|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 25th, 2005, 03:09 PM | #1 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 43
|
Laptop computer
I want to buy a new laptop computer for video editing. Any suggestions for a dream computer. Either Sony Dell or Toshiba. Thanks
|
October 25th, 2005, 03:19 PM | #2 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
Moved to PC Editing forum from Industry News.
|
October 26th, 2005, 06:57 PM | #3 |
Jubal 28
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 872
|
I use an HP which I dearly love.
17" widescreen; 1680x1050 resolution 1GB DDR 60GB 7200 RPM HDD DVD+/-RW drive Ordered straight from HP. I keep media on an external drive and I can edit on both the main machine and the laptop.
__________________
www.wrightsvillebeachstudios.com |
October 27th, 2005, 05:23 AM | #4 |
Trustee
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Suwanee, GA
Posts: 1,241
|
HDD speed is very important. My HP will not log video well with my mainline editor on a 4200rpm drive. Minimum should be at least 5400, 7200 if you can (but I do not like using IBM drives).
|
November 1st, 2005, 02:31 PM | #5 |
Major Player
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: kentucky, USA
Posts: 429
|
All of a sudden, HP has introduced 7200rpm 100GB harddrives in their laptops.
This is especially interesting to me since I just spoke with a customer service (sales rep) on the phone recently asking why 7200s were not available on their laptops and got at least 10mins worth of reasons why not. These reasons included HP engineering deciding that 7200 was just too fast for laptops and problems would most certainly occur. I know of course that this guy is a "salesman" and would say most anything to keep me on the phone until I would buy what was available. Anyway they have them now. |
November 1st, 2005, 04:52 PM | #6 |
Trustee
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Suwanee, GA
Posts: 1,241
|
That salesman has no clue. HP did not have them as they had not finished cert on them mostlikely and 100s are new.
|
November 3rd, 2005, 04:44 PM | #7 |
New Boot
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Posts: 16
|
1GB RAM is not a dream but necessity, I'd get 2 GB. Also you've never mentioned what software you are going to use. I would recomend nVdia 6800 at least. Now instead of dumping big money into a laptop I would get a cheaper laptop and a desktop. Unless you must use your computer on the go. You will always have more power in a desktop for the same money. Now if you already have a good desktop that's a different story. Again I'd rather spend money on some other equipment.
Regarding 60GB 7200 RPM vs 100 or 120GB 5400 RPM. The 7200 RPM HDD may not even be faster, but will defently be smaller and use more power. The reason is 100 and 120 GB drives will have more data density therefore faster sustained r/w speeds. This is just my opinion. Good Luck Alex |
November 3rd, 2005, 05:49 PM | #8 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 43
|
Laptop
Thanks to all. I have been using Pinnacle for several years. I am about to receive the new Version Studio plus 10 upgrade . I guess i'm one of the lucky ones, but I have not had a problem YET. I have a Dell desktop now, 120 gig, 1 ram . I need the portability . i am considering Sony ,toshiba ,or another Dell . will go withh 2 gigs Ram, 7200 RPM hard drive P4 2.6 .Any other suggestions appreciated '
Mike |
November 4th, 2005, 06:39 AM | #9 |
Trustee
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Suwanee, GA
Posts: 1,241
|
Look for high-end mobility video with at least 128MB of dedicated memory. I have the X200 chipset and while ok, it is not too impressive. I think the ATI X600 chipset is now mobile as well as the nVidia 6600. After what we just found out about the X1800 chipset, I wish it were mobile (ATI is now working on encode/decode modules for it - will edit with link when I find it.)
Studio 9 captures without dropping frames on a 4200 (my workaround to Liquid dropping frames). I suspect VirtualDub can also capture on even the slowest drive. Not sure about S10 yet. And Liquid 7 is shipping with a new capture tool (Avid's) with low overhead. Extreme Tech review on GPU accelerated transcoding |
November 5th, 2005, 05:34 PM | #10 |
New Boot
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Posts: 16
|
Yes get as good videocard as you can find. I have nVidia 6600 on mine. There is also ATI X700 mobile. One thing to note though with mobile video cards, while they might be called same names as their desktop counterparts they may need different drivers and they may not be compatible with other programs as well as desktop cards.
|
November 9th, 2005, 09:47 AM | #11 |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 642
|
I'm a bit confused.
I remember when figuring out a configuration for my desktop, I was told that videocard dedicated RAM is not a big issue in video editing and that I should be more concerned with the other specs of my machine. And that the higher RAM video cards are more for gaming and 3d. I actually ended up getting a video card with only 32MB dedicated memory and it worked fine. Does this change with a laptop? |
November 9th, 2005, 10:16 AM | #12 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,750
|
A laptop shouldn't be different.
You actually only need very little video RAM. It's the 3d gaming applications that take a lot of video RAM since it's used to store textures and things like that. Check the recommended specs for the particular programs in question... they should tell you what you need. |
November 13th, 2005, 06:14 PM | #13 |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 642
|
if that's so glen, then why is it everyone is saying that a strong video card is important and that you should get one with at least 128mb dedicated ram?
my desktop has a matrox 550 which only has 32mb and it works great. is the dedicated memory really THAT important for video editing and 2D animation? is having 32mb dedicated memory on a video card and 512 ram system memory better than just a shared memory video card (like the Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900), assuming i don't do any gaming or 3D stuff at all? |
November 13th, 2005, 06:17 PM | #14 |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 642
|
FORGOT TO MENTION SOMETHING IN PREVIOUS POST.....
I MEANT TO SAY IN THE LAST PART: .......is having a 32mb dedicated memory on a video card and 512MB of system memory better than just a shared memory video card (like the Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900) and 1GB of system memory, assuming i don't do any gaming or 3D stuff at all? |
November 13th, 2005, 08:10 PM | #15 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,750
|
Quote:
In practice, reading the recommended specs is a good starting point. It's also possible to run benchmarks on *relevant* tasks... although there's not really such benchmarks available. |
|
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|