Best laptop configuration for 4K, 6K, 8K, h265

[shooter]

I have read Canon's h265 4:2:2 is even harder than h265 4:2:0... but there are people still complaining with modern processors:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Dell/comments/hbs81k/xps_15_9500_i7_10875_cant_edit_4k_h265_video/

 

In doubt what's the best?

A Hexa-core i7-9750H or Xeon E-2276M with the Quadro RTX 5000 16GB VRAM?

Or Octa-core i7-10875H with a RTX 2080 Max-Q 8GB VRAM?

Or yet the Octa-Core Ryzen 7 3700X but with the RTX 2070 8GB VRAM?

 

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-9750H-vs-Intel-Core-i7-10875H/m766364vsm1111393

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Xeon-E-2276M-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-3700X/m785884vs4043

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-7-3700X-vs-Intel-Core-i7-10875H/4043vsm1111393

 

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-RTX-2080-Mobile-Max-Q-vs-Nvidia-Quadro-RTX-5000/m704710vsm712800

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-RTX-2080-Mobile-Max-Q-vs-Nvidia-RTX-2070-Mobile/m704710vsm694798

 

So, is it more crucial an Octa-core CPU or a 16GB VRAM GPU?

 

 

[Stab]

For encoding/ decoding the CPU does almost all the work. So in this case buy the best CPU possible.

Unfortunately, all those cpu's don't have h265 acceleration built in the chip and therefore it's always going to be ineffecient at it.

Apple recently released an M1 chip which actually does support that. And even though it's a much slower / less powerful cpu than the options you mentioned, it might be faster at encoding and decoding (playpack) than most cpu's in this regard.

Check it out!

[shooter]

Thank you! I mean on Windows side.

 

Something wrong with the links. Here again now:

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Dell/comments/hbs81k/xps_15_9500_i7_10875_cant_edit_4k_h265_video/

 

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-9750H-vs-Intel-Core-i7-10875H/m766364vsm1111393

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Xeon-E-2276M-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-3700X/m785884vs4043

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-7-3700X-vs-Intel-Core-i7-10875H/4043vsm1111393

 

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-RTX-2080-Mobile-Max-Q-vs-Nvidia-Quadro-RTX-5000/m704710vsm712800

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-RTX-2080-Mobile-Max-Q-vs-Nvidia-RTX-2070-Mobile/m704710vsm694798

 

 

 

[josdr]

The Mac M1 will run all over the above. Nothing can beat dedicated hardware acceleration.  Nvidia cards from the 1660's and 20xx forward have a form of hardware nvenc encode decode , but you will probably buy an M1 for the price of a decent gpu. Graphics card are ridiculously overpriced and the costs to build a decent rig this way amount to too much instantly.

I suppose the budget option for you would be to get a 1660s gpu with the best cpu you can afford ,or go for any of the 20xx series card if you can afford them. There is of course the newer generation of gpus from Nvidia  if you are that flash with cash. I would buy the Mac M1, it costs as much as a top end gpu these days....

[gt3rs]

What software do you use? 

Do you want to edit and render 8k or use 8k on 4k timeline?

8k timeline in Resolve needs ideally 24 GB VRam. For 4k you need 8 GB VRam.

My notebook is an i9-10980hk, 2070 and can edit 4k h265 10bit 4:2:2 at 30 fps but at the limit so not ideal. Problem is 4:2:2, 4:2:0 are HW accelerated in the GPU so no problem. 

8k timeline is a no go with 8 GB VRam in Resolve. 8k Canon RAW on 4k timeline works quite well and this is most of my footage. You can work on a 4k timeline and render 8k but some of the gfx will not work.

All the video I saw so far they show m1 8k on a 4k timeline.... 

[gt3rs]

In theory the new ice lake and tiger lake CPUs have hvec 10bit 4:2:2 HW encode and decode: https://github.com/intel/media-driver/blob/master/README.md
Not sure that there are already notebooks with GPU with 8 GB Vram and these CPUs... also not sure Resolve already supports it. 

But it seems a matter of time and you will have h265 10bit 4:2:2 on intel too....
 

 

 

 

[shooter]

But, at what price? My budget is $1000-$2000...

Resolve, I believe the most recommended today perhaps.

Is the use of Proxies too much of a hassle?
 

Thank you.

[Cameramoto]

Even if you get a dedicated cpu or gpu decoder, you will need to encode proxies as a side car to edit h.265. It's been like that for as long as I can think. Original media like Red raw and many compressed media don't play well with the reaction time needed in an editing session. You need tack sharp stop and play from your editing software. No frame skipping, no lag, no audio out of sync. So don't bother trying. As soon as you will build a fast pace edit with multiple clips of ony a few frames on the beat of the music, frame skipping will occure.

 

That's why Final cut X and Avid creates de facto optimized medias.

[kye]

10 hours ago, shooter said:

But, at what price? My budget is $1000-$2000...

Resolve, I believe the most recommended today perhaps.

Is the use of Proxies too much of a hassle?

There are two ways to buy a computer for video editing.  The first is to look at what performance you need and buy something that can deliver that for you, regardless of price.  The second is to set a budget and get the most you can for that, accepting whatever level of performance that gives you and working around the limitations.

$2000 is isn't even in the same universe as the first option, so your only hope is to buy the best performance you can, and then work out the best proxy workflow for your NLE and situation.

To get good editing and colour grading performance, your system needs to be capable of maybe 2-4 times (or more) the performance required to play the media you're editing. Even a simple cut requires your computer to load the next clip, skip to the in point of the next clip, if it's IPB then it needs to retrace in the file back to the previous keyframe, then render each frame from there forwards until it knows what the first frame on your timeline looks like, and it needs to do all that while playing the previous clip.  This doesn't include putting a grade on the clips once they're decoded, or even having to process multiple frames for things like temporal NR, etc.

Playing a file is one thing, editing is something else entirely.

By the way, Hollywood films are regularly shot in 2.8K or 3.2K and processed and delivered in 2K, so trying to convince someone that you need an 8K workflow is basically saying you need 16 times the image quality of a multi-million dollar Hollywood film, so good luck with that.  Most systems work just fine with 2K by the way....

[shooter]

Yes, it is. Multi-million dollar Hollywood films don't need it. Different production values. Different gear. Etc. We cannot compare their cameras with ours. Our 1080p is far away of theirs. Our 8K is a way to improve our production value. Different targets too. We can shoot 8K today, why to end with a master below than that!?? Why not take advantage of a future proof?

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, shooter said:

We can shoot 8K today, why to end with a master below than that!?? Why not take advantage of a future proof?

Sometimes you have to be brutally honest with yourself and admit that so called "future proof" is a delusional dream that the likes of RED are selling you. 
Don't buy the B.S.
As in reality, nobody will care about your production a couple of years from now. You're not creating the next "Gone with the Wind" masterpiece that will be spoken of for generations to come. (& that wasn't shot in 8K!)

For 99.99% of us, we don't need 8K deliverables. Not this year, not next year, not the year after that, or even the year after that. 

By the time you "need" 8K deliverables, there will be cameras and PCs out far better than any which are out now, and costing far less too. So why waste your thousands and thousands of dollars right now? Just get yourself a quality 4K camera and PC rig. 

[shooter]

Please don't derail the discussion. This is zero connected with yours. If I have 8K recording, I want to finish my master in the same resolution. This is nothing about delivery. Your battles don't fit.

Future proof can mean one or a couple of decades later. To each his own.

[shooter]

I understand you want to express your idea. Where you're going.

People are not formatted. You like your way. You use your 4k camera. Other people record 8k. For different reasons, not yours. It's useless to tell other people to do what we want to do. The world will not change because of your beliefs. Also useless because 8k doesn't cost thousands and thousands of dollars right now. We aren't all trying to follow hollywood. Lots of filmmakers in the world, you're just one of them.

[IronFilm]

3 minutes ago, shooter said:

Also useless because 8k doesn't cost thousands and thousands of dollars right now.

The difference between an otherwise identical 8K vs 4K setup when it comes to cameras, or to a PC to handle it smoothly, or the extra storage required across an entire film / series, then yes, each of those components is thousands of dollars extra. 

Are you really saying you've got nowhere that you could put that which you'd get a better return from? 

[shooter]

You talk from your angle. Return. Business. There isn't one type of filmmaker. Your motivation is not mine. Your clients are not mine. Your product isn't mine. Etc, etc, etc. There are smartphones recording 8k right now. Your clients aren't expecting you will deliver to them in 8k. That part we both understand. The part that you don't understand is that your liking, your needs aren't mine. Vice versa. I am recording 8k right now. I want to have my masters in 8k. Again: your reasons aren't mine. I am not expecting they are. I imagine you too.

[shooter]

This looks like when a woman decides to love a man and her friends say to her he's not the one! 😆🤣

[Tim Sewell]

1 hour ago, shooter said:

I am recording 8k right now. I want to have my masters in 8k.

That's fine - but you're going to need to spend a *lot* more than 2000.

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, Tim Sewell said:

That's fine - but you're going to need to spend a *lot* more than 2000.

Exactly, @shooter's budget and "requirements" don't match at all!

Even worse that they want it in a laptop. 

[Cameramoto]

6 hours ago, shooter said:

If I have 8K recording, I want to finish my master in the same resolution. This is nothing about delivery

You can edit a 8k film with a 1000$ laptop. Just import your originals in 8K, make 1280p prores LT Proxies on a 1280p timeline to edit en send reviews. Now that you're happy with the cut export a XML cut list to grade in Resolve on the 8K original from the edit only converted to prores 444. Then grade on a 8K timeline previewed in 1080p or 4k. Then export in 8K master prores HQ or DNXHR.

You can stay in Resolve for all the steps and make proxys and optimised medias along the way. it's 300$. Far cheaper then a 5 000$ system you ask for.

[kye]

10 hours ago, shooter said:

Yes, it is. Multi-million dollar Hollywood films don't need it. Different production values. Different gear. Etc. We cannot compare their cameras with ours. Our 1080p is far away of theirs. Our 8K is a way to improve our production value. Different targets too. We can shoot 8K today, why to end with a master below than that!?? Why not take advantage of a future proof?

Fair enough.

Unfortunately, your budget isn't sized appropriately for the resolutions you're talking about.

I think you have three paths forward:

• Give up on the laptop and add a zero to your budget, making it $20000 instead of $2000, then go find where people are talking about things like multi-GPU-watercooling setups and where to put the server racks and how to run the cables to the control room
• Do nothing and wait for Apple to release the 16" MBP with their new chipset in it (this could be a few years wait though and no guarantees about 8K)
• Work with proxies

Proxies are the free option, at least in dollar terms, and you probably don't need to spend any money to get decent enough performance.  I'd suggest rendering 1080p proxies in either Prores HQ or DNxHD HQ.  This format should be low enough resolution for a modest machine to work with acceptable performance, but high enough resolution and colour depth so that you can do almost all your editing and image processing on the proxy files, and they will be a decent enough approximation of how the footage looks.  Things like NR and texture effects would need to be adjusted while looking at the source footage directly, but apart from that you should be able to work with the Proxy files and then just swap to the source files and render the project in whatever resolution you want to deliver and master in.