Jump to content

Pyrofan

Member
  • Posts

    102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards

This user doesn't have any awards

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Sorry for the delay, work caught up with me. Ive tried all that to no avail. My PC is clean, nothing is mining or eating up resources. Im not sure what is causing this issue.
  2. Yeah, somethings up I doubt my ryzen is dead after just two years. The thermals are fine. It's watercooled and underload never even get high. Yes, all cores are running. The laptop and desktop were both using the same save files, though the desktop save the files to three separate SSD's which helps performance. Quality is the same, though I can playback at a higher resolution on my laptop Temps never go above idle. Even under load the fans barely spin cause of the water cooler. Idel temp is around 36c
  3. I typically pride myself on understanding technology and how things work, or if they dont work, how to fix them. But boy oh boy, am I confused now. So here is my desktop: Gigabyte Gaming 3 B350M Ryzen 1700 32 Gb Trident Z Ram EVGA 1080ti Not a bad PC at all. The Ryzen 1700 is getting a little old but for what I do, I works fine. See, I am a full time video editor and producer. Since time is money, I need something that isnt slow. I get paid to edit, not watch a video buffer. Over the past few months, I've been editing off of my laptop. It's a HP Omen with a 8750H, 1070 Max-Q and 16gb of ram. So while it's just a laptop, it's been a champ at eating through DNxHR footage at 4k 60fps. This is no easy task. I decided though to edit a project on my desktop. I did some editing and noticed it was slightly slow, but maybe it was because I was also browsing the internet. So once I finished my task, I go to render a 12min, 4k timeline. Normally I expect on my desktop a 20-30 min render. I look, "4 hours, 43 minutes". I let it sit for 10 minutes, seeing if it was just a buggy frame that threw off the estimate but nope, it was now at 5 hours. I tried 3 more times and all of them said 5 hours. So I decided to see what my laptop said about the render. It rendered it in 37 minutes. How does my $1500 laptop, beat out my desktop. My desktop used to edit footage no problem but now, it cries at even the lightest color grade. Ive tried everything I know to do. I thought about reoverclocking my Ryzen and ram to 3.9 and 2933mhz because it used to run stable there but I updated the bios and didnt feel like redoing the overclock. But I dont understand why my performance is slow low.
  4. I really need something sooner than that, I know some websites have price match policies. HP already has a sale on the Omen 15t.
  5. I guess it's between the Omen with the 1070 for $1700, or an open box Aero 15X for $2k. The only real difference is gonna be battery life.
  6. Oh ok! I think the only other upgrades would be CPU (so like the Xeon's from the ThinkPads) or the GPU (Mine has the 1070 so really only a 1080 would be better) and both of those would be like sub 15% performance increase for almost 2x the price. The only other option would be one of those Sager or XoticPC laptops with desktop grade stuff but those arent really portable at all. Like I know I said I didnt care, but a 2in thick 12lbs laptop would be annoying.
  7. So right now, is the HP the best option? I just want the most performance without stepping into a $3k laptop.
  8. I agree but the price difference of $400 I might would just go for the Aero for the portability and the 1070. The thing is, most of the ThinkPad laptops are equipped with Quadros so the performance is less than the GTX counterpart in my applications. I can only go up to a P3200 6Gb which wont be able to deal with 4k 60 footage from what ive seen.
  9. So those are all pretty similar to my current size laptop which isnt bad. So any reason to go for one of these over something like a Aero 15X? Im fine with spending more money to get some performance upgrades or better battery.
  10. Location: US Budget: Not really a budget, just needs to meet my goals but the cheaper the better Weight: Light is better but I carry heavy camera gear all day so weight isnt an issue Battery: 4-6 hours would be great, but I know with a 4k screen thats gonna drop hard so as long as possible Special: Good screen (95-100% color accuracy), 4k, 16gb of ram, no spinning hard drives.
  11. Ive seen pretty much every video online about it. You say I wont be disappointed but from what I have read I am quite worried. I mean it cost much more than the Aero, for no performance upgrade.
  12. I agree but the XPS has knows thermal issues causing the nice 6 core processor you paid for to throttle down and the 1050Ti Max Q is pretty much on the same level as my current 970M and that is already struggling. If they could solve the thermal issues (Which I know you can undervolt) and had like a 1060/70, it would be a no brainer.
×