First Hackintosh Build - Video Editing

[SnackAttack]

Hi,

Been lurking for a while, and have finally selected components for my build. Primary reason for building this is so I can run Final Cut Pro without spending thousands of dollars on decent hardware. I'd like my system to be as quiet as possible within expected limits.

Also, I realize that my graphics card isn't great, but I don't plan on doing any serious gaming, and FCP doesn't have GPU accelerated performance. It was only $35 after rebate at Microcenter so it works for me.

Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA-P55-USB3 LGA 1156 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128425

CPU: i7 870

RAM: G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333
(PC3 10666) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231311

GPU: NVIDIA EVGA 9500 GT http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0310468

DVD Burner: Sony Optiarc AD-7261S-0B http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827118040

System HDD: WD Caviar Black 640 GB http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136319

Media HDD: WD Caviar Green 1 TB http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0347229

PSU: XIGMATEK ACXTNRP-PC602 600W http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817815009

Case: Rosewill Blackbone Black Steel http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147023

I plan on buying another 1TB drive to do software RAID 1 in OS X (For now I'll back up to an external). Would it be too much of a hassle to add RAID 1 post-build? Also, would the Caviar Green be too slow for a media drive? I already picked it up at Microcenter so I'd like to find some use for it. System drive perhaps?

How does everything look as far as compatability? Thanks!

 

[slowjin]

Another lucky one living nearby a MicroCenter!

Unless you already own the Core i7 870, I believe you can get Core i7 950 at $199 in-store. With the money saved, you can easily get a nice X58 mobo from Gigabyte.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128456&cm_re=ga_x58-_-13-128-456-_-Product

You will have to get tri-channel RAM instead as well. I think you will have a nicer setup with higher end HW with the 950. Only possible if you can pickup one of those 950 for $199!

Good luck!

 

[SnackAttack]

Thanks for the input. I do have the 870 already (purchased at microcenter for $230). I haven't opened it yet so I could return it and pick up the 950. I had considered that, but I was concerned about the temperature of the 130W processor. Does anyone know if the temperature difference is significant?

 

[QATesta]

Also, would the Caviar Green be too slow for a media drive?

Im trying to do the same build for a FCP Video Editing Rig too.
Im not a big techie, but from what I read and been told by others smarter than me.
Use the Green drives for pure offline dailies storage. The Green drives are too slow for regular editing within FCP. You'd prolly wanna use a black or blue drive. Those run faster in RPM. Black is supposed to be fastest I think.

Good luck and please let us know how your build goes!
Im sure many people [like me] are interested in your results.

 

[justr]

Thanks for the input. I do have the 870 already (purchased at microcenter for $230). I haven't opened it yet so I could return it and pick up the 950. I had considered that, but I was concerned about the temperature of the 130W processor. Does anyone know if the temperature difference is significant?

I can't tell you if the temp difference is significant, but I've got the 950, and with an aftermarket cooler, even a cheap one (Hyper 212+; cheap but effective) and my chip overclocked to 3.8 Ghz, I stay in the 40 to 50 C range for almost all tasks, including when I'm using FCP and Aperture.

In Win7, prime 95, I got the hottest core up to 73 degrees-- which is fine.

In other words, I wouldn't worry too much about the temps. You can always get a cheap cooler for $30 or less if you want to overclock or run stock but cool.

I think the advantages of X58 (6 Dimm slots, triple channel memory) and the 950, might make it worth it if you can pick up the chip at MC for $199 (I had a friend grab one for me )

 

[SnackAttack]

I've been doing some more research, and from benchmarks at Tom's Hardware, the 870 seems to have an edge in many benchmarks:
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/compare,2421.html?prod[4475]=on&prod[4481]=on

The 870 is on the right. For some reason the comparison doesn't show the names of the processors above the columns.

Since they obviously don't benchmark Apple applications (e.g. Final Cut Pro, Compressor, etc.), there isn't really a way of knowing how they compare. But I feel comfortable going with the 870 after looking at there benchmarks. Is there something that I might be missing that would make the 950 more appealing?

 

[justr]

I've been doing some more research, and from benchmarks at Tom's Hardware, the 870 seems to have an edge in many benchmarks:
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desk ... .html?prod[4475]=on&prod[4481]=on

The 870 is on the right. For some reason the comparison doesn't show the names of the processors above the columns.

Since they obviously don't benchmark Apple applications (e.g. Final Cut Pro, Compressor, etc.), there isn't really a way of knowing how they compare. But I feel comfortable going with the 870 after looking at there benchmarks. Is there something that I might be missing that would make the 950 more appealing?

The bottom line is that there isn't a huge difference in speed between 870 and 950. At stock, I believe, the turbo mode (one core gets overclocked on the fly for single-thread applications like gaming) is more aggressive. For tests that only stress a single core, this will be reflected in benches.

I don't think you'll regret going either way.

What makes the 950 more appealing for video editing is:

- 6 Dimm slots on the motherboard instead of 4. Video editing ALWAYS needs more memory. That makes it cheaper to get to 12 GB, and allows you to get up to 24 GB. Hell, I still use up every last bit of RAM when I'm using Aperture 3.x-- it's the only time I EVER notice page-outs with 12 GB RAM. I haven't looked during FCP if that's happening, but it's a safe assumption.

- Triple Channel vs. Double Channel memory. For some things double is actually faster, but my understanding is that video editing is one of those areas where having triple channel memory shows improved speeds. (I still think the 6 vs 4 slots is a bigger advantage though.)

 

[justr]

I'd be concerned with the Sata bus speed on that board, the P55 is the old standard Sata, the P58A-UD3R has the new Sata setup as well as the USB 3

With video editing, wouldn't that be an issue? I know the socket is different, but wouldn't the gain in disk speed be worth it?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128423&Tpk=ga-x58a-ud3r

I don't think that-- at least at the moment-- hackintosh is able to take advantage of SATA 6.0 Gbs (or USB 3) speeds. I love knowing I've got these on my board, but there's not much practical advantage to them (maybe in the future?).

 

[justr]

I'd be concerned with the Sata bus speed on that board, the P55 is the old standard Sata, the P58A-UD3R has the new Sata setup as well as the USB 3

With video editing, wouldn't that be an issue? I know the socket is different, but wouldn't the gain in disk speed be worth it?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128423&Tpk=ga-x58a-ud3r

I don't think that-- at least at the moment-- hackintosh is able to take advantage of SATA 6.0 Gbs (or USB 3) speeds. I love knowing I've got these on my board, but there's not much practical advantage to them (maybe in the future?).

My guess is that the Sata 6.0 would be independant of the OS, it's a hardware bus speed / interface issue. The USB3 could have software driver issues, but the harddrives should be completely OS independant.
Even the USB should be OS independant, as I understand it, it's the interface between the device and the board/bus...
It should be kinda like a buffer or spindle speed on a HD, in that it doesn't matter what's reading it, it still spins / buffers the same.

That's incorrect, as far as I understand it. I could be wrong. But I haven't been able to find anyone who has gotten SATA 6.0 running faster than SATA 3.0 speeds in a Hackintosh; so SATA 6.0 ports will be able to take your SATA I or II devices, but they won't run at full SATA 6.0 speed.

Likewise, you might get faster that USB 2.0 speeds using the USB 3.0 ports with specific devices, but I've only heard mixed reports of success. Yes, I think USB 3.0 may get better support at the OS level.
http://www.maclife.com/article/reviews/ ... d34_review

That said, if you can point out an example of SATA 6.0 working at SATA 6.0 speeds with SATA 6.0 devices (I don't know, like a Crucial C300...)-- I would LOVE to see it.

EDIT: For instance:
http://tonymacx86.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=12708