i9 9900k or i9- 9700k

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 4 months ago
  • (Edited)
Building a new system. Trying to decide of these few processors for camtasia

i9 9900K8 Cores, 16 Threads @3.6GHz, Coffee Lake.
i9-9700K 8 Cores, 8 Threads @3.6GHz, Coffee Lake.
Would rendering be marginal between these two processors?
How many cores and threads can Camtasia 2019 utilize.
Also what exactly does a graphic card do in Camtasia and is something like a 2060 good enough no matter the complexity? Is a graphic card really need for medium work?

Any other suggestions
Thanks
Photo of Richard Humphrey

Richard Humphrey

  • 12 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 4 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Muscle Whisperer

Muscle Whisperer

  • 73 Posts
  • 46 Reply Likes
Hi Richard,
Camtasia is a decent screen-capture and video-knitting program, but a fast CPU doesn't seem to make any difference at all in speed or render time.
If you're looking for blazing, lightning-fast Camtasia projects - don't waste your money on expensive "kit," as the English say.
I just bought an i7 -8700K @3.7GHz with an nVidia p4000 GPU, and there's perhaps a 15% improvement in rendering when I share an hour-long lecture to mp4 at 720p. I feel like a fool for having a semi-gaming desktop computer, when my old laptop (i7-5600K @2.6GHz, onboard Intel graphics) would almost suffice.
Photo of Richard Humphrey

Richard Humphrey

  • 12 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thanks for reaching back. The reason I am looking at updating is I have an 8700  processor at work. No graphic card. It takes 20 minutes for me to process 65 minute video. At home I have a 2600K and it takes 42 minutes to process that same video. How long does it take you to render your hour long lecture. 
Photo of dmey503

dmey503

  • 108 Posts
  • 70 Reply Likes
 I believe Camtasia 2019 will use every thread you have available so 16 threads will certainly render faster, but the amount of RAM and the memory speed will also impact render times. Having a solid state drive and decent GPU will also help somewhat (I think Camtasia 2019 supports hardware acceleration).

I built my own machine just for rendering since I'm often filming and editing 4k video--I strongly recommend the dedicated rendering machine!  
Photo of Richard Humphrey

Richard Humphrey

  • 12 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Can you tell me the specs of your machine. 
Also do you know where the graphic comes in. I thought rendering was only using the CPU I do plan for a 970 evo pro m2 drive.
Thanks
Photo of Joe Morgan

Joe Morgan

  • 7485 Posts
  • 4103 Reply Likes
What are the recording and production dimensions of your 65 min video? That you can render  in 20 minutes with your i-8700?

Regards,Joe
Photo of Richard Humphrey

Richard Humphrey

  • 12 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
It was a 1080x1920 screen recording. The file is 1.3 Gigs as a zip which I imported and tested the same way on my 2600k.
I then remoted in to my work PC and ran the same thing and it literally cut my time in half to render. 
Photo of Ed Covney

Ed Covney

  • 525 Posts
  • 313 Reply Likes
Hi Richard - I just got done putting a 9900K system together.  Its pretty great, but its 2 ea 1TB M.2 NVMe (Intel 660p) drives (slots on the mother board) are the stars. It does everything at least twice as fast as my 5-yr old 4790K. But using the 2 - M.2 slots on the mobo limits what can be added in the future (x16 slot wise), but 3+GB/sec xfer speed between any 2 drives is worth every penny.
64GB of DDR4 RAM, 48 GB is RamDrive, 16 GB for programs helps a ton.  The Intel 9900K only provides 44 vs 48 PCIe lanes, so it can limit you to one hi-end video card, or anything you may want to put in a second PCIe x16 slot. I don't know if the 9700K sops up PCIe lanes or not.
I haven't installed Camtasia yet, but Handbrake took 22 minutes to trans code (compress) an MKV to MP4 on the new guy for a 28 GB blu-ray rip vs 85 minutes on the old system!
Another point to consider: Rendering a 65 minute lecture is much easier and quicker than rendering a 65 minute car race. 
For me, the 9700K may have been enough, except I'd always wonder, what if . . .?






Photo of Richard Humphrey

Richard Humphrey

  • 12 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thanks ED
Photo of dmey503

dmey503

  • 108 Posts
  • 70 Reply Likes
I'm using an i7 8750h, which has 6 cores (12 threads), 24 gb DDR4 2800mhz memory, a geforce 2070 video card with 8 gb of memory, and a 2tb (Samsung I think) SSD. To be clear, the video card helps with the actual design and editing and I'm using a lot more than Camtasia (premiere pro, AE, AI, photoshop, etc.) During the render, your CPU is the workhorse. I got a nice GPU for my render machine because, as is often the case, I'll open up a project and end up wanting to tweak something and thus it tends to become my work machine haha

I generally film 4k @ 24 fps @ 100 mbps with my A7III or 4k @ 30 fps @ 100 mbps with my Mavic 2 Pro. 4K video sucks up your computer's resources like none other, especially the stuff filmed on my Sony, which is almost 1 gb for every 1 minute of video.  I know Adobe snobs will judge me, but one of the first things I do is I import the unedited clips into Camtasia where I can quickly scan through them and easily trim out the junk I don't want and export at 100 percent quality (screw Camtasia's 75 percent threshhold haha). Then I'll take those smaller and still 100 mpbs clips into AE if I want to do any serious post production. Then I'll render again around 30-40 mbps, which is around what Vimeo and YouTube use for 4k, to free up my computer's resources.

My point, is I spend a lot of time rendering and having a dedicated machine just for that purchase was definitely worth the $1,500 or whatever I paid. If you're just rendering screen recordings or recordings of lectures, then I'd say it's probably not worth it. Or just go to Best Buy or Frys and buy a decent gaming computer and use that for rendering. 

Good luck! :)
(Edited)