CPU for video editing - Quick Sync

[George64]

I want to build PC for video editing. I will use .mov files (h.264, mvi) made with Canon EOS 1100 D.
I heard that Intel`s CPUs are better for video editing because they have Quick Sync.
Some of them don`t have it (7700), but i58600k, i78700 and i78700k have it.

Is there anyone who is well informed about real benefits of Quick Sync when it comes to rendering?
I would like to hear something smart. Thank you!

And, do AMD`s CPUs have something similar to Intel`s Quick Sync?

[.Apex.]

3 minutes ago, George64 said:

I want to build PC for video editing. I will use .mov files (h.264, mvi) made with Canon EOS 1100 D.
I heard that Intel`s CPUs are better for video editing because they have Quick Sync.
Some of them don`t have it (7700), but i58600k, i78700 and i78700k have it.

Is there anyone who is well informed about real benefits of Quick Sync when it comes to rendering?
I would like to hear something smart. Thank you!

And, do AMD`s CPUs have something similar to Intel`s Quick Sync?

Quick Sync renders the video really fast actually, about doubles the speed of rendering of my i7-8700k when using handbrake, i've tested that on H.264 and H.265.
 

but the files are not small  it doesn't do well with compression, renders fast but the files are bigger, sometimes much bigger, it really depends.

[Mira Yurizaki]

Unless it's an APU, AMD's side doesn't have something like QuickSync by the nature of QuickSync and NVENC using the GPU. AMD's equivalent is VCE.

 

Otherwise, GPU based rendering is faster, but may not produce as good of quality for the same bitrate. But I say try it out anyway and see what you like.

[.Apex.]

Quick Sync is great if you wanna render a video quickly without caring much about size, it's pretty useful sometimes, didn't notice a difference in quality for me, but you may have different results, so i cant say the quality is the same.

[George64]

Well, I just want to upload them on YT so if YT doesn`t care about size why should I care about it?

The quality is the most important for me.

Ok, I will definitely go for Intel 8700 since I don`t have enough money for 8700k now (for good cooler, z370 motherboard, etc.)

Thank you guys for your answers.

[DrMacintosh]

If you are transcoding video, AMD is always going to win. 

 

If you are just throwing clips together Intel will give you the best performance, but ONLY if you are using an up to date version of Premiere Pro. 

[George64]

I will not only throw them together. I mean... that`s not the only thing I want to do. I want to make splitscreen (multicam) videos, put some subtitles, titles, and so on.

 

And, I will probably work with Corel VS or Cyberlink Power Director.

If Intel CPUs are not good for that software why would they write that someone should buy i7 for multicamera?

 

https://www.videostudiopro.com/en/products/videostudio/pro/#system-requirements