Maximum quality DaVinci Resolve 14 system build?

Now Resolve 14 is accelerated, could ask what system builds are needed that will I've you real time highest quality bit depth and data rate realtime 4.6kp50 or 8kp50 Red workflows?

Something that goes along with the above question, is the Mac Pro all you need, or is a power book all you need?

I don't even want to fork out for a Mac Pro, let alone a $20k-$30k system. Actually, we are expecting a beefed up IMac before a new MacPro, so how would the current top IMac go, to give an idea of something maybe half as good? Also, how would a AMD 32 core Napels server chip go, or in 4k mini footage, a new APU?

I don't know if software manufacturers have regularly figured out that their potential customers want to save on their systems and still use their next camera in 3 years time (meaning to be 8k ready).
A lot of low end people would have to choose lesser software, camera or system spend to compromise to run software that is not optimised, maybe Resolve and BM cameras can cleanup here.
Thanks

I am going to go out on a whim here and first say that if you think 8K in 3 years is realistic.. well.. who knows for sure, but I doubt it. I do realize they are pushing hard for 8K movies, but I think we are a good 8 years away before we start to see 8K TVs/projectors hitting the shelves at reasonable prices. That doesnt mean 8K cinema projectors that costs a small fortune wont be available soon, or there wont be a reason to use 8K cameras now. I can already see shooting/offering 8K stock footage... assuming internet speeds multiply by at least 10x in the next year or so.. which in the USA wont be happening anytime soon.

As for hardware... even the yet unknown but announced 2018 Mac Pro wont touch what you can get on a PC right now in laptop or desktop form. I recently purchased a $2500 Sager NP9872 laptop that is fitted with NVMe SSD drives, 64GB RAM, 17" HD (4K became available right after I bought it) 120Hz screen, i76700K with a single 1070 gpu.. but for about $4K I could have gone with the dual 1080s and bigger drives. My point though.. while it is not nearly as slim/portable as a Mac.. the performance and memory make it well worth the added weight, especially since most of the time it sits stationary to me is well worth it.

I am really looking forward to seeing what the AMD 16core cpu will do with a couple Vegas or Titans for editors.. I suspect near real time 4K RAW capabilities with that sort of hardware.

Maximum quality? I would say a 22-core Linux machine with 128GB of RAM plus 8 Quadro P8000s (in an expansion chassis) should do it. I think with panels, you'd be looking at roughly $60K + i/o, storage, monitoring, and the room itself. There are quite a few rooms like this in LA doing major A features right now.

I think you can do quite a bit with 2 GPUs and a more modest system. In truth, there are some 8GPU systems around town that still can't do real-time 4K playback once you drop in several OFX plug-ins.

Oh, let's see. That company that does the chips for action cams and technology for the big brands, have had uhd ready low cost camera chips for a couple of years. I'm not much fussed on filming 8k myself, but it down converts, ideally, to better 4k then 4k Bayer, and is great for stills extraction in wedding photography.

They are aiming 8k sets in 2020, and for photography they needed that yesterday. It is a marketing selling point, and the next one.

I'm specifically talking about requirements using the now much faster resolve 14, rather than the existing slow resolve the setups you are targeting to work with.

So, using new 10x faster resolve 14, how does this shift down the system requirements for that footage spec in reality? I doubt it will be as smooth as 10x in general. So, Marc, that mean one Quadro, or two?

I would build the most powerful machine you can afford. I spend several hours yesterday running all kinds of media through v14.

On my system I don't see any speed improvement with UHD/30 h.264 material. There are speed improvements using 1080/30/60/120 h.264 material for me.

System Specs:
Windows 10 Pro Creator Update
All SSD's
32Gigs Ram (12 Gigs allotted to Resolve)
i7-4770 3.4GHz
GTX 1060 6GB
2 UHD LG Monitors

I'm specifically talking about requirements using the now much faster resolve 14, rather than the existing slow resolve the setups you are targeting to work with.

So, using new 10x faster resolve 14, how does this shift down the system requirements for that footage spec in reality? I doubt it will be as smooth as 10x in general. So, Marc, that mean one Quadro, or two?

I'm also hopeful 14 10X performance claims will reduce hardware demands. We will never see 10Ghz+ cpus with current silicon tech. Carbon nano tubes maybe 5-10 years away - but 4k, 6k, and 8k are here to stay. How will we handle new h.265 camera formats which require even more CPU power for software decoding? I have a feeling it may be new GPU hardware decoding (currently available) or new GPU based codecs. If cameras use realtime hardware encoders why can't PCs use hardware decoders for edit?

My ver 14 UHD h.264 tests so far are encouraging vs 12.5.5.

Too soon to say for ver 14 - I'm not sure we ever agreed on the ver 12.5 4k hardware requirements.
Time will tell

Maximum quality on Resolve 14 is also going to depend upon the capture codec or your transformed codec on the timeline. H.264 isn't going to maximize your results if that's your input codec. Lots of other codecs will impose extra work on your system. I think ProRes clips will give you the maximum results and up to you to choose the resolution and flavour of ProRes you want to work with in Resolve 14. So your pursuit of a maximum build needs to be tailored to how you need to work. Some may require raw and some h.264.

It seems to me, the more compressed your clips, the more cycles your workstation will waste just uncompressing the information. Sweet light Texas crude is so much easier to manage than heavy Alberta bitumen.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I just tested with the V14 (timeline 4096 X 2160) a delivery of a clip AVC GH5 422 10 bits 4096 X 2160 to a QT DNXHR 444 10 bits (same dimensions) +
- Force sizing to highest quality
- Force debayer to hightest quality
- Maximum speed

Render speed: between 12 and 14.5 fps.
Most: use of 12 cores (i6850K) at + 95% during rendering.

2017-04-25_17-40-59.jpg

Good point

As for hardware... even the yet unknown but announced 2018 Mac Pro wont touch what you can get on a PC right now in laptop or desktop form.

What? You don't know what you're talking about. No one knows what Apple is going to do with the 2018 Mac Pro. There isn't even a current laptop that can beat a current entry Mac Pro, so I don't know where your getting the idea that suddenly a 2018 Mac Pro will be even less powerful than the current Mac Pro. Sure, given the money you could build a PC to outmatch any Mac Pro. It's always been that way. This is nothing new. People get a Mac Pro not just for the power, but also for the build quality, the support, the software, and the Apple ecosystem.

Most: use of 12 cores (i6850K) at + 95% during rendering.

That's not bad for a 6-core CPU! Not bad at all!!



=) Just teasing you...

As for hardware... even the yet unknown but announced 2018 Mac Pro wont touch what you can get on a PC right now in laptop or desktop form.

What? You don't know what you're talking about. No one knows what Apple is going to do with the 2018 Mac Pro. There isn't even a current laptop that can beat a current entry Mac Pro, so I don't know where your getting the idea that suddenly a 2018 Mac Pro will be even less powerful than the current Mac Pro. Sure, given the money you could build a PC to outmatch any Mac Pro. It's always been that way. This is nothing new. People get a Mac Pro not just for the power, but also for the build quality, the support, the software, and the Apple ecosystem.

May have misquoted.. I mean Macbook Pro.. my apologies.

As for hardware... even the yet unknown but announced 2018 Mac Pro wont touch what you can get on a PC right now in laptop or desktop form.

What? You don't know what you're talking about. No one knows what Apple is going to do with the 2018 Mac Pro. There isn't even a current laptop that can beat a current entry Mac Pro, so I don't know where your getting the idea that suddenly a 2018 Mac Pro will be even less powerful than the current Mac Pro. Sure, given the money you could build a PC to outmatch any Mac Pro. It's always been that way. This is nothing new. People get a Mac Pro not just for the power, but also for the build quality, the support, the software, and the Apple ecosystem.

May have misquoted.. I mean Macbook Pro.. my apologies.

Huh? There was no just-announced MacBook Pro. There's a current MacBook Pro, but you're comparing that to current "PC right now in laptop or desktop form"?

I'm specifically talking about requirements using the now much faster resolve 14, rather than the existing slow resolve the setups you are targeting to work with.

It's all blue sky and conjecture until v14 is stable enough to use for day-in/day-out work.

Faster, more efficient operation is a major part of the v14 feature list and I saw for myself at NAB certain things do run faster, even on the fairly-modest iMacs at the booth. I just hope the reality measures up to the potential.

I'm specifically talking about requirements using the now much faster resolve 14, rather than the existing slow resolve the setups you are targeting to work with. So, using new 10x faster resolve 14, how does this shift down the system requirements for that footage spec in reality? I doubt it will be as smooth as 10x in general. So, Marc, that mean one Quadro, or two?

I wouldn't consider a system with fewer than 2 GPUs. But given how that works now with 12.5, it should be somewhat better in a few months with 14. At a time when 1080 cards are down to $600 or so, it seems silly not to get 2.

Watch: In-Depth with Blackmagic DaVinci Resolve 14 at NAB 2017
http://nofilmschool.com/2017/07/in-depth-blackmagic-davinci-resolve-14-nab-2017

"Even for long time Blackmagic users, the hardware requirements of Resolve have been too steep for many entry-level filmmakers and post-production professionals. Now ten times faster than its previous iteration, DaVinci Resolve 14 is built to be reliably run on most computers and laptops."

Do you all believe in such marketing speak? It will be 10 times faster for a few specific tasks, not for everything!
Plus, it will need a few iterations until we can really see what it means in practice. Right now, it's the least stable public beta BM ever delivered on the PC, quite a bit better on a Mac.

The whole system throughput is far more complex than just saying "10 times" and highly depends on the format you use. 8K is definitely a few years away if you want to earn your money with it (and not only be an early adopter). But even for 4K it matters a lot if you have H.264 or H.265 (they will need massive CPU power) or if you have high quality intra frame footage, which will need storage throughput most of all.

BTW, R3D footage is not so critical, since their wavelet format can easily be decoded in lower resolutions. We are working all the time with Epic Dragon footage in 6K and it runs fine on a beefed up old MP 5,1. We switch to full 4K DCI only when rendering. And, finally, 8K from a Bayer sensor is not really 8K resolution…

So, the best advice that was given to you already is: get the best system you can afford right now. I'd add: aim for a proper balance between CPU, GPU and speed of storage.

Do you all believe in such marketing speak? It will be 10 times faster for a few specific tasks, not for everything!

Not from most sources - but this is BlackMagic and NAB so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt as they have a reputation for delivering quality products. It's new and still in Beta testing. I doubt BM would make such claims unless they plan to substantiate them.
My 14 is now stable and faster including h.264 but it will take months to try all the new features so I'm impressed so far and optimistic about the future.
I'll wait a while before upgrading my desktop for 4k editing.

Also from the NAB report above:
"Mounting frustrations with the current crop of NLEs have caused many editors to seek out alternatives, and in the midst of this platform chaos, DaVinci Resolve 14 has put itself in a position to gain a lot of new users. In performance mode, Resolve can confidently allow users to edit 4K footage in real time on a laptop in H.264 or even RAW. "

Well, marketing speech again.
They don't define what kind of a laptop: there are some gamer laptops with quite powerful GPUs, which are heavy and eat batteries for breakfast. But that's not your average office laptop.

Maybe I'm too sceptic, but I'v read too much of that stuff for the last 30 years. This is not to say that BM is not delivering quality. I love their products, but everybody does it that way.

Yes, typical PR shouting Quite often reality is very different

Marketing Hype? PR Shouting?
What do you guys really expect? Why the accusations? Based on what? Compared to what other products? Premiere, Edius, Avid and Vegas have decades of software development behind them.

BM are newcomers to the NLE world. Early Resolve was disappointing to me - but in a few years we have had 12 and then 12.5 with a ton of new features. A year later I expected 12.6 with some fixes and minor enhancements but we are getting 14 which sounds almost like a re-write and look at the new features and improvements list.

Release of DaVinci Resolve 14 Public Beta
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=58544

All this and it's still free to most of us, supported on three operating systems - plus they slashed the paid Studio price by almost 2/3 to $299!!
Their track record has exceeded market expectations.
We can safely assume 14 is bigger, better, and faster. Exactly how much remains to be seen and actual hardware requirements will depend on user workflow needs. 4k h.264 editing on a consumer level PC may be here.

AVID, Premiere, Edius as NLEs decades behind Resolve?
You mean other way around when it coms to NLE features and usability.

Atm. v14 is unusable- lets wait for stable release. It may take long time as lot has been changed in engine. My fear is the Resolve will become like some other BM products- "never finished". Stability already seams to be going down with new releases. Constant demand for more causing product to be never properly debugged and tested. Old bug keeps going through many releases. Reminds me Premiere few years ago.

AVID, Premiere, Edius as NLEs decades behind Resolve?
You mean other way around when it comes to NLE features and usability.

Please re-read I did not say decades behind - they have had several decades of NLE software development vs Resolve which is a relative newcomer.
14 beta may have been released prematurely but maybe testing it in the market is the fastest way to debug.

Sorry, time to go sleep Can't read anymore.
Yes, more people test quicker you catch problems.

I'm specifically talking about requirements using the now much faster resolve 14, rather than the existing slow resolve the setups you are targeting to work with.

It's all blue sky and conjecture until v14 is stable enough to use for day-in/day-out work.

Faster, more efficient operation is a major part of the v14 feature list and I saw for myself at NAB certain things do run faster, even on the fairly-modest iMacs at the booth. I just hope the reality measures up to the potential.

I'm specifically talking about requirements using the now much faster resolve 14, rather than the existing slow resolve the setups you are targeting to work with. So, using new 10x faster resolve 14, how does this shift down the system requirements for that footage spec in reality? I doubt it will be as smooth as 10x in general. So, Marc, that mean one Quadro, or two?

I wouldn't consider a system with fewer than 2 GPUs. But given how that works now with 12.5, it should be somewhat better in a few months with 14. At a time when 1080 cards are down to $600 or so, it seems silly not to get 2.

It normally gets better, so it is testable to tell present minimums, I will have to further clarify here. How is that blue sky? But, yes, it is how it stacks up, which is testable your do everything extent now.

Delete

Robert, yep, it may point to the system relying on the inbuilt h264 hardware sections of the GPU, or maybe that the GPU/CPU is a limiting factor.

Everyone, I should clarify that I was talking about things like 8kp60 R3D red codex, and whatever the BM one is gong to be, plus equivalent prores is going to be that you would transfer such footage too. But, h264 h265 inter is a reality, but I don't think much of a reality at these quality levels professionally, so I'm welcome comments on that too, but not at the expense of raw and piers 8kp50/60 16 bit highest data rate estimates.

Rick, highest data rate on the camera side, not on resolves side. .

Al, 10 ghz even 20 is probably possible, but present silicon chip design and x86 limits it. Still expect a hot machine.

I just tested with the V14 (timeline 4096 X 2160) a delivery of a clip AVC GH5 422 10 bits 4096 X 2160 to a QT DNXHR 444 10 bits (same dimensions) +
- Force sizing to highest quality
- Force debayer to hightest quality
- Maximum speed

Render speed: between 12 and 14.5 fps.
Most: use of 12 cores (i6850K) at + 95% during rendering.

2017-04-25_17-40-59.jpg

Good point

What GPU Jean?

Al, 10 ghz even 20 is probably possible, but present silicon chip design and x86 limits it. Still expect a hot machine.

Wayne - Unfortunately for those of us who grew up with the early NLEs, Moore's Law allowed us to "painlessly" progress from DV tape to HD. CPU power often doubled from year to year. Moore's Law is dead and Intel has even abandoned it's Tick/Tock program. Silicon CPU technology literally "hit the wall" around 2011.
Have a look at this three part article which explains it all and you will see why little has changed, or is likely to change in the near future. 10-20ghz CPUs are just not on the horizon yet.
The future of computers
http://www.edn.com/design/systems-design/4368705/The-future-of-computers--Part-1-Multicore-and-the-Memory-Wall
Timeline editing is still CPU intensive using software decoders for codecs which have been around for many years. When we move from HD to 4k we increase the amount of data per frame by 4X and we haven't seen a 4X increase in CPU power for a long time. h.265 HEVC is here plus 6k and 8k and new CPU technology is not coming to our rescue as it did in the past. Costs may come down thanks to AMD but power limitations will remain for some time.
BM has just re-written the Resolve playback engine and claims "up to" 10X performance improvement. Resolve has had a reputation for heavy hardware demands vs other NLEs so some of the 10X may be improved code efficiency - but the rest??

It normally gets better, so it is testable to tell present minimums, I will have to further clarify here. How is that blue sky? But, yes, it is how it stacks up, which is testable your do everything extent now.

The blue sky is good enough I can pull a clean key from it.

I just tested with the V14 (timeline 4096 X 2160) a delivery of a clip AVC GH5 422 10 bits 4096 X 2160 to a QT DNXHR 444 10 bits (same dimensions) +
- Force sizing to highest quality
- Force debayer to hightest quality
- Maximum speed

Render speed: between 12 and 14.5 fps.
Most: use of 12 cores (i6850K) at + 95% during rendering.

2017-04-25_17-40-59.jpg

Good point

What GPU Jean?

Hi,

I have a NVIDIA GTX1070 8Go VRAM (GUI) + a GTX 980ti 6Go VRAM.
I use "use gui gpu to compute"
MOBO : Asus X99-A II @4.2 Ghz
RAM : 32 Go : 2 X G Skill TridentZ F4-3200C14-16GTZ
Driver cache : Samsung M2
Drivers NVIDIA 373.06

Thanks Jean.

Al, 10 ghz even 20 is probably possible, but present silicon chip design and x86 limits it. Still expect a hot machine.

Wayne - Unfortunately for those of us who grew up with the early NLEs, Moore's Law allowed us to "painlessly" progress from DV tape to HD. CPU power often doubled from year to year. Moore's Law is dead and Intel has even abandoned it's Tick/Tock program. Silicon CPU technology literally "hit the wall" around 2011.
Have a look at this three part article which explains it all and you will see why little has changed, or is likely to change in the near future. 10-20ghz CPUs are just not on the horizon yet.
The future of computers
http://www.edn.com/design/systems-design/4368705/The-future-of-computers--Part-1-Multicore-and-the-Memory-Wall
Timeline editing is still CPU intensive using software decoders for codecs which have been around for many years. When we move from HD to 4k we increase the amount of data per frame by 4X and we haven't seen a 4X increase in CPU power for a long time. h.265 HEVC is here plus 6k and 8k and new CPU technology is not coming to our rescue as it did in the past. Costs may come down thanks to AMD but power limitations will remain for some time.
BM has just re-written the Resolve playback engine and claims "up to" 10X performance improvement. Resolve has had a reputation for heavy hardware demands vs other NLEs so some of the 10X may be improved code efficiency - but the rest??

Thanks All. It's not moores law, its just different design technology by the other Moore (and not the other guy from AMD). It is the same reason a GPU achieves, or custom codec hardware, achieves a number of times speed up over CPU per watt. But there is a lot of overhead in silicon design principles for safety margins as well, plus the circuit design efficiency itself. So you will read of some silicon doing 50 Gz or 200Ghz years back, several, in the lab, but by the time you apply the design rules and allow for slower parts of the circuit, it might be 5Gz-20Gz, but the heat generated could wreck the chip. The actual natural timing of the circuit might be 1ghz or less, where less leakage happens, which is what they do to get ultra low powered chips on a customised silicon process. You can literally probably do 10 Gz-20Gz today but the cooling and power consumption would be very high, and as they don't it, it is probably inefficiently high. Generation on generation speed increases have been held back with decreasing process node size shrinkage, to take advantage of the power savings of the shrinkage, and bring energy consumption under control, allowing also more circuitry and cores per chip. I would imagine somebody has probably overclocked a CPU to 10 Gz by now, which is impressive, as they are generally made to use less power and run slower. At least that is my impression of it. However custom designing a circuit beyond the process design rules and a more efficient design can lead to a vast speed up. However, complex designs are hard to do like this, the laying out is not so simple, and favours less complex circuits. These are things that a leading chip designer in the world attempted. As it is under cloiae conercuasl secret, it is are to know details. This is all not Moore's law in silicon, but how you use the silicon.

One off the other old alternatives to silicon also enjoys an 2x advantage per node size over silicon. I think that was in leakage, but it means potentially another avenue by the time nanotubes, or whatever, come out for some speed up.

Huh? There was no just-announced MacBook Pro. There's a current MacBook Pro, but you're comparing that to current "PC right now in laptop or desktop form"?

Simple google search would find this near the top:
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-ma ... hip-2017-2

Basically they screwed up with the current one, cut out a lot of users... pissed off a lot of people. Not sure the updated one will be much better. They are in serious need of a major laptop update though, or they will continue to lose a lot more people back to Windows based machines.

Huh? There was no just-announced MacBook Pro. There's a current MacBook Pro, but you're comparing that to current "PC right now in laptop or desktop form"?

Simple google search would find this near the top:
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-ma ... hip-2017-2

Basically they screwed up with the current one, cut out a lot of users... pissed off a lot of people. Not sure the updated one will be much better. They are in serious need of a major laptop update though, or they will continue to lose a lot more people back to Windows based machines.

1. Still, it's not "just announced". This is an analyst reporting essentially a rumor. The current MacBook Pro is no less capable than previous versions, and is in fact more capable, so I don't see the "screw up" or cutting out of users. Is this because of USB-A ports being romoved? Get an adapter. They're cheap. Everything is going USB-C anyway so you're better set for the future. Also, multiple Thunderbolt 3 ports that are faster and more capable. Problem with the missing SD card slot? SD cards are moving up in speed this year with V60 and V90. That would make SD card slots obsolete and you'd need a V60/V90 reader anyway. You also have the Touch Bar and larger trackpad. Again, more capability. They aren't really any faster than previous models (Intel's fault as CPU's are gaining much speed with newer models these days), so if you need those specific features buy the older model. Problem solved.

2. It's a laptop and your comparing it to a desktop and an oversized laptop. If you need something like that you should probably be using a desktop anyway...

3. MacBook Pro and other laptops are pretty much OT here. It doesn't apply to what the OP is asking since a desktop is clearly what's needed and asked about.. the "maximum quality" build. That's not a laptop. It's going to be a desktop. No one should be trying to grade 8K footage on a laptop. That's just ridiculous. Get the right equipment for the job. Right now, if you want to run MacOS that's a used/upgraded 5,1 or a maxed out 6,1 (which the OP said he doesn't want to spend money on). If you want Windows, build a custom desktop PC around X99 with 10-core CPU overclocked, with 1080Ti or Titan Xp (and if you buy the right parts you might be able to run MacOS on it too). A 5K iMac might work, but it will be probably be very slow with 8K footage. An eGPU might help. If you want to spend less than a 6,1 Mac Pro, get the used/upgraded 5,1 or build a custom PC... either will probably cost half a 6,1, maybe less than a maxed iMac, and probably be faster than those.

I do not speak English (I use Google translator) and I do not know much about hardware. Can anyone tell me if the following paramatracies are sufficient for installation and operation (basic, for learning) in DaVinci Resolve 14?

Seria Dell Precision
Model T3500
Procesor Intel Xeon W3503, 4M Cache, 2.40 GHz
Cores 2
RAM 8 GB DDR3
Chipset Intel X58, 64-bit
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
HDD 500 GB
Broadcom 5761 Gigabit Ethernet Controller LAN 10/100/1000 Mbit/s
High-Definition Audio, ADI1984A
Windows 7 Pro

Thank you
- Basia

[Dwaine Maggart]

Basia, the NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800 is not supported by Resolve.

You need a better graphics card.

Basia, the NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800 is not supported by Resolve.

Bad news. But thank You, Dwaine.

I have an alternative. Will it be better?

Fujitsu ESPRIMO
Model P700
Procesor Intel Core i5 2400 3.4 GHz, 6M Cache, FCLGA1155 podstawka pod i3,i5,i7
Cores 4 + (4log.)
RAM 8GB DDR3
Graphics Card: Intel HD Graphics 2000
HDD 500 GB
Ethernet LAN 10/100/1000 MBit/s Intel 82579 LM
10x USB 2.0
Windows 7 Pro (COA)

b.

[Dwaine Maggart]

Just install a better graphics card in either of those systems.

Something like a GTX 1050 TI would be a cheap option that would be much more powerful than the FX3800. The TI has 4GB of VRAM, which I would recommend as a minimum.

Also note that we don't support Windows 7. Resolve will likely run on it, but there may be things like higher res H.264 files that won't work.

I can upgrade Windows to 10 and I will consider your card suggestion.

Thanks a lot!

- Basia

Just install a better graphics card in either of those systems.

Dwaine, is it time for an update to the Resolve Configuration guide?

Please post updated Resolve configuration Guide for Resolve 14. Much appreciated. I am considering the following build for 8K workflow
Dual 18-Core 2.3GHz Intel Xeon Haswell E5-2696 v3 [36-cores / 72-threads]
256GB (16x 16GB) of 2133MHz DDR4 ECC Registered RAM
1TB NVMe Flash Storage
8TB (4x 2TB) NVMe Flash Storage RAID 0
DVD Burner
GTX Titan X 12GB (Pascal)
GTX Titan X 12GB (Pascal)
Quadro P4000 8GB
DeckLink 4K Extreme 12G - Capture & Playback Card
Intel X540-T2 Dual-Port RJ45 10GBe PCIe Converged Network Adapter
Windows 10 Professional 64-bit
HP Adjustable Rail Rack Mount Kit

Looks well overdone.
256GB RAM- do you really need as much?
My typical complain- to many cores at low clock instead of less cores at higher clock.
8TB (4x 2TB) NVMe Flash Storage RAID 0- how are you going to do this?
Quadro P4000 8GB- is this for GUI? It costs fortune. The only good bit about is fact that it's single slot.

I can upgrade Windows to 10 and I will consider your card suggestion.

Thanks a lot!

- Basia

Basia;
i have two t5500's with 1050Ti's in them, i think the same case as the t3500, you will want to get a card like the mini that is low enough to fit in that case, a blower card that exausts the heat out the end is also not a bad option

the machines work pretty well, i have Resolve 12.5 on them, although they are mainly used for support and gfx, and rarely turn on Resolve, it does work... the q4000's that were in them are not supported by Resolve anymore, so for me it made sense to put the 1050Ti's in them, dead cheap and fills our needs

another note, right now in taskmanager i'm seing Resolve using 22gig of ram on my z820 as it saves a project, only 8 gig in your t3500 seems like a potential bottleneck

i haev seen Reslove alone using 72gig of ram when deleteing unsued caches, i have 96 gig in my front line machines, 32 gig in the support machines


my front line machnes are HP's with alot more horsepower

How useful is this Naples 32 core cpu? Apparently they are working on some performance chip also for supercomputers.

https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... han-intel/
http://wccftech.com/amd-zen-opteron-processor-32-core/
https://www.nextplatform.com/2017/03/08 ... els-xeons/

I've decided to delay my upgrade due to:

1) Give 14 beta more time to stabilise so we can better assess the enhanced 14 performance claims and wait for some objective performance cpu/gpu benchmarks like the Puget Systems Premiere Pro Ryzen/Intel benchmarks here.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CC-2017-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-1800X-Performance-909/#comment-3303171781

2) Intel due to release new Kaby Lake and Skylake X 6, 8, & 10 core cpus Jun-Aug. X99 and 1151 sockets will be obsolete replaced by X299. Rumours are improved performance and (hopefully) better pricing in Response to Ryzen. i7 will be replaced by i9. They even expect even expect a new 12 core Intel Core i9-7920X with 44 PCIe Gen 3.0 lanes "which are enough for running a range of multiple discrete GPUs and fast NVMe storage devices".
http://wccftech.com/intel-skylake-x-core-i9-7920x-7900x-7820x-7800x-x299-leaked/

If I was a gamer I might consider Ryzen, but for editing I'll stick to Intel. I hope AMD survives but I have my doubts. Nvidia have tramped them in the GPU world and even the recent surge in Ryzen demand is not enough to make them profitable yet. A lot of PC software has not been optimized for Ryzen yet and may never be as long as Intel dominates the market. Time will tell.

I'm not sure what a "max quality system" means as requirements will vary with user workflow.
For those of us looking for a 4k solution the growing popularity of h.264 and now h.265 (GH5 & DJI), I have a feeling the heavy cpu intensive workload of software codec decoding for the timeline may be drastically reduced by GPU hardware decoding currently available for AVC and HEVC decoders in the Kaby Lake i7 cpus. Edius 8.5 has added h.265 hardware decoding support as have MAGIX (who now own Vegas) using the Intel GPU. Future NLE software may adopt hardware decoding reducing cpu workload and the associated cost. Imagine 4k realtime editing with 4k 10 bit timeline preview without transcoding?? Hardware demands have grown exponentially from HD to 4, 6, and 8k, cpus stalled around 4-5Ghz more than 5 years ago and and the once promised 10Ghz cpus are not even on the distant horizon, so maybe a new approach is needed.

The next few months should prove interesting indeed.

So, now that the i9 is out, and AMD's 16 core chip, and the aim at performance computing, how dues that affect it?

Interesting to see the performance of the Threadripper now that it is out. Very impressive performance for editing and rendering, and at 1/2 the price of an Intel setup that is slower.. I personally am headed this direction. Intel may end up passing them up again by next year, but right now, a $3K threadripper system will be quite a nice editing rig.

Yes im also very interested about a system with a threadripper 1950X. If you look at the Benchmarks, it should give you a hefty lift:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
I'd be wary about this and wait a bit, back in the days i had an AMD-CPU based System and it was not the best expirience to say the least. There is a reason Intel succeeded and AMD stopped building CPU's. I really hope for them to succeed Intel needs competition.

When did AMD stop building CPUs? I dont recall them ever stopping, just not doing nearly as well.

It took AMD to build the Athlon and hit 1Ghz first for Intel to wake up and catch up a couple years later. I suspect that the same thing will happen now. Intel was caught off guard by AMD again, though this time around they have capable CPUs, they are just much more expensive. Intel certainly could lower the price by quite a bit and remain competitive for a couple hundred more, which I suspect they may end up doing eventually.

For anything other than video games, AMD is the way to go right now. Even video games are on par with similar CPUs between the two, but Intel still takes that crown... again paying quite a bit more to do so.