Will the Intel HD Graphics processor be enough for 1080 HD viewing and editing?

Hey Guys and Gals,

Will the Intel HD Graphics processor be enough for 1080 HD viewing and editing? I have spoken to numerous companies offering HD editing software and they have said that they do not use the graphics processors in independent graphic cards. They say that HD editing is dependent on memory, HD and the CPU.

Accordingly, the Intel HD Graphics processor should be enough, however, I am leery about this, especially considering the future. I am concerned that in the very near future these companies will start to use the GPUs in these powerful graphic cards.

I am asking because independent graphic cards drain more power (even in switchable formats), add cost and also limit your configuration in some machines. For example, the t-410s by lenovo cannot have an expansion port and a switchable graphics card.

So what do you think. Is it a better idea to get an independent graphic card or should I just stick the stock Intel HD Graphics processor? Why?

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,
Mario

 

Video editing is indeed a CPU intensive task, not a GPU intensive task. Playback used to be a CPU intensive task, but nowadays any integrated GPU can offload full HD video. If you're not going to game or do any sort of rendering, there really isn't much point in getting a discrete GPU.

Unless you want to try like CUDA-based encoding or something...

 

Thanks Commander Wolf for the quick response. Yeah, I am not doing any rendering at all. The only thing I am going to be running is HD videos and editing HD home movies.

DO you think that HD editing programs may start taking advantage of the gpu as well as the cpu (like adobe premiere does?)

 

Traditionally Commander Wolf is correct. However, with the introduction of Adobe CS5 that tradition is about to change.

I've little doubt that once the enormous advantages of the GPU in editing are fully realized, every software manufacturer around will be jumping on that bandwagon. As for the hardware, Intel is already there.

 

OpenCL and DirectCompute should help to speed up the process of GPU usage in video editing applications. There is definitely a lot of potential for it, because video is hugely parallel, as are GPUs. That said, it's still going to be a while before we see widespread usage of GPGPU.

 

For parallelizable tasks like video rendering a desktop is 2x as fast as a laptop at the same price. Plus you can't stuff a big hdd raid into a laptop. HD video on a laptop works if you are in a pinch, but simply can't compete with a desktop. Whether you get the integrated or some not-that-fast-either mobile dedicated graphics is moot, imho.

 

I'm sorry, but twice as fast might be a bit of an exaggeration. Sure, you'll get a slightly faster rendering time with desktop; and notebooks do cost more than a comparably equipped desktop, but that's true generally for laptops.

Nevertheless, a well equipped workstation can compete quite satisfactorily with a desktop in all but the most demanding and extreme circumstances. You are however, correct about the storage and price. But what you give up in that capacity and extra cost, you gain in portability and convenience.

 

For what the OP is going to be doing, the Intel HD Graphics will be plenty. Heck, my 4500m HD plays HD perfectly. And I run Adobe CS4 without any issue.

 

Coming at enthusiast/semi pro editing/encoding from another point of view the majority of laptop screens are not up to the task of correcting or grading colour contrast etc.

Once you have conceded the need to plug in an external monitor . . probably an external mouse or pad, and the AC adapter, and headphones /decent speakers . . Then the question is "shall I buy this 'small , hot, expensive proprietary-hardware hard to upgrade' system unit or a large cheap one I can upgrade easily and fix myself in hours not weeks. No question in my mind

Another question : Can I at a pinch play HD video (definitely yes) and do very basic editing/correction on a laptop with HD standard integrated graphics. (Yes . . but It wouldn't be my choice)

 

First off, thanks to all that gave me feedback. I really appreciate it guys, your help is invaluable to me!

Ok, let me clear up some confusion. I am not a HD video Pro and, yes, I will build yet another PC for video editing also (I already have a great ips monitor - the HP2475, that I bought a couple of years back). Right now I have a PC for editing that contains a Q9300, an ATI 3850, multiple SATA arrays, 1 for system drive, 1 for the media workspace and yet another (HD not raid) for the program files. I have 4 gigs of ram because I am still using XP on that machine, but will soon add more as I go to Windows 7. All of that is on an ASUS P5K3 motherboard (nothing is overclocked). So yes, I know PCs are better for editing and I will build a new one soon.

What I am looking for now is a "jack of all trades" laptop that I will be using mostly for note taking at school (that is why battery life, weight, portability and screen real estate is so important to me.) The notebook's secondary tasks will be to watch HD movies flawlessly, with no stuttering AT ALLon vacation and running pretty light programs, lastly I will be doing very simple photoshop and HD editing which will consists of trimming video and cross fading, and perhaps converting to SD just so I can post some stuff on yotube to share while on vacation.

When doing the latter tasks, I want performance (i.e., that it will do these tasks quickly), within the limits of a relatively low voltage processor (the i5-540m). IF the graphics card MAY help in the next 2.5 years, then I have no choice but to get it, because I will have this notebook for at least 3.5 years. However, if you guys think that a dedicated GPU will not have ANY effect of the tasks I listed, especially HD movie playing, then I will rather not get it. One of the main computers I am considering is the T-410s, will not have an express port expansion slot if I get the switchable graphics. The expansion port is important to me because I will probably want to add either USB 3 or firewire to this lap top in the future.

If you guys want to check out what I am considering for my laptop, I would really appreciate any help you could give on that thread: http://forum.notebookreview.com/wha...en-900-1080-dpi-hd-viewing-light-editing.html

THANKS!

Regards,
Mario

 

What you're looking for is typically know as a Media Center laptop (and it's the same for desktops). They're designed for media center application, but the same things that make them good for that purpose also make the perfect for what you want to do.

Since media center laptops are also desk top replacements, you can pretty much forget about very long battery life, since the same thing that makes the useful as entertainment/editing devices also will quickly drain your battery. There's just no way around that.

So find the manufacturer that make the one with your particular needs in mind (i.e. screen size/resolution/ratio etc.) and you should be fine editing anything just shy of what the pros can.

 

Thanks Krane, but I know about all the different types of laptops. Basically, I am looking for a business laptop that can do some HD editing and has a nice screen. Battery life, portability and weight are not things I am willing to sacrifice. To do HD view and simple editing, one should not have to get a behemoth. I am currently looking at the Vaio Z series, the dell latitude e6410, the T410s by lenovo, and the Envy 14. If the dells or lenovos just had reasonably good screens I would definately go with them, but their screens have been rated very poorly, as has another option the hp 8440p.

 

But don't you see the difficulty in that. Those machines aren't designed for HD viewing or editing applications. So choosing one of those would mean you're going to have to compromise something important no matter which model you pick.

In addition, any good editor will need all the real estate he can get. Because once you reduce your screen to the typical editing format, those window are going to get pretty small really quick. Maybe you can make do with that, and that's your choice. But in my view, even a part-time editor will get real fatigued viewing those small windows for more than a short while. You should keep that in mind.

 

You are right Krane, it looks like a sacrifice will have to be made, probably in the amounts of expansions slots or ports. The Vaio is the closest thing I gues. Unfortunately it is a little thicker than I want and expensive.

It is important to remember that this will not be my main computer. I have an editing pc at home with a 24" HP 2475 with a great s-ips panel. THis laptop that I want to buy will be just for very primitive editing (cut, pastes, crossfades, converting to SD, ect.) while on vacation, it will not be mainly used for editing. Its main uses will be for grad school office projects. Therefore, the most important features will be portability and battery life, I also must have either a matte or very good antireflective screen.

Again, thanks for your comments. They are greatly appreciated!
Regards,
Mario