ASUS ProArt Z490-CREATOR vs MSI MEG Z490 GODLIKE

[Anannyo]

Hey guys,

 

I am only going to use this PC for absolutely video editing and rendering workstation purpose; no gaming at all. I am going to use i9-10900K processor for this build. Which motherboard will be best for the absolute video editing performance: ASUS ProArt Z490-CREATOR or MSI MEG Z490 GODLIKE? Please help!!

 

Also feel free to suggest better components for absolute video editing and rendering performance. Thank you!!

 

Cheers!!

[jaslion]

For video editing and rendering a 3900x or 3950x would be better.

[Anannyo]

13 minutes ago, jaslion said:

For video editing and rendering a 3900x or 3950x would be better.

Hey @jaslion, why not AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X or 3970X?

[gloop]

1 minute ago, Anannyo said:

Hey @jaslion, why not AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X or 3970X?

If you have the budget, sure. 

[jaslion]

Just now, Anannyo said:

Hey @jaslion, why not AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X or 3970X?

You could do that too BUT that entirely depends on what applications you use as not every program can actually use all those cores effectively or flat out can't use them all.

[Anannyo]

2 minutes ago, jaslion said:

You could do that too BUT that entirely depends on what applications you use as not every program can actually use all those cores effectively or flat out can't use them all.

Yeah, I am gonna use Adobe Premiere, After Effects, Photoshop, Illustrator, Lightroom; also Da Vinci Resolve mainly for video production. Well, efficiency and the performance is my major concern. I am even considering either to make hackintosh or get Mac Pro if I can run Mac Pro without buying Pro Display XDR. Spending $6000 on Pro Display XDR is too much for me. So still considering all options. My best bet is i9-10900K as Apple is gonna switch to ARM from next year anyway. 

 

2 minutes ago, gloop said:

If you have the budget, sure. 

Yes I can afford AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X or 3970X; but AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X is too much and don't wanna spend that much.

[jaslion]

2 minutes ago, Anannyo said:

Yeah, I am gonna use Adobe Premiere, After Effects, Photoshop, Illustrator, Lightroom; also Da Vinci Resolve mainly for video production. Well, efficiency and the performance is my major concern. I am even considering either to make hackintosh or get Mac Pro if I can run Mac Pro without buying Pro Display XDR. Spending $6000 on Pro Display XDR is too much for me. So still considering all options. My best bet is i9-10900K as Apple is gonna switch to ARM from next year anyway. 

 

Yes I can afford AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X or 3970X; but AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X is too much and don't wanna spend that much.

Those programs start not being used fully around 24 threads so a 3950x would be plenty. A mac pro would be worse in performance because it goes for a lot of cores that don't have the best single core performance it's also a 2 gen old cpu now.

 

If you want to go overkill you could go for a 3960x but not needed.

[Anannyo]

9 minutes ago, jaslion said:

Those programs start not being used fully around 24 threads so a 3950x would be plenty. A mac pro would be worse in performance because it goes for a lot of cores that don't have the best single core performance it's also a 2 gen old cpu now.

 

If you want to go overkill you could go for a 3960x but not needed.

I have been told that Mac Pro T2 chip and after burner card optimize the performance of the video editing and rending on Mac Pro and it performs 2x to 3x than the same hardwares normally would in any setup, even with MacOS. However, getting any Mac machine at the moment will be a loss project as Apple is switching to ARM processor in 2021 and almost all of their MacOS lineup (may be except Mac Pro) will be replaced by 2022.

[jaslion]

2 minutes ago, Anannyo said:

I have been told that Mac Pro T2 chip and after burner card optimize the performance of the video editing and rending on Mac Pro and it performs 2x to 3x than the same hardwares normally would in any setup, even with MacOS. However, getting any Mac machine at the moment will be a loss project as Apple is switching to ARM processor in 2021 and almost all of their MacOS lineup (may be except Mac Pro) will be replaced by 2022.

That is in final cut pro. The t2 chip is just a security chip that basically says. If you do not have all apple parts in here that are bound to this system with a hardware id I will not allow this computer to work. Part from the gpu ram and cpu in the mac pro.

[Anannyo]

17 minutes ago, jaslion said:

That is in final cut pro. The t2 chip is just a security chip that basically says. If you do not have all apple parts in here that are bound to this system with a hardware id I will not allow this computer to work. Part from the gpu ram and cpu in the mac pro.

Actually the test was run on between i3-8100 Mac mini with T2 and iMac 4K without T2. The Mac mini took 3 minutes  32 seconds while iMac 4K took 6 minutes 29 seconds. The i3-8100 Mac mini has out performed iMac 4k by 2 minutes 57 seconds!! The link to the full article is here: https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/04/09/apples-t2-chip-makes-a-giant-difference-in-video-encoding-for-most-users

 

Anyway, let's see what Apple announces on 22nd June. I will keep exploring my options and will go for the best one even if I need to spend a bit extra (not too much haha).

[jaslion]

4 minutes ago, Anannyo said:

Actually the test was run on between i3-8100 Mac mini with T2 and iMac 4K without T2. The Mac mini took 3 minutes  32 seconds while iMac 4K took 6 minutes 29 seconds. The i3-8100 Mac mini has out performed iMac 4k by 2 minutes 57 seconds!! The link to the full article is here: https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/04/09/apples-t2-chip-makes-a-giant-difference-in-video-encoding-for-most-users

 

Anyway, let's see what Apple announces on 22nd June. I will keep exploring my options and will go for the best one even if I need to spend a bit extra (not too much haha).

This is for video transcoding tho. So for the editing process you'd still want a rather beefy system. Seems the t2 chip is doing some sort of system management at the hardware level. However it does seem that it's benefits crumble to faster a system you get as it can only do so much to accelerate.

[jaslion]

After looking a bit more the gist of it is: t2 makes things work more efficiently without wasting resources but the faster the cpu the less it's going to help. So pretty much not really applicable in your situation.

[ShadowChaser]

I think Buildzoid said it best, there's no point buying a $750 'do it all' mobo when any of the $300 ones will be better if you know what you're using it for. I'm inclined to agree that buying a 3950X would make more sense, especially since GPU acceleration is becoming more and more important anyway in the video editing and transcoding space. The 10th gen desktop chips just aren't there in terms of efficiency and anyone buying them outside of strictly single threaded workloads needs to reevaluate their priorities, as I don't understand why it would be necessary to sacrifice so much in terms of cooling and power for them.

[Anannyo]

8 hours ago, ShadowChaser said:

I think Buildzoid said it best, there's no point buying a $750 'do it all' mobo when any of the $300 ones will be better if you know what you're using it for. I'm inclined to agree that buying a 3950X would make more sense, especially since GPU acceleration is becoming more and more important anyway in the video editing and transcoding space. The 10th gen desktop chips just aren't there in terms of efficiency and anyone buying them outside of strictly single threaded workloads needs to reevaluate their priorities, as I don't understand why it would be necessary to sacrifice so much in terms of cooling and power for them.

 

The thing is that 5 years ago I had an AMD build with AMD FX-8350, but did not have good experience with the performance and my younger brother's i3 1st gen Macbook Air was performing better than my 8 core build. I have been told that it is not always about core counts but the performance of each core. I know AMD has come a long way and intel is stuck to the same generation of processor. So I can't say AMD is not better option than intel as all people are saying and using AMD over intel now a days. Plus I am gonna use MacOS, hackintosh, in my build; whether it is AMD or intel as I can't tolerate Windows either. Constant crashes and slowing down with time the system is up and running; along with .exe file missing error and number of time the system going into update; so no matter whoever tells me what I can't stand Windows. So, I need to see which processor and components will perform better with MacOS along with the apps that I am gonna use for video editing and rendering. That is the reason I am being so much analytical about everything. And I can't afford Mac Pro and will never get iMac because: i) can't upgrae; ii) major reason: thermal throttling due to overheating and minimum cooling afford from Apple. So, next couple years no Apple until they can produce better results than Intel and AMD with their ARM chips and master it.

[ShadowChaser]

27 minutes ago, Anannyo said:

 

The thing is that 5 years ago I had an AMD build with AMD FX-8350, but did not have good experience with the performance and my younger brother's i3 1st gen Macbook Air was performing better than my 8 core build. I have been told that it is not always about core counts but the performance of each core. I know AMD has come a long way and intel is stuck to the same generation of processor. So I can't say AMD is not better option than intel as all people are saying and using AMD over intel now a days. Plus I am gonna use MacOS, hackintosh, in my build; whether it is AMD or intel as I can't tolerate Windows either. Constant crashes and slowing down with time the system is up and running; along with .exe file missing error and number of time the system going into update; so no matter whoever tells me what I can't stand Windows. So, I need to see which processor and components will perform better with MacOS along with the apps that I am gonna use for video editing and rendering. That is the reason I am being so much analytical about everything. And I can't afford Mac Pro and will never get iMac because: i) can't upgrae; ii) major reason: thermal throttling due to overheating and minimum cooling afford from Apple. So, next couple years no Apple until they can produce better results than Intel and AMD with their ARM chips and master it.

Yeah, those were dark times for AMD

If you want to hackintosh I think you're limited to intel cpus and radeon gpus, which sucks. I guess Windows ain't for everyone but both of those problems you think you'll experience pretty much only arise when you stop maintaining your OS, which on a professional machine you ought to be doing anyway.

If you do want MacOS I guess Z490 makes sense if you don't need ECC capability and are ok with the RAM cap of 128GB. I think the Radeon VII is the best GPU that MacOS can support, but good luck finding one for a decent price.

[Anannyo]

2 hours ago, ShadowChaser said:

I guess Windows ain't for everyone but both of those problems you think you'll experience pretty much only arise when you stop maintaining your OS, which on a professional machine you ought to be doing anyway.

Not true, Windows needs maintenance; MacOS not much; I am using High Sierra for programming and photo editing job for last 2 years on a Hackintosh setup and did not do anything; not a single update or anything! I put it to sleep, and wake it up when I need to work and I can keep working without requiring to restart; I restart it once or twice a month if I feel like to.

 

And my wife brought a Asus Zenbook with i7 8th gen, it has SSD and windows 10 64 bit and 16gb ram and very good GPU; and sound does not work after wake up; random exe error and goes to auto update when it feels like to and so on. And let's not talk about security and virus and all.

 

So man, sorry, MacOS is the supreme OS and I am not biased; I am saying it from my experience. I have used Windows from 2001 to 2018, 17+ years as my main OS and I have switched to MacOS for my professional use just because I had enough with Windows. Sticking to Windows would be so easy for me to make the build and I would use NVidia Cuda, GPU; but the performance of MacOS is so supreme in terms of stability and solidity; I am ok to take all the frustrations in building the machine for optimal MacOS than using Windows ever again for my professional work. 

 

2 hours ago, ShadowChaser said:

If you do want MacOS I guess Z490 makes sense if you don't need ECC capability and are ok with the RAM cap of 128GB. I think the Radeon VII is the best GPU that MacOS can support, but good luck finding one for a decent price.

Yeah, at least for next 2-3 years until Apple sorts out everything with ARM and can delivery supreme workstation machine that performs on par with intel or amd. 

 

AMD RDNA 2 Big Navi will be featured in this year's iMac with 10th gen i9. So, may be there is a chance that I will be able to use AMD RDNA 2 Big Navi in this build. Otherwise, will have to stick with Radeon VII. 

 

[ShadowChaser]

2 hours ago, Anannyo said:

Not true, Windows needs maintenance; MacOS not much; I am using High Sierra for programming and photo editing job for last 2 years on a Hackintosh setup and did not do anything; not a single update or anything! I put it to sleep, and wake it up when I need to work and I can keep working without requiring to restart; I restart it once or twice a month if I feel like to.

 

And my wife brought a Asus Zenbook with i7 8th gen, it has SSD and windows 10 64 bit and 16gb ram and very good GPU; and sound does not work after wake up; random exe error and goes to auto update when it feels like to and so on. And let's not talk about security and virus and all.

 

So man, sorry, MacOS is the supreme OS and I am not biased; I am saying it from my experience. I have used Windows from 2001 to 2018, 17+ years as my main OS and I have switched to MacOS for my professional use just because I had enough with Windows. Sticking to Windows would be so easy for me to make the build and I would use NVidia Cuda, GPU; but the performance of MacOS is so supreme in terms of stability and solidity; I am ok to take all the frustrations in building the machine for optimal MacOS than using Windows ever again for my professional work. 

 

Yeah, at least for next 2-3 years until Apple sorts out everything with ARM and can delivery supreme workstation machine that performs on par with intel or amd. 

 

AMD RDNA 2 Big Navi will be featured in this year's iMac with 10th gen i9. So, may be there is a chance that I will be able to use AMD RDNA 2 Big Navi in this build. Otherwise, will have to stick with Radeon VII. 

 

Hmm, I think you must have gotten lucky, though to be fair aplle support tends to be quite good for their prosumer customers on the software front. I used to work for a computer repair store and from my experience, while Macs tended to have fewer problems, when they do it's rather catastrophic. And just because you don't set a time for windows to auto-update (which is pretty much what MacOS does) doesn't mean others don't - I've never had an update intrude on my work. Now granted MacOS is superior in terms of how intuitive it is and how stable it is, but it is by no means currently the more 'secure' OS - the reason why it is still touted as such is due to hardware implementations like the T2 security chip, which won't be present on a hackintosh build. That's my opinion on the subject - it still comes down to general safety and common sense in the end, because if a malicious party were to want to plant anything they could with relative ease on either platform. If security was such a concern there are more options on the market but I'm not well versed on this field at all so I'll leave it to the experts.

 

I think it's generally a good idea to wait for what AMD can offer with their new Radeons, and to also see how easily and how well they hackintosh. You know, I went the complete opposite way as you did, sticking with MacOS up till Lion before switching to Windows 7 and 10 XD. I'm actually really excited for what they're doing to bring ARM to the table - provided that they can get a powerful chip that 'just works'. That might be enough to let me switch back for my casual use.

 

I think your wife got supremely unlucky, or it might just be another Asus goof. They have the really good and the superbly bad, so who knows? I have been daily driving XPS 13s for the last few generations and they are much more 'stable' than other PCs I've used. I really don't know what exe error you're talking about bc I've never experienced it and my colleagues have no clue either. Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if it is just some niche Windows thing haha

[Anannyo]

1 hour ago, ShadowChaser said:

I think it's generally a good idea to wait for what AMD can offer with their new Radeons, and to also see how easily and how well they hackintosh. You know, I went the complete opposite way as you did, sticking with MacOS up till Lion before switching to Windows 7 and 10 XD. I'm actually really excited for what they're doing to bring ARM to the table - provided that they can get a powerful chip that 'just works'. That might be enough to let me switch back for my casual use.

Basically one of the main reasons that I make hackintosh instead of buying Mac devices is thermal throttling; so basically with the same intel cpu I get better superior performance with MacOS. And catastrophic blunder can happen only with Mac devices, not with Hackintosh because most of the hackintoshers keep clone backup of the system and can restore if needed to. And if it can be installed once, it can be installed again. Anyway, yeah if ARM processor can keep the heat low as they generally are at the moment and can make the powerful chip; I will buy Mac devices instead of making hackintosh.

 

Yep, I am very hopeful about the Big Navi and after learning that iMac is gonna have support in it just made it super convenient for me!