Upgrading to a new AMD based desktop system for video editing

[videobruce]

My current system from 2016;

AMD FX8350 on a AM3+ chipset
MSI Nvidea GTX 1060 3GT
G.Skill Ripjaws X series F3-1600C9D 2x 8GB DDR3
Gigabyte GA-970A D3P MB
Seasonic G Series 80+ Gold 700w PS
Rosewell Challenger-U3 ATX Mid Tower Case
1 250GB SSD
2 4TB HD's
BD Burner
Front panel Hot-Swap 3.5" HDD tray
Win 7 Pro x64

Yes it's kinda old, but it works fine except for CPU/GPU tasks.
I plan on keeping the drives, case & PS. I will upgrade to Win 10 as much as I don't want to. (I'm not paranoid about so called security).

I'm looking for a AMD based system as I have had over the past 25 or so years. Absolutely NO Wintel for me! I also want to switch to a AMD based video card, Nvida has to much of a strangle hold on the industry in spite of they supposedly being 'better' cards.

My deliminator is the lack of video performance when editing and processing the edit.
This is for up to 1080p material mostly off the Internet (You-Tube for example), but NOT BD's and surely not 20GB files! This is 'mid-end' editing mostly using Movavi VideoEditorPlus v15. I also use VideoReDo Studio v6 and VideoReDo v511. I basically do NOT do 'Content Creation', just tweak & edit existing materiel for my own use (collection).

The current system takes 50% of the files length (.mp4) to process the edited material. IOW's a one hour recording takes 30 minutes to process then finished edit changes which I too long for me. Non of this is any 'hi-end' work by all means, I'm not looking for the fastest setup out there and I DO NOT GAME!!
I want a separate GPU.
I understand these NVMe PCIe SSD's are the fastest BUT, it is overkill since the other components are basically slower (depending on what they are). Isn't a SATA SSD is a wiser choice taking cost into consideration?

The biggest issue is AM4 vs AM5 MB's and the step up with CPU's and memory sticks. It's mostly a cost vs performance issue. My current system is basically maxed out (other than the video card) so it has to go.
Are the CPU & GPU close to being equal AFA processing speed? And AFA storage drives, are SATA SSD's vs NVMe PCIe drives fairly equal regarding speed?

I hope all of that makes some sense. Any questions, fire away.

[Asmodian]

I understand these NVMe PCIe SSD's are the fastest BUT, it is overkill since the other components are basically slower (depending on what they are). Isn't a SATA SSD is a wiser choice taking cost into consideration?

No, that advice is out of date today. SATA is dead. The other components are not slower anymore. Costs are based on the NAND too, so SATA is not even cheaper than PCIe 3 NVMe. Also, any new system is going to support PCIe 4 and since PCIe 5 is the new hotness PCIe 4 drives are very reasonable even compared to the cheapest SATA drives.

Are the CPU & GPU close to being equal AFA processing speed?

I don't understand what you are asking. :confused:

[videobruce]

"SATA is dead" Reference????
As to your question; I shouldn't of used "processor" in the question. To re-word; which is more of a bottleneck, which would be the weakest in the chain?

[GeoffreyA]

An AM4 platform would be cheaper, but you're going to be stuck at Zen 3/Ryzen 5000. AM5 has more upgradability, being supported till 2027, and you've got the option of Zen 4, 5, and newer generations. Either way, you'll get a massive improvement going from Piledriver to >= Zen 3.

For editing and encoding, you'll want at least 6 or 8 cores. If AM4, something like the Ryzen 5 5600 and upwards. If using a discrete GPU, avoid the Ryzen APUs, which carry a "G" in their model numbers, such as the 5600G. They've got half the L3 cache and PCIe Gen 3 support instead of 4, along with fewer lanes.

On the other hand, if you do not plan on playing games, the Ryzen APUs would be cheaper on the whole (and, if needed, handle games tolerably well, particularly the AM5 versions). Alternatively, you may just reuse your existing 1060 card.

If AM5, try to get a 9000-series CPU, which uses the latest Zen 5 microarchitecture. For example, the 6-core Ryzen 5 9600.

TPU Relative Performance (https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-9950x/27.html)
TPU Performance per Dollar (https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-9950x/28.html)

In CPU-bound tasks, the GPU won't be a bottleneck. In games, a weak CPU can limit a high-end GPU. Of course, a low-end GPU won't do much even with a 9950X3D.

A SATA SSD is all right, for the time being, if sticking with the existing drive. Ideally, this brand-new system deserves an NVMe SSD, which is faster in things like copying files.

[Asmodian]

"SATA is dead" Reference????

I only meant that it is out of date. There isn't a cost benefit anymore and it is very slow.

[Z2697]

I don't know about you, but in the market that's available to me, SATA SSDs isn't really cheaper than NVMe SSDs. (that is, if I choose "reputable" / reliable products)
However, if we just ignore that, then SATA SSDs are probably not gonna cause you bottlenecks, with the theoretical 600 MB/s speed, that's "4800 Mbps" bitrate, or more then 100x the max video bitrate of Blu-ray (not UHD).

If you absolutely don't game, and willing to use a HW encoder to speed up the video encoding (instead of software encoding which have better quality most of the time),
an Intel ARC Battlemage video card IS your best choice for now. It probably is the cheapest discrete video card with a decent HW encoder, or might be the best, according to some online benchmarks.
It can even game! How surprising, Intel! LOL.
(Mission Failed: Escaping Wintel) (Not your everyday Wintel though, it's very GRAPHIC)
Not sure about other aspects of HW acceleration. For example some OpenCL (or GL?), CUDA, Vulkan or something different. (It cannot use CUDA for sure)

[GeoffreyA]

It's probably not going to cause a bottleneck for booting and loading programs.

Indeed, I was surprised at the Arc B580, the best value card on the market right now. Gone are the days of Intel i740, 810, and 845.