Professional video editing pc

A couple things I would add

Have an SSD for Windows and programs and use HDD for data

Video Editing loves memory. If your buying two 8GB sticks you might consider a Motherboard that has four slots so you can add another 16GB at a later date and not have to pull the existing two you bought. It is very important to match memory when adding after the fact. (Voltage, speed and timings)

I would likely buy a video card with more memory but maybe another member could comment on this. Any editors out there?

Myself I like a bigger monitor and I like two.

and just watch connections from video card to monitors. Are they a match. Current config.

Is the resolution high enough for jobs outside youtube.


Ken (not an editor)

I have to agree with most of the sentiments here, that rig above isn't going to cut it for video editing. I don't necessarily agree with needing two monitors though. A good 24-27 inch is a good start though.

And despite all the whatever Adobe products are the industry standard for a reason.... they do what the do extremely well. Sure, there are lots of video/photo editing software options out there that can some of the things Adobe can do, but none can do all the things Adobe can do. If you feel Adobe is your best option go for it. No need in settling only to spend more in the end - replacing what you bought because it didn't suit your needs after all.

I'm a longtime Adobe Photoshop user (since 2000) and Lightroom (since 2012) user and currently subscribe to the photography plan which includes both PS and LR. Anyway my system runs both rather well without issue.

That said, for video editing, I'd look at least an Intel i7 (I'm strictly Intel) or an AMD equivalent . I'd advise at minimum 16gig of RAM, though 32 would be idea. At least a 512gig SSD drive (I've got 5), and at least a 4TB HDD drive if you don't want to do multiple SSD's. For video, you might look to go at least a GTX 1060 or 1070 instead of a 1050. And the more RAM on the card the better (I've got a Radeon VII with 16gig of RAM).

We all have opinions (me included) on what we feel is best or economical, but you're the one who has to live with the machine so take things with a grain of salt and go from there.

Good luck.

My two cents.

I would suggest a different approach to setting specifications for hardware ...

Take a look at the software you intend to use and set up to meet the suggested hardware for the package, also look towards the higher end of the spec range to allow for future developments.

As for software Blackmagic Design are an Australian company that build and sell professional editing hardware to the film industry, they are based in Hollywood, so they are serious players. they also make software for their hardware desks

They have for a long while made their previous version of their top of the line software Free to use for anyone, this is an open attempt to get starters in the industry, film students etc familiar with them as a company and familiar with their software, the software can also work with other software such as that from Adobe

the latest free version is available here ... DaVinci Resolve 16 | Blackmagic Design the full software is not cheap at £229.00 but a lot cheaper than the equivalent Adobe rental costs when starting out. As it's the software used by the hollywood film editors it's good to learn, and is recognised in the film industry

The Adobe range is also an industry standard so going that way is a perfectly valid route but the way to spec should always go from software to hardware -

what do you want to do, then what do you need to achieve it .... should always be the Mantra when dealing with computer hardware

I agree with @sygnus21 that two monitors is not an essential starting out, although it can give additional editing control, if you get a reasonable TV with computer input options this can be used to show the output results whilst using the Main monitor to perform the edits. I do not do much if any Video work but use lightroom for stills development - often I "throw" a full size image onto a 40" TV next to my Desk to give live output of the image I'm working on

pparks1 said:

Well, that one is easy. Some people have only used the Intel platform for all of their builds. Intel historically has had the upper edge in performance. It's usually been a safe bet going with Intel. AMD has been considered the "budget" chip, and on an enthusiast forum, building out on "budget" hardware is not typically how it goes.

As an (Intel) "enthusiast" myself, I have to point out AMD no longer considers themselves the "budget chip" company and don't want the title. What they're about now is outperforming Intel not price undercutting them.

Am I ready to jump ship? Well at the moment I'm happy with my i9-9900K build. I will say I think the demise of Intel is greatly exaggerated. However, AMD isn't going away this time and it's not about "budget" chips