New PC Build

Hello,

I'm fairly new to DaVinci Resolve, and need some help to figure out what I'm doing. I'm currently making guitar cover videos, with multiple guitar takes, angles, close ups, etc, and putting all the clips together to make my cover video. During my editing process, splicing all the clips together, can be painfully slow on my current computer. My CPU usage is spiked, and most of my memory used in Task Manager, I can hear my fans spinning like a jet engine, and it's a lot of click and wait for it to buffer out and be usable again. I think I just need a new computer. I'm using an old i7-2600, with 14GB of RAM, Samsung 1TB SSD, and I do have an NVidia GTX 960 graphics card in right now.

Normally, I see the GPU idling very low, while my CPU is very high. I have looked through settings and tried to set everything to use GPU that I can - but I'm finding in some forums, that the free version of Resolve doesn't really use the GPU, so that is less important as the CPU.

So in the hunt of a new CPU, and using Resolve free where the GPU might not be used as much, am I better off getting a faster processor with fewer cores (AMD Ryzen 5600X for example), or more cores (Intel i7-10700K for example)?

I'm willing to accept I need to spend the money and finally replace my 10ish year old computer, but if I build a new computer, want something with the flexibility it will perform great for several years to come, and if I get more serious with my video editing in the future, I could handle something like upgrading to the DaVinci Resolve Studio version, to get more features and utilization of the GPU. Trying to stay somewhat on a budget, so the $200-300ish price on a processor.

Any input, tips, tricks, comments are appreciated in helping me figure out this new skill.

Thank you!

[Peter Chamberlain]

You likely use a camera that records to a compressed format, like h.264, which does not use a optimal decompression process in the free version, and your GPU is old too, and quite underpowered.. that said, this table says it would support NVENC so maybe the Studio version is the short term speed increase u need till you replace the whole system.

https://developer.nvidia.com/video-enco ... matrix-new

If what Peter said applies to your work probably upgrade to Studio first and see how it goes.

When upgrading the system:
I think the 10700K is the better choice between the two.

You'll need more ram too. I'd suggest going with 32 in 2 banks for a possible upgrade to 64 should you want to down the line.

The GPU might be fine for your workloads but will probably be the next best upgrade if you want to work on heavier projects, higher resolution etc.

Just a bit hard to get a GPU at a fair price now though.

You likely use a camera that records to a compressed format, like h.264, which does not use a optimal decompression process in the free version, and your GPU is old too, and quite underpowered.. that said, this table says it would support NVENC so maybe the Studio version is the short term speed increase u need till you replace the whole system.

https://developer.nvidia.com/video-enco ... matrix-new

Thanks Peter. I do have a GeForce GTX 970 I just pulled from an old computer at work, I can install that too. Still not a current/up to date GPU, but better than the 960 I have now, but if I were to build a new PC, I would do something more modern or newer. At more of a budget price, I'm seeing the GTX 1650 or 1660 Super's mentioned a lot.

So if I were to upgrade to Resolve Studio, what all would that do for me and performance increase?

If what Peter said applies to your work probably upgrade to Studio first and see how it goes.

When upgrading the system:
I think the 10700K is the better choice between the two.

You'll need more ram too. I'd suggest going with 32 in 2 banks for a possible upgrade to 64 should you want to down the line.

The GPU might be fine for your workloads but will probably be the next best upgrade if you want to work on heavier projects, higher resolution etc.

Just a bit hard to get a GPU at a fair price now though.

Why would you go 10700K over the 5600X? I have seen lots of posts and benchmarks that the two processors are neck and neck - speed per core the 5600X is a better processor, but the 10700K does have 2 more cores, so some of those multitasking or multi-core processes just work better cause there is more resources/cores. The AMD would be the cheaper route when you put the whole system together too. I've used Intel forever, but AMD seems to be everywhere I'm looking. I'm still deciding between the two.

And I would do a minimum of 32GB of RAM on a new workstation. Any recommendations on a GPU? I have a 970 I recently came across, better than what I have now, but still not the best or current. I'm seeing a lot of 1660 Super's being mentioned on the web.

I did a new build earlier this year and was between the 10700 and 5600X. I think they are both probably about equivalent overall. I ended up going with the 10700 because I was able to get a good deal on it, and it ended up being like $80 cheaper than the amd option at that time. Something to keep in mind with the 10700 is that it can put out some heat when you are working it hard, so make sure you have adequate cooling.