Some questions about getting my system to run Adobe Premiere

[Angeteen]

Sung to the tune of price comparison, what about these video cards? There all a X1600, and are all at 512 MB, thing is, there about $50 cheaper. Are they worthwhile?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814241017

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814102039

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814241032

[Kariudo]

the problem (ok, it's not really a problem...but it should be) with those is that they use GDDR2, which offers little more compared to DDR.
I also read somewhere that GDDR2 has a heat issue.

the x1600 is not twice as good as the x800, they're just from two different lines of products (the x series and the x1k series)

I'd reccomend going with GDDR3 if possible (the x800 card had GDDR3)
512MB is overkill for pretty much everything (save extreme gaming/3D-rendering) 256MB should be fine, save yourself a little extra money

[Angeteen]

Okay, although, the reason I'm going with Wal*Mart, is that in case the thing should malfunction, or in case it makes no difference when using APP, I can be able to return it and get my money back. Tell me...if I went with something off of newegg, would I be able to return the thing in case of an emergency?

Also you mentioned GDDR2 and GDDR3; what are they? What difference would their impact make? Also, as you mentioned, they come from two different lines. Well, if so, then which is the newest (ie. most powerful to be using for APP).

[Keeper of Hellfire]

While this is partly true:

for the video card, (I may be making a little stretch here) I assume that the reccomended ones were the ones tested

(I said partly because the cards weren't only tested, but also found partly or fully supporting APP 2.0), your conclusion:

...and you should be ok as long as you get a card with similar specs (AGP4/8x or PCI-E, 256MB GDDR3, core clock ~400MB, memory clock ~1GB

is wrong. If the support for APP works depends on the GPU. The functionality that APP puts into the graphics card must be implemented in the hardware of the GPU to bring positive effects. So the GPU has to be compatible with the tested ones (for e.g. an enhanced version), otherwise it''ll have no effect. (And to be picky: frequencies are measured in Hertz, not Bytes. )

[Willen]

Okay, although, the reason I'm going with Wal*Mart, is that in case the thing should malfunction, or in case it makes no difference when using APP, I can be able to return it and get my money back. Tell me...if I went with something off of newegg, would I be able to return the thing in case of an emergency?

Also you mentioned GDDR2 and GDDR3; what are they? What difference would their impact make? Also, as you mentioned, they come from two different lines. Well, if so, then which is the newest (ie. most powerful to be using for APP).

The advantage of a Brick & Mortar store like Wal-Mart is that if something is borked, you can head down there and exchange it for a replacement right away. With an online store, you have to get a RMA and ship it back. Your replacement unit may or may not have to be sent back first before your new unit gets shipped, but regardless, this means that you can't get instant resolution to your problem. Not to mention that the shipping of the defective unit back may be at your cost.

As for GDDR2 and GDDR3, they are types of graphics memory (hence the 'G' in the name). As you can probably guess, GDDR3 is better than GDDR2 since it is newer and a bit faster. Although it's primary advantage is lower power consumption and less heat. GDDR2 should be cheaper to manufacture so lower end graphics cards may use it instead of GDDR3 to bring the cost down. Overall, performance differences are minor.

I'd personally do the CPU upgrade first since although a faster/newer graphics card can help in making APP run smoother, the majority of the work is still done by the CPU. If you still have some money to spend, then upgrade your graphics to something listed by Adobe as having APP support and is the newest and fastest you can afford.

[Keeper of Hellfire]

I agree with Willen that a CPU upgrade is more important than upgrading the graphics card, but if you decide to upgrade the graphics card, prefer one that's listed at Adobe's page. Be carefull with the CPU, there exist two versions of the 2.8 GHz P4 for socket 478 - with 533 MHz FSB and 800 MHz FSB. You can only use the 533 MHz Version.

[Keeper of Hellfire]

Sorry for the doublepost, but I have something to add: The chances are very low that you find a 4x-AGP card with one of the recommended chipsets except the ATI 9800, which has only conditional support. I don't think that the possible speed increase is worth the money.

[Angeteen]

I can understand the thing about the memory and it being faster and all, however, I went to newegg, and did some comparison of the features between the x800 and the x1600. Here is what I found out as far as the features were converned.

x800

SmartShader HD
SmoothVision HD
3Dc
HyperZ HD
VideoShader HD


X1600

CATALYST Software Drivers
12 Pixel Pipelines Architecture
8 Vertex Shader
SMARTSHADER Technology
VIDEOSHADER Technology
SMOOTHVISION Technology
HYPER Z III+ Technology
Dual Display Support
Avivo


Looking at it from this standpoint, I think that while the x1600 is a little slower, the performace it boasts should be better, right? Also, as for the memory, I might as well go with a 512MB ($180) since a 256MB costs $165. However, tell me, while the 800 is centered around high defintion, because of the system I'm using, it would be unable to make use of that high definiton, wouldn't it? Therefore wouldn't the x1600 be a better choice?

Also, since I'm inexperienced with reading the specs of graphics cards, the x1600 should have a better all-around quality compared to the x800, right, or am I misreading. If the performace is better, well, I think I can do with a *little* waiting.

As for the CPU upgrade, yeah, that's first on my list. I'm going from 1.80ghz to 2.80ghz. Here's the chip I plan on getting.

http://www.starmicro.net/detail.aspx?ID=118

[Kariudo]

found some info somewhere out there, and although it's aimed at mobile video cards (for laptops) I still find it relevant in this discussion.

1.Is an ATI Radon X1400 256MB better than an ATI Radeon X700 128MB?
This is a very common train of thought – more video memory must mean better performance. This is not true – the video card itself matters more than the memory it has.
In this case, the X700 is the faster card, even though it has half the video memory. The reason for this is fairly simple – the X1400, although it has 256MB of memory, cannot use all of it effectively.
Here's a primitive example. An office worker can use a maximum of three computers at a time. If he is given an additional three comptuers, is he any more productive? No, because he can only use three of them to begin with. The extra three do nothing.

as for the techs that the cards have, this is where newegg fails...they don't explain what the different techs do (which I why I look at tigerdirect too)
x800
x1600 (it has a lot of the same things that the x800 does)

I just realized that the x800 card is pci-e x16 instead of AGP 4/8x...and that the agp version is $140 but if you want to be 100% sure that it'l work with everything that APP 2.0 offers, then it's probably the way to go

[Angeteen]

x1600 (it has a lot of the same things that the x800 does)

*thinks*

Therefore it doesn't matter which I get, because both will work just as good, right? As for the extra 512MB memory, yeah, the reason I'm going with it is because the price difference is less than $20, so I might as well go with it. Still, now that I think of it, what is the difference between, say, SMOOTHVISION Technology, SMOOTHVISION HD? I mean, comparing the two, the only difference is that one has technology after it and the other HD after it (high definiton I guess).

Also, as for the AGP part, yeah, that is pretty important to me. I tend to shy away from PCIs due to that they are slower, and when in use, you have to worry about bottlenecks (might as well go with AGP so as to get the full benefit of the card). Either way, weather X800 or X1600, even if they were both at only 256MB, they are both just as likely too do good either way, right?

Also I noticed something else worth pointing out. Under the 3D API listing, it listed the X1600 as OpenGL 2.0, and for the X800 as OpenGL. Hmm...openGl? Isn't that some sort of glide wrapper or something? Is there any benefit to it? So which is the better part (more important)? Techology/HD or OpenGL/OpenGL 2.0? Man my head hurts. I think I'll check out those tigerdirect links you posted.