PC Hardware Articles in Category "Hardware"
One of the core values of Puget Systems is transparencyWe detest hype in the midst of an industry that is full of it. Our mission is to provide the highest quality hardware and consultation services to our customers, and to back up our decisions by freely sharing what we've learned along the way. To earn a place in our product line, a computer component undergoes rigorous testing. We apply the results of our testing, along with our years of experience in learning reliability trends and manufacturer characteristics, to make prudent decisions about what we can put our name behind, whether that's an individual part or an entire computer. With the following articles, we are writing up the results of these internal processes and discussions, and taking them public. We feel we can take this on with a unique perspective as we evaluate each topic with the experience, resources, and objectivity of a system builder. If there is a topic you'd like us to write about, email us at !
AMD's new 2nd Gen Ryzen Threadripper processors are absolute monsters, with the 2990WX in particular having 32(!) cores. But are they better than Intel for video editing?
DaVinci Resolve is a very GPU-intensive program, but it can still require a powerful CPU to match the amount of GPU power you may put into your system. We have seen diminishing returns with higher core count CPUs in the past, so the question is whether the 32 cores in the Threadripper 2990WX will increase performance or if you are better off with a lower core count CPU.
In the past, AMD's Threadripper CPUs have fared very well in Premiere Pro, but fell behind their Intel counterparts by the slimmest of margins. With the new 32 core Threadripper 2990WX and 16 core 2950X, will AMD finally overtake Intel as the best value for Premiere Pro users?
Photoshop is definitely not the target market for AMD's new Threadripper 2990WX 32 Core or 2950X 16 core CPUs, but even so we wanted to see how it stacks up against the previous generation Threadripper CPUs as well as a number of Intel Core i7/i9 CPUs.
For several years, After Effects has not performed very well with high core count CPUs - instead favoring processors that have higher per-core performance. This means that while AMD's new Threadripper CPUs like the 2990WX and 2950X are very impressive in some applications, they shouldn't be terribly great for After Effects compared to their Intel counterparts.
After choosing a 10-bit per channel graphics card (AMD Radeon Pro / Nvidia Quadro), and connecting it to a 10-bit monitor, you will want to make sure the graphics card is set to display 10 bit output in its software.
AMD just updated their high-performance Threadripper processor series, and the new top-end model - the 2990WX - is the fastest single CPU we've ever tested in V-Ray. This article will look at how it stacks up to other AMD and Intel chips, as well as Intel's dual Xeon configurations.
AMD just updated their high-performance Threadripper processor series, and the new top-end model - the 2990WX - has given the highest Cinebench multi-core score we've seen from a single CPU. This article will look at how it stacks up to the older Threadripper 1950X and a selection of Intel chips... and just as importantly, how it performs in single-core mode.
DaVinci Resolve is able to heavily utilize the GPU (or multiple GPUs) to greatly improve performance, but are you better off using an NVIDIA GeForce card or an AMD Radeon card?.
After Effects may not be able to take advantage of the GPU as much as other applications, but the question still comes up: AMD Radeon or NVIDIA GeForce? Which performs better in Ae and which will give you more performance for your dollar?
AMD vs NVIDIA is typically a very hot topic for PC enthusiasts and we often get requests to compare AMD's Radeon Vega video cards to their NVIDIA GeForce counterparts. Premiere Pro is able to take better advantage of the GPU than most other Adobe applications, but will AMD or NVIDIA give you more bang for your buck?
Depending on how you use Media Encoder, the GPU may or may not have a large impact on performance. If you use it primarily as a transcoding tool, it should be mostly CPU-bound - so is there any reason to use NVIDIA GeForce over AMD Radeon or vice versa?
Many users require the use of a workstation graphics card as that is the only way to display 10-bit color in Photoshop. But will an NVIDIA Quadro or an AMD Radeon Pro video card give you the best performance for your dollar?
We are often asked how AMD's Radeon Vega video cards compare to their NVIDIA GeForce counterparts. Photoshop rarely benefits from having a powerful GPU, but there is still a measurable difference between these two brands of cards.
PhotoScan makes use of the video cards in a computer to assist with the computation of certain steps. As such, the model of video card used can have an impact on the amount of time those steps take. In this article, we take a look at AMD's Radeon line - including the Vega 64 and 56 - and see how they stack up to NVIDIA's GeForce 1000-series.
GPU rendering engines like OctaneRender and Redshift utilize the computational power of the graphics processing chips on video cards to create photo-realistic images and animations. The more powerful the video card, the faster the rendering process goes - and multiple video cards can be used together to further improve performance. But can those video cards be a mix of different models, or do they all need to be identical?
Redshift is a GPU-based rendering engine, which recently updated from version 2.5.72 to 2.6.11. That update added compatibility with NVIDIA's Volta GPU architecture, and cards like the Titan V, but did it also improve render speeds?
Redshift is a GPU-based rendering engine, and the latest version 2.6.11 introduced compatibility with NVIDIA's Volta graphics architecture and cards like the Titan V. Lets take a look at how different GeForce and Titan models perform.
PhotoScan makes heavy use of both the central processors (CPUs) in a computer and the video cards (GPUs) to run many of the calculations involved in turning still images into a 3D model or map. Agisoft, the makers of PhotoScan, have versions available for both Windows and macOS - so let's take a look at how these two, competing computer platforms compare.
Now that OctaneRender has been updated to support the Volta GPU architecture, how well does its performance scale when using multiple Titan Vs? And how does that compare to other popular rendering cards like the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti?
OctaneRender is a GPU-based rendering engine, so the bulk of the processing it does is carried out on the video cards in a system. Different processors and motherboards can impact the number of cards that can fit in a single system, but do they matter beyond that? Does the CPU itself have any impact on rendering speed/performance?
PhotoScan makes heavy use of both the central processors (CPUs) in a computer and the video cards (GPUs) to run many of the calculations involved in turning still images into a 3D model or map. Intel's new Xeon Scalable processors offer configurations with dozens of CPU cores, as well as the ability to support multiple GPUs - so let's see how they perform in PhotoScan.
Intel has launched their new Xeon Scalable processor series, with very high core counts and multi-CPU configurations. How do they stack up to single-socket workstations using other Intel and AMD processors when rendering in V-Ray?