Good older P4 mobo to base a video machine on?

Discussion in 'Amateur Video Production' started by James, Jun 19, 2006.

  1. James

    James Guest

    I want to put together a bit beefier system for doing video editing.

    However, it doesn't have to be the latest screaming system. With an eye
    toward budget mindedness, I'd be satisfied with something in the 2 gig
    processor speed range, and I want to go with one that uses 168 pin PC-133
    SDRAM since it can be had dirt cheap so I can fill it up (hopefully a gig or
    more) without breaking the bank, and will recognize drives over 137 gig
    without any add-on cards. Also 5 or 6 PCI slots would be great. I assume I'd
    be looking at a mid-level P4 board. I'm sure I'll go with WinXP Home as an
    O/S.

    Any suggestions for boards that fit this criteria? Will most likely be
    eBaying.

    Thanks
     
    James, Jun 19, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. For the price difference it doesn't make much sense to go with
    technology that's so old. Video editing is one of a relative few
    applications that greatly benefit from faster speeds. A used
    2.4GHz P4 Northwood, Intel i875 or i865-based motherboard
    (Abit IC7/IC7-G, Asus P4C800-E/P4P800 or similar) and
    some basic DDR400 memory will run rings around any older
    technology.
     
    Jack F. Twist, Jun 19, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. James

    James Guest


    Okay thanks. This is exactly the kind of input I'm looking for.
     
    James, Jun 19, 2006
    #3
  4. James

    Davey Boy 2 Guest

    Another word of warning - some newer applications (such as the later Adobe
    Premier Elements) will not run AT ALL on certain older processors. This is
    because these applications require somethng called the "SSE2 instruction
    set". My collegue got caught out like this and is in the position where he
    will have to replace his motherboard if he wants to use the older system for
    editing using Elements.

    Dave
     
    Davey Boy 2, Jun 20, 2006
    #4
  5. James

    Davey Boy 2 Guest

    Another word of warning - some newer applications (such as the later Adobe
    Found this on the Adobe web site...I don't know if this affects other
    vendors products.

    http://www.adobe.com/support/techdocs/332238.html
     
    Davey Boy 2, Jun 20, 2006
    #5
  6. I'd go with something newer. Dual core processors are becoming pretty much
    the standard. The P4 is a lame duck. Clock-for-clock, the P3 is faster!
    Intel's latest offerings confirm this - they have abandoned the P4 lineage
    and have resurrected the P3 for processors such as the Pentium D 8xx
    series - adding SSE2 support and other features. And they offer some
    serious cost benefits. (For laptops, the Pentium M running at 1.5GHz
    outperforms a P4 at 1.8GHz. The Pentium M is from the P3 lineage, too.)

    You can buy a dual core processor for $130 or so and overclock it to 4GHz.
    That's two fully-fledged 4GHz processors! See
    http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/10/dual_41_ghz_cores/ for more details.
    (To get the same performance from other lines of processors, just the
    processor could cost you more than the system described!)
     
    John F. Miller, Jun 20, 2006
    #6
  7. The exact same thing is true for P4 Northwoods, which are clock
    for clock faster than all of Intel's subsequent CPUs (including,
    incidentally, Conroe).
    P4's are perfectly SSE2 capable. Did you mean SSE3?
    Yeah. All he'll need is a power supply that can provide anywhere
    from 260W to 475W -- JUST FOR THE CPU -- high-end and
    expensive DDR2 memory that can handle substantial overclocking,
    and a watercooling rig that will just by itself cost hundreds of dollars:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/10/dual_41_ghz_cores/page14.html
     
    Jack F. Twist, Jun 20, 2006
    #7
  8. No - I meant that the P3 architecture was enhanced to include SSE2.
    The OP didn't really specify a price range. Tom's Hardware suggest you can
    build the system mentioned for less than $800, including cooling.

    The point I was trying to get across was that high performance can be had
    for low cost. Even without overclocking, a dual core D805 would outshine
    any secondhand single core P4.

    Intel CPUs with NetBurst give a significant performance penalty for
    intensive multimedia processing. Intel have finally dumped NetBurst and
    provided the necessary L2 cache.
     
    John F. Miller, Jun 20, 2006
    #8
  9. James

    Mr. Tapeguy Guest

    I am admittedly not an expert on PC compatibility but some of the most
    recent versions of popular software may not work on XP Home once you
    get past consumer-level stuff.

    What is your price range? I can give you a much better idea on a
    system if you can be more specific.

    Craig

    http://www.pro-tape.com
     
    Mr. Tapeguy, Jun 21, 2006
    #9
  10. James

    Mr. Tapeguy Guest

    I would agree with that. And to please my biggest fans I would also
    recommend looking at a Core Duo Mac Mini. It will run XP if you want
    to but it will also give you a chance to check out iMovie and possibly
    later a more advanced program.

    Regardless don't skimp too much. Video editing is very processor and
    graphics card-intensive and getting older gear may handicap you on
    working with current software and you can probably dig that up too but
    good luck in getting any help with it.

    Craig

    http://www.pro-tape.com
     
    Mr. Tapeguy, Jun 21, 2006
    #10
  11. James

    Mr. Tapeguy Guest


    I would agree with you if he's prepared to spend time tweaking the
    computer in addition to editing. For some that's desireable, others
    not. Overclocking can have consequences as well and it's not for
    everyone.

    Craig

    http://www.pro-tape.com
     
    Mr. Tapeguy, Jun 21, 2006
    #11
  12. James

    Mr. Tapeguy Guest

    To clarify: you can probably dig up older software

    Too-late-for-typing....

    Craig

    http://www.pro-tape.com
     
    Mr. Tapeguy, Jun 21, 2006
    #12
  13. Not recommended! A Mac running XP is not the same as a PC running XP that
    carries the Designed for Windows XP logo and uses hardware that passes the
    Windows Hardware Compatability Test.
    And this is why Windows certification is so critical....
     
    John F. Miller, Jun 21, 2006
    #13
  14. James

    J. Clarke Guest

    So how is an Intel chipset on a board that says "Apple" any different from
    the same Intel chipset on a board that says "ASUS"?
    If you believe the Microsoft party line.
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 21, 2006
    #14
  15. James

    olushola Guest

    So how is an Intel chipset on a board that says "Apple" any different from
    Exactly what I've heard at this music store who was selling the new Macs. They will run all XP software. He said
    the notebooks are a very good at music applications as they have separate video card which will significantly
    minimize audio latency problems. But then again, if one choose a PC with a separate video card instead of having it
    sharing memory, it will also accomplish the same.

    Olushola
     
    olushola, Jun 21, 2006
    #15
  16. James

    Mr. Tapeguy Guest

    I see your point although many MANY systems are custom-built - in fact
    that has always been a major strength of the PC market and a core
    advantage that many PC users do not want to give up. None of these
    systems, many of which will run better than some prefabricated budget
    brand name, are necessarily put through the compatibility test and
    besides, what's to say one of the new Macs would not pass the test?

    Craig

    http://www.pro-tape.com
     
    Mr. Tapeguy, Jun 22, 2006
    #16
  17. James

    Mr. Tapeguy Guest

    That is an important distinction between the Mac Minis & Macbooks as
    opposed to the Macbook Pro and towers Apple will ship, which of course
    means more $.

    Craig

    http://www.pro-tape.com
     
    Mr. Tapeguy, Jun 22, 2006
    #17
  18. James

    J. Clarke Guest

    The towers are still G5 machines, and would be lousy choices for running
    Windows applications--they do it with a soft emulator instead of running it
    natively.
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 22, 2006
    #18
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.