If this has been brought up...
 

the feel free to flame me, but I just found out, from talking to professionals at VASST on the phone, that processors have everything to do with the 150's performance when it comes to programs like Sony Vegas and the like... Now, I plan to post this in the Vegas forum too, but apparently AMD doesn't like the footage at all. My core 2 duo 1.8 desktop plays the footage back with a stutter every Few thousand* frames. My AMD X2 2.8 with 4 gigs of ram only plays 1 in every 2250 frames. I thought it was a fluke until I edited an entire project smoothly and easily over a couple of days (but I did have to cut out the last frame of a couple of shots because it crashed vegas- but man, it was smooth before it did). So don't discount the 150 as a problem child yet...

Does that also mean that I should dive into the I7?

I looked again at Vegas and the frame counter.

I doubt that it is a HMC150 issue per~se, likely more an issue with the AVCHD format itself. Maybe the AMD chip that you are trying to use doesn?t support the optimal instruction set that Intel chips use, and that Vegas might rely on.

This might be an option for you:

How Vasst GearShift tames AVCHD in Vegas Pro- My Review

I plan on trying this out for Vegas on my dual core AMD.

This is not encouraging news...
I just built an AMD quad core machine in anticipation of buying an HMC-150 next month....

Anyone editing AVCCAM with an AMD quad?

Bob T.

I've always been a big AMD fan, I guess I like rooting for the underdog... but this last upgrade I went with a cheap Intel Q6600 and even cheaper MB... it was a significant improvement over my x2 6000+ when it came to render times.

Every benchmark test I've seen, AMD just hasn't kept up with Intel when it comes to video type work. I still have plenty of AMD boxes in my fleet, but they are doing other mundane tasks like photo editing, entertainment PC, and web surfing. Doesn't mean AMD doesn't work, they're great stable performeres, it's just that the AMD CPUs aren't processing video operations as fast as Intel CPUs. Dollar for dollar, that leaves an Intel Quad as the CPU of choice if you're upgrading...

Exactly what I have realized, but there are alot of people blaming the camera...

Which leads me to believe that the I7 might be the choice for future proofing (at least over the next 5 DAYS or so- as soon as you get something, it's obsolete!) my work with this particular camera and file format.

The whole thing reminds me of The Onion Movie- The Bates 4000 got all the way to the 9000, in the matter of days, before a tomahawking.

Im mostly editing on a Q6600 with little problem, very stable. The most time consuming process is running de-shaker scripts on 1080i AVCHD footage, very time consuming, but excellent results. 720P30 footage is faster, but still time consuming.

But, any major update will be to the i7 platform. It will certainly tame AVCHD.

Also, I used to be an AMD fan, but the last few years, Intel is just consistently much faster. I did just buy the kids an AMD/HP machine, very nice.