiser to go for high throughput Xeons as dual Xeon MB are available easily, while dual Core I7 are a rarity.

Another good to have option in an MB is to have lots of RAM slots. That will enable easy addition of RAM, rather than discarding lower capacity ones for higher capacity ones. * slots is a good number as you can easily start with 2 DIMMS of 4GB each and then add 2, 4 or 6 DIMMS giving you a total of 8x4= 32GB. My MB has 16 slots so I can achieve 32GB with 2GB DIMMS.

Here is an interesting article that deals with 4K video processing requirements.
Editing in 4K: Minimum System Requirements | Videomaker.com
Video Processing

Thank you, Aroy. That is a stunning reply and you have set my head straight on this matter.

I'm going to do quite some research based on the (new)info I have acquired from you. Major, major thanks.

I'm only sorry that my short reply cannot convey my deep gratitude for your time and effort.

Later in the New Year, I will update this with my planned specs.

Kevin

(e2a: I also meant to add that I don't do gaming.)

(e2a: thanks, Mods, for the extended Edit time! Wow! What a fight between dual cpu xeon mobos and i7's! I'm still leaning towards dual xeons for reliability.... this is going to take some wading through!

Post below: I'll check this out now! - thanks!

aroy said:

Here is an interesting article that deals with 4K video processing requirements.
Editing in 4K: Minimum System Requirements | Videomaker.com
Video Processing

Click to expand...

You're right, that is an interesting article and, surprisingly, it also gives a shopping list of exactly what to buy. The only problem is the cost. Looks like I'll be shooting stills and HD video for a little while yet.

I've just read the article and very interesting it is, too.

So, as I'm mainly doing offline editing, I know which way to swing. Although I suspect, the truth of it to be told, is there isn't really much difference in it.

I like speed (who doesn't?), but you know, maybe I'll be glad of the 'enforced' break from the pc (maybe a coffee?) while it's doing it's rendering.

I think while I've been very disappointed in the guarantee service, I still have a great base unit and I'm glad of that. When Summer '16 come's along, with a raft of new mobo's, gpu's and cpu's - I will take another look. The main thrust has to be quality components that can migrate to newer systems as money and opportunity allows. Without exception, everybody's comments have been seriously valuable.

I also shouldn't take my eye off the fact that no amount of techno-wizardry can surmount stupidity 12" behind the lens itself. ;-)

Major, major thanks to you all. What a great community you are (truly).

Kevin

(e2a: I forgot, the original outlay - while tough - is not so bad when you consider the lifespan of the base unit. Plus, factoring in items that are still useful when upgrading/migrating later.)

Photoshop CC / Lightroom can made use of the GPU but is very picky about which one is in your computer. If you turn GPU accelerator on in Adobe CC and the card is not supported then CC will crash anytime you try to do just about anything so if you are building then read the list below and buy a compatible card to start with.

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cc-gpu-card-faq.html

Super. Thank you. I'll save that page to my pc.

I'm another user/builder of a a dual Xeon workstation. I'm not doing HD video editing so my machine may be a bit dated for that purpose, but I would certainly have to say that you can't go wrong with a dual Xeon workstation based platform with LOTS of RAM. I'm using a mere 24 GB of RAM and honestly I've never seen so much as 10 GB actually in use at once. It's really just about an unstoppable machine at my current level of editing. Oh, and with 5.1 TB of disk storage, I don't feel like I'm short on storage.

As for graphics cards, just pick the highest Nvidia card you care to spend money for which meets your 4K video requirement and you'll be good to go.

Thanks for that - sharing your experience with a dual Xeon. It's incredibly comforting to know it was the right decision for you - and leads me further into thinking it will be very much so in my case, I believe.

I share your sentiments exactly about the gfx card.

A super thank you for your time to reply.