Hardware for 4K video editing

>>59721954
>Not waiting for the next gen Nvidia
>Not getting Zen

>>59722007
the Ti just came out, I'd have to wait another 6 months

Zen?

>>59722007
obligatory Ryzen waitfag in every fucking thread

File: HandBrake.png (25KB, 1299x818px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 1299x818px

It's good. Just remember to get the fastest possible RAM your budget allows.
Creative tools love fast RAM.

>>59721954
Looks good m8.
>>59722313
This too though, aim high.

>>59722046
>Zen waitfag
1800x is already out and beats the 6900k at nearly everything

>be rich fag
>gtx 1080 sold out
>buy gtx 1070
>1080 in stock, buy it
>throw away 1070
>months later
>gtx 1080 ti comes out, but it
>throw away 1080

>>59721954
You want Ryzen and shitloads of RAM.

Xeon over i7 for Video editing

>>59721954
Why would you overpay for i7-6900 so much when you can just get Ryzen 1700???

>>59722740
wasteful

>>59722313
>>59722449
thanks m8s
Is this overkill?

G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C18Q-32GTZSW

Also, I was planning to run Windows 7 Ultimate (allows up to 192gb of ram). I'll probably start with a pirated version. Do you foresee any issues with that?

I know this is about hardware but has anyone managed to get Vegas looking decent on 4k? The scaling is terrible.

>>59721954
>1080 ti
Are you doing 3d? If it's video, even HD, a 3d accelerator isn't going to help. Put it towards drive space since HD video needs tons.

(I'd put it toward memory and more drives, if it's only for video, if you game too then have at it)

>>59722855
I dunno, I've never really trusted amd. They seem less reliable. I want something that's gonna last 6-7 years and be competitive for 2-3 years. I do some scientific computing too (C++, gurobi) and almost everyone I've taked to in that community recommends intel

>>59721954
>video editing
Definitely get a Ryzen 1800x, better performance at a lower cost
Only problem is that a nice AM4 motherboard is kinda pricy

And possibly look into workstation cards over gaming cards, something like a new quadro.
If you're going 4k go with big screen size as your first priority, you don't need fancy features other than resolution, size and image accuracy
Same for any professional work really. One of my coworkers bought 4 fancy 1080p screens at 120hz, some weird sync thing, looks like gamer aids, and they benefit him in no ways over another guys cheap 4k tv. Simpler and has a very simple workspace, instead of managing tool paletes and loads of reference, the work order, other instances of autoCad and shit on different small screens, it all fits on one big unscaled 40" tv
We're all draftsmen by the way.

File: 213894172394.jpg (50KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 300x300px

>>59721954
>i7-6900K

>>59721954
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/h9nDXH

>implying you need gpu for video editing
>skimping out on the monitor

>>59723012
Ryzen is 300$ and beats intel 6900K in literally everything. But w.e its your money.

>>59722924
is your source even native 4k?

when will this be available? I'm tired of fucking waiting!
http://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=11G-P4-6696-KR

>>59721954
i encode chinese cartoons everyday.
you don't need 1080ti.
in fact you can just use onboard graphics

>>59723012
I've used AMD and Intel for different things for a long time. I've never had a chip fail me in either way from either of them, aside a faulty i5 I have downstairs. Only stable with a certain motherboard, anything else seems to BSOD. At the moment for what you're describing, a 1700X with good cooling and some fast ram would beat the Intel... but go with what you feel comfortable with. They'll both do the job.

>>59723194

If you're doing actual video editing (and just doing shitty reencodes of shows or YouTube stuff) then having a GPU helps in leaps and bounds. All the legit editing software uses the GPU for rendering.

>>59722924
>Still using Vegas for 4k

Lol