RYZEN vs. Coffee-Lake in Video Editing! (2018)

RYZEN vs. Coffee-Lake in Video Editing! (2018)

Adobe’s Premiere Pro has seen it’s fair share of updates since my last video editing benchmark – so have things changed?

Amazon (US)
AMD RYZEN 5 2600: https://amzn.to/2J7CFr3
AMD RYZEN 5 2600X: https://amzn.to/2J8vgI3
AMD RYZEN 7 2700X: https://amzn.to/2qM5hhU
AMD RYZEN 7 2700: https://amzn.to/2J9u7QJ
AMD Threadripper 1950X: https://amzn.to/2KKHB5H
Intel Core i7 8700K: https://amzn.to/2HKoetI
Intel Core i5 8600K: https://amzn.to/2HbTzEl
Intel Core i5 8400: https://amzn.to/2HNpHj2
Intel Core i3 8100: https://amzn.to/2HcdrLB
X470 Board used: https://amzn.to/2K7MrxL
Z370 Board used: https://amzn.to/2OSX5rH
X399 Board used: https://amzn.to/2vCaLiA

NCASE M1 Mods: https://optimumtechmedia.wixsite.com/optimummods

Current gear!
Sony a6300: http://geni.us/IrGrgYY
Sigma 16mm f/1.4 DC DN: http://amzn.to/2CjRC7h
Sigma 19mm f/2.8 DN ART: http://geni.us/zUCgeLp
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC DN: http://geni.us/OqYZS
Sony OSS 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6: http://geni.us/pbto

Twitter: https://twitter.com/OptimumTechYT
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alisayed3/

The above Amazon product links provided by Optimum Tech Media are affiliate links and thus provide us with a financial ‘kickback’ in the event of purchases.


  1. Thank you so much!! I was waiting for this for a long long time! Everyones doing gaming gaming gaming thank you very much for this video!!

  2. Adobe kinda hate Cores….I mean then Comes the troubling side A core i9-7900X falls behind Core i7-8700K in (simple)editing work just because of hardware acceleration works better with iGPU which i9-7900X simply lacks… Ridiculous!!….So better use DaVinci Resolve or something else where 1950X can stretch it’s arms(cores)….

  3. Even though the GPU within the Intel CPUs is definitely a benefit for H264 Video encoding, I’d be more interested in H265 and VP9 video encoding that can’t make use of the integrated GPU. Because H264 is about to die within the next couple of years… eventually.

  4. As someone who uses a threadripper, I love it. It cut my render times by half or more in all scenarios. It’s expensive but worth it to me.

  5. Result is that Adobe Premiere Pro is still poorly optimize for AMD or higher core counts. Sounds like AMD should be pushing another developer to maximize their CPU.

  6. Great comparison and as an owner of both Ryzen and Intel systems (R7 1700 desktop i7 8th Gen laptop), I agree with the conclusion that for Premiere Pro/Media Encoder use, Intel is better.
    One thing I’d mention is that my projects are rarely PPro only. I use a significant amount of Resolve and After Effects as well.
    Resolve is very GPU optimized (color grading, noise reduction, tracking, stabilizing and exporting).
    And After Effects, while favoring single threaded performance and clockspeed more (and of course, tons of RAM), can scale up nicely on high core count Ryzen using plugins like RenderGarden and BGRender Pro.
    So in the end, I’m happy I saved a few bucks on Ryzen and I’m not missing out on much 🙂

  7. Thanks for the great video, very well presented and very useful. Would be interesting to see how it scales with i9 though, in your video you mention two things, 1) design with intel hardware 2) dont scale well with threadcount, but wondering about something like i9 7940x? according to puget systems is the fastest CPU for adobe.

    Maybe in time you can do a i9 9900k vs i9 7940k, i know it might be difficult, but maybe you could ask for some samples?

  8. Very honest video,thank a lot, poor optimization of Adobe software to Ryzen CPUs made people to switch into Vegas Pro 15 and Filmora in my country

  9. Title is misleading "RYZEN vs. Coffee-Lake in Video Editing!"
    You tested only Adobe, right now the worst optimized NLE, just check these numbers https://youtu.be/L7iu1x-BJRo?t=5m52s
    Adobe doesn’t use NVenc or AMD VCE for encoding, check out Magix Vegas pro, uses these and encoding is faster or the same as quicksync.
    Then, Pugetsystems tested the so called hardware acceleration and found the quality to be worse https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXWWJvuexqE
    He came to the conclusion – "It makes me wonder how much of the performance gain people talk about is actually due to Media Encoder not actually setting the bitrate correctly so people are actually comparing two completely different export settings without being aware of it."

  10. 5:23 "[Warp Stabilizer] is an example of just one of Adobe’s effects that contains a lot of sequential coding, and as such, responds very well to clock speed."

    A major error of most tech YouTubers is this emphasis on clock speed, like it is some kind of litmus test for the speed of a CPU. When they show a new set of CPU SKUs, they will state the clock speeds like it gives any kind of indication of actual computational speed, which it doesn’t. It’s not a piece of information that means anything unless accompanied by some actual real-world results.

    You are basically correct if you are talking purely about the same CPU clocked at different speeds, but more broadly, the warp stabilizer algorithm execution time is inversely proportional to single-threaded performance. Two processors of different architectures with the same clock speed are not likely to have identical performance. I have an AMD FX-9590 which runs at 4.7 GHz, but it’s obviously going to be total crap compared to a modern CPU clocked at the same speed.

    CPU performance can involve all kinds of things, and can depend on integer vs floating-point operations, memory speeds, etc. Individual micro-optimisations done at the hardware and microcode level all contribute to it.

  11. I’m not sure if it’s a good thing to do it, but I do not think it’s a good thing to do it. I’ve got a Ryzen 7 2700 @ 4 ghz and yes I think Intel is superior and I intend to go back to the Intel range soon … Another question is about quality in pkayback and drop frames. There is an option in the menu to take the playback in maximum quality and it is not the one that we know in the playback window. It is to leave in the maximum quality of pkayback but deactivating the maximum quality in the context menu by clicking with the mouse button.

  12. Fair enough.
    One thing though, mind doing a video on alternative software to the whole Adobe Suite?
    Adobe Suite is well known for poor optimization.
    I’d love to see how the 2700X, 2400G and 2600 each does in a wide range of video editing programs.
    Both open and closed source.

  13. the focus of video software is not to eek out the most your hardware can offer but to offer as many features as possible in a package that is as stable as possible while still working with hardware that doesnt cost 10,000 dollars. final cut and premiere do these things fairly well i suppose.

    if people just want to see amd do well in a video then look for a video on resolve, not a video on premiere. cause thats what a lot of the complaints seem to be about. amd isnt being shown to be superior. but you will have a hard time finding many videos on resolve cause a lot of people dont use it. resolve is more for film i think. adobe is for the independant video artist

    but the fact is that the intel igpu isnt made for games. you can tell that by the benchmarks with the igpu lol. its supposed to provide a display without the cost of a seperate display adapter in businessoffice machines, to increase battery life in notebooks by offering hardware acceleration when viewing video (instead of using a power hungry general purpose cpu for the same task), and finally to speed up encodesdecodes of video on desktop systems. overclocking the igpu when on a desktop cpu helps a lot as well when you are not power bound like on a laptop.

    this combo works very well and it was one of the key reasons intel integrated the igpu into the chip instead of a cheaper, slower, version on the chipset. this was implemented back in the amd fx cpu days when video encoding was the one bright spot when compared to the i5’s back then. the igpu’s video perf helped it to compete very nicely and it still does. one would think that the same advatages could be had when using an amd or nvidia gpu with adobe or final cut but the fact that all the info would need to be moved over the pcie bus to the gpu for a bit of work and then all the way back to the cpu to do the next step actually makes this not work very well. with integrated graphics the cpu and the igpu use the same memory pool though so that parts that are sequential (like comparing one frame to the next for key frames or warp stabilzing) are done on the cpu and non sequential actions or actions that apply a single instruction to multiple bits of data can be done on the igpu or the cpu’s avx units whichever is best. since these operations are switched back and forth from frame to frame (or every other frame or 3rd frame or etc…) you really couldnt do this on the gpu unless it had some sort of serial processor (a cpu on the gpu). its an effective package.

  14. Another misleading title, unsurprisingly, from the guy who once tested Threadripper with two sticks of the RAM.
    In the world of DaVinci Resolve, Vegas, and bunch of other similar apps, testing only Premiere and applying generalizing title "in Video Editing" just shows where will this video go…

    Not to mention that there’s no dash in Coffee Lake code name, and Ryzen isn’t written with caps lock ON!

  15. The iGPU video encoding is useless if you have a GPU Card. The advantage will turn to the R7 2700X if you know how to use and configure your hardware, especially if you have a GTX1060 at least. The incovenient with the iGPU, its encoding is limited to standard H264, with the GPU such as a GTX 1060/1070 you can encode in H264 / H265 HEVC in 8, 10 and 12 Bit with NVENC with the plugin Voukoder for Premiere Pro for FREE. It will be much faster than using the iGPU as the GPU can encode and render at the same time, so the CPU will just assist with full of its power for what the GPU can’t render or in parallel rendering. I am not a Pro AMD or Pro Intel, I have a i7 6950x, I do Video Editing daily so I know how to use and optimize my workstation for fast editing and broadcast quality.
    I’ve made a video to help people who think they got fooled by not having an iGPU, but it is the reviewers that don’t know more who misleading people who has already better equipment:
    My Voukoder Review : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2i8pAZmH7q4&t
    Please Optimum Tech, just try this plugin, it may help you sees Video Editing differently.

  16. I like to know how the results will be with other editing tool like vegas ! Can you test the same set of cpu models with vegas tool ?

  17. Your video need more views. Totally worth it! I was looking for upgrading, and finally – a review showing all the different top config available.

  18. As others have said, the hardware acceleration via Adobe Media Encoder provides an output file that is different from the files that use software encoding. Puget Systems has a really great YouTube video and article on this called "H.264 Hardware Acceleration in Adobe Media Encoder – Good or Bad?" that demonstrates the quality reduction when using hardware acceleration.

    Which then makes the conclusion of this video weird: "The hardware acceleration on the Intel CPUs compromises the quality of the output, which allows Intel to win."

  19. Genuine question… why people that can afford Premiere Pro (minimum 300$/year for just premiere) even consider budget options with CPUs?

  20. I wish I could get my threadripper overclocked, however no matter what I do, it does not stay stable. So stock speeds for me :/

  21. If you’re only using adobe to make comparisons, please update the title (video editing with premiere, etc). Adobe is known to be buggy and poorly optimized (can’t use more threads). So this video won’t video editors who use other suites.

  22. Great video. My vote still goes to the 8600k overclocked as the best bang for your buck. This crown will probably transfer to the upcoming i7-9700k due in October.

  23. Beware, the adobe premiere benchmark is misleading, when activatiing the igpu hardware acceleration, there is a significant drop in encoded quality, you can’t compare cpu and gpu encoding directly, they are not the same quality, there is a significant lost in details, colors and added artifacts.

Comments are closed.