Need Advice on Notebook for Video Editing

[megamachine]

I've been toying with the idea of getting a notebook for video editing. For my lifestyle at the moment, desktops are not practical. So, I need some advice on some possible options for customizing a notebook PC. How's this look?

-Nvidia GeForce GO 7900 GTX PCI-Express 16X Graphics with 512MB DDR3
-2GB Dual Channel DDR SDRAM at 400MHz - 2 X 1024MB Memory
-Two internal 100GB Seagate SATA 7200rpm HDDs
-AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ Processor

Regarding the two internal HDDs, I have the option of RAID0 or RAID1 or no RAID. I've been reading up on this a bit, but have no clear idea of how that would work with the two HDDs installed on the same PC. If I have them set up as RAID0, for example, can I install XP Pro and my editing software, and also have my work file folders, on the same two drive array? Or is it better to keep the two HDDs separate (no RAID). I'm a little bit foggy on this question.

I use a variety of softwares for video editing, mostly Ulead and Adobe, but will also like to use TMPGEnc, DVD Decrypter and other favorites. Any issues with software on this setup (and in particular if I have the HDDs set in RAID).

Any opinions, advice or other options are most welcome, with many thanks.

[techreactor]

I've been toying with the idea of getting a notebook for video editing. For my lifestyle at the moment, desktops are not practical. So, I need some advice on some possible options for customizing a notebook PC. How's this look?

-Nvidia GeForce GO 7900 GTX PCI-Express 16X Graphics with 512MB DDR3
-2GB Dual Channel DDR SDRAM at 400MHz - 2 X 1024MB Memory
-Two internal 100GB Seagate SATA 7200rpm HDDs
-AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ Processor

Looks like a good configuration but you can look at the Core2Duo also nowadays with some price comparison. It would be better to include a Dual layer lightscribe DVD+-RW into this package, if not done already.

Regarding the two internal HDDs, I have the option of RAID0 or RAID1 or no RAID. I've been reading up on this a bit, but have no clear idea of how that would work with the two HDDs installed on the same PC. If I have them set up as RAID0, for example, can I install XP Pro and my editing software, and also have my work file folders, on the same two drive array? Or is it better to keep the two HDDs separate (no RAID). I'm a little bit foggy on this question.

I use a variety of softwares for video editing, mostly Ulead and Adobe, but will also like to use TMPGEnc, DVD Decrypter and other favorites. Any issues with software on this setup (and in particular if I have the HDDs set in RAID).

Any opinions, advice or other options are most welcome, with many thanks.

depends on what is your preference, you need to protect your data or get better performance out of the HDD. Although IMO, laptop HDD's are already very robust and do not crash very often.

Using a RAID 0 array without backing up any changes made to its data at least daily is a loud statement that that data is not important to you.

RAID 1 is used for applications requiring high fault tolerance at a low cost, without heavy emphasis on large amounts of storage capacity or top performance. Especially useful in situations where the perception is that having a duplicated set of data is more secure than using parity. For this reason, RAID 1 is popular for accounting and other financial data. It is also commonly used for small database systems, enterprise servers, and for individual users requiring fault tolerance with a minimum of hassle and cost. Although you also half your storage capacity by using RAID 1. i.e. a 100 GB * 2 disk will give you a storage capacity of 100 GB only.

[megamachine]

Thanks for the reply, techreactor. Some makers offer the option of the Meron processor, so I might get that instead of the Athlon, and a DVD DL writer is stock on most of these machines. Actually, they do service primarily as gaming machines, but also seem to have some users recommending them for video. On the RAID question, I read up on that quite a bit, at least to understand the ups and downs of each array in general terms, and would be partial toward using RAID0 for maximum performance. However, what I am not clear about is the question of housing the OS and my software installations on the same physical drive as the video editing files, since I will not necessarily be using this machine with an external HDD. So, if I set up the two drives as RAID0, will the OS and programs not see it as a single physical drive? Anyone have any experience with that? Some video editing software, such as Premiere Pro, recommends having the program installation on a dedicated physical drive and using another physical drive for the project working folders and temp storage. This machine comes with the two 100GB Seagates onboard, as noted above, but if I configure them as RAID0 will that compromise performance of my video editing software installed on that array? Hope some one can weigh in on the particulars of this question. Many thanks.

[Chewy]

the raid 0 will not compromise performance, it will just double(or more) the chance of catastropic failure. As long as you get the 7200 rpm drives, don't stripe, one hickup and you'll be sorry.

[techreactor]

However, what I am not clear about is the question of housing the OS and my software installations on the same physical drive as the video editing files, since I will not necessarily be using this machine with an external HDD. So, if I set up the two drives as RAID0, will the OS and programs not see it as a single physical drive? Anyone have any experience with that? Some video editing software, such as Premiere Pro, recommends having the program installation on a dedicated physical drive and using another physical drive for the project working folders and temp storage. This machine comes with the two 100GB Seagates onboard, as noted above, but if I configure them as RAID0 will that compromise performance of my video editing software installed on that array? Hope some one can weigh in on the particulars of this question. Many thanks.

With RAID0 you are essentially making your data spread over two drives. So when you Install your OS, and one of the HDD goes bad, you might even loose your OS also.

The performance will not be compromised.

But I suggest you use them as two different disks without any RAID. Use one for your OS and source data and the other as your destination and processing area. This way you are better off in terms of disaster management of your HDD with vry little to NO performance impact.

[megamachine]

Thanks Chewy and techreactor, I was aware of the dangers of RAID0 and willing to take the risk for a significant performance boost (really tired of my present rig chugging along to preview or render video files), but I have read some who say that, as techreactor suggests, the performance boost is not that great anyway. So, it sounds like having the OS and work files on different physical drives is the way to go, and if I do get this beast it will be no RAID. Glad I checked with you!

On a related note, anyone have any views on the desktop replacement notebook PCs from companies like Voodoo, Sager, Hypersonic, M-Tech, and others who seem to be reselling D900 series machines made by Clevo?

[Chewy]

for what you are doing I would use a core duo cpu, an external dvd burner
and partition the system drive, leaving a little more than half for data.

[megamachine]

Thanks Chewy, I always appreciate your advice. May I ask a few more Qs?

For CPUs, which are at the moment in the "sweet spot" in terms of power vs performance? Here's those available for the notebooks I have been looking at:

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200 up to 4800
AMD Athlon FX 60
AMD Opteron 185
Intel T2400 up to 2600

Most of these machines come with the option of getting an internal dual layer DVD writer, and some have the additional option of two internal CD/DVD drives. Why do you recommend using an external DVD burner?

For HDDs, I'll go with 100GB SATA 7200rpm, and most seem to use Seagate, but some use Hitachi. In your opinion, how do these two size up? And, if there are two internal HDDs, one for OS and programs and one for data, should both of them be 7200rpm? Any disadvantage of having one 5400?

Hope it's not too much trouble, with many thanks for your valuable advice.

[Chewy]

well make the system drive the 7200, a 5400 can probably keep up with any transcode and will only slow a drive to drive rip slightly

how in the heck are they putting full desktop cpu's in a laptop?
power use and heat wise the T2400 would come out on top but the X2 4200 is faster.

the 4200 and T2400 are the best bang for the buck

seagate way over hitachi, reliability wise

[megamachine]

I see, so 7200 for the system drive for sure. But if I am going to do video capturing, presumably on the data drive, would it not be better to have the second drive 7200 also? Or, given the size of these drives, could I partition the 7200, half for system and half for capture, and use the 5400 for data?

Some of these machines are beastly, with two HDDs, two optical drive bays and desktop CPUs. Others not so much so, I am still sorting out the choices. You mention the T2400 and the X2 4200, but are there any advantages to stepping those up to T 2500 or T2600 and X2 4600 or 4800? The heat and speed trade offs, I guess I would prefer speed, as these have multiple fans.

On the HDDs, I'll go with the Seagates, most seem to be offering them stock.

[Chewy]

I don't see paying twice as much for a cpu that's gonna overheat and only give 10-20% performance gain, if that.

With most video encoding you'll be running 2 cores at their max, no matter how efficiently they design a desktop replacement it's not going to take the place of my 90mm cpu fan or my 120mm case fan.

A 5400 rpm drive can easily keep up with the fastest capture, but if a 7200 drive isn't much more go for it.

Forget any X2 cpu with extra L2, it's a waste as the onboard memory controller makes it redundant. Benchs prove it.

[megamachine]

Point taken on heat, thanks Chewy. I'll mull over the 7200/5400, but as I recall the prices are not that much higher for 7200 all around. When you say forget X2 with extra L2, does that mean stick with 4200? Which are prone to overheating?

[Chewy]

amd is dropping the extra L2, no bang for the buck, probably extra heat.

T2400 would be the best bet, performance, power and heat combined

now a true desktop core duo would be even better, they just aren't available yet, but should be soon

[megamachine]

Got it, many thanks Chewy. I'm not going to rush into this.

[Chewy]

If you are going to spend 3-5K I wouldn't rush into any purchase