Building a PC

[FrugalFisherman10]

I'm sure there are some other PC builders on here!

It's my first time attempting to build my own. 

I plan to use it mainly for video editing (and some photo editing), using a program like Sony Vegas or Powerdirector.

Here's my part list so far. Thoughts?
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 7 1700 3GHz 8-Core Processor  ($258.40 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: MSI - B350 TOMAHAWK ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($64.89 @ OutletPC)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3466 Memory
Storage: Crucial - MX500 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive  ($74.89 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Western Digital - Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($43.85 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: MSI - GeForce GTX 1050 2GB Video Card  ($159.99 @ B&H)
Case: Fractal Design - Focus G (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case  ($54.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Power Supply: EVGA - SuperNOVA G3 550W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($55.88 @ OutletPC)
Total: $712.89
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Things I'm running into:
My motherboard https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/B350-TOMAHAWK.html#support-mem-11 apparently only supports G.Skill RAM (officially) up to 2400. But the one I just bought is 3466. It was a great deal, and there doesn't seem to be much $ to save in terms of going down in speed (2133, 2400 - all seem to be around $160..I paid $172 for mine. Not sure the $12 savings is worth returning..and maybe I can squeeze some overclocking out of the RAM. But I'm not sure I want to get into all the overclocking stuff honestly...just kinda want a reliable PC that is fast for video editing.)

I plan to run this through my TV, and there's this note in the details of the Mobo that says
"Onboard Graphics
• 1 x HDMI™ port, supports a maximum resolution of 4096x2160@24Hz*
* Only support when using a 7th Gen A-series/ Athlon™ processor"
...not sure what that means.

Anyway, picking up the CPU and the mobo tonight..my PSU arrived today. and I ordered the super fast RAM but I may end up returning it if it's not compatible with the Mobo.

[neo von retorch]

I'm about 75% sure that the RAM will simply run at the maximum speed that the motherboard is able to. The extra headroom may be "wasted" but for $12, it seems like a reasonable choice. The CAS latency of 16 isn't the "best" (CL14 is a little better in the DDR4 zone) - you might have been able to get better CL with slower RAM. But overall it probably will not make much difference.

Your motherboard would support "onboard graphics" if (and only if) you bought an APU instead of a CPU. In your case, you're plugging in a dedicated graphics card, and the onboard graphics will be 100% unused (and unusable.)

Overall I think you made very good choices. I'm sure I could "nitpick" but it would just come from a place of bias... (I prefer ASRock/Asus and Gigabyte motherboards, Samsung SSDs, Corsair power supplies, etc... but in computer tech terms, I'm an ancient dinosaur.)

[Cromacster]

You don't need to worry about the onboard graphics.  Ryzen chips don't support it yet to my knowledge, but that's why you have a graphics card.

You might consider upping the RAM and video card, but I'm not sure how intensive those video editing programs are.

I pretty much built the same PC.  Ryzen 7, ASUS mobo, ASUS GTX 1060, and GSKILL 2400 32gb.  Thing screams for pretty much everything I do (games).  Getting a 1080 would probably push some great FPS at 1440, but I couldn't spend 500+ on a video card >.<

The next item you might want to consider is your tv/monitor.  Refresh rates and resolution become more noticeable if you are doing high frame rate stuff like gaming, maybe video editing.  SO if you tv is 60hz you might want to consider something new to really get the best out of your new rig.

[ketchup]

Looks solid.  I'm not super familiar with AMD's stuff right now, but from what I do know it looks good.

I'd swap the 2.5" SSD for an M.2 like this one https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075Y4JN6W/?tag=pcpapi-20 (same price) so you're not limited by the SATA 3.0 bus.

Is 16GB of RAM enough?  That's what I put in my video editing machine I built in 2011, and I'm sure things have gotten more involved since then (I've been out of the game).  My GF's Photoshop machine has 32GB.

Are you sure that 250GB of SSD storage and a 1TB spinner is sufficient for photo/video editing?  That'll fill up pretty quickly.  GF has a 512GB M.2 SSD for the OS/etc, 1TB SSD for current work (this will probably be increased soon), 5TB HDD for recent stuff, and then 22TB of "archives" on a NAS.  And she's not even doing video.  And you're backing everything up, right?

[neo von retorch]

Sony Vegas - https://www.vegascreativesoftware.com/us/vegas-pro/specifications/#productMenu
RAM: 4 GB RAM (8 GB recommended; 16 GB recommended for 4K)
Processor: 2 GHz (multicore or multiprocessor recommended for HD or stereoscopic 3D; 8 cores recommended for 4K)

PowerDirector - https://www.cyberlink.com/products/powerdirector-ultra/spec_en_US.html?affid=2581_1299_540
2GB required (6GB or above recommended)

With RAM being at near all-time high prices, I think it's wise to stick with 16GB for now unless absolutely necessary.

The CPU will make the most difference, and the high core/thread counts of the AMD Ryzen chips make them an absolute winner for this specific use case.

You do get a performance jump in SSDs when you go from 256GB to 512GB, and the extra space would be helpful. So I'd consider putting any additional money there.

[FrugalFisherman10]

Thanks everyone for the info so far! (especially that info on powerdirector and sony vegas..I haven't looked into that part of the equation much yet)
Yeah the 32GB thing keeps coming up.. Ultimately it's twice as much money, and I'm just not trying to do that right now I guess.

More storage is a different story. another TB in HDD doesn't cost that much  more money, so I'll keep watching prices to maybe bump up to 2 or 3TB.
I also think where you start from has a lot to do with this. I've been working on a 2010 macbook pro for the little videos I've created so far..anything is going to be such an improvement over that that I'm expecting to be blown away.
my current laptops specs are this (laugh. please.)
Processor: 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
RAM: 4GB 1067
Graphics card: GeForce 320M 256MB!!

of course I use FCP X and proxies but it's still soo badd..I'm really looking forward to having a new computer.

[FrugalFisherman10]

I'd swap the 2.5" SSD for an M.2 like this one https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075Y4JN6W/?tag=pcpapi-20 (same price) so you're not limited by the SATA 3.0 bus.

Wow yeah that looks good..that's the same price as the 2.5" one I have in there now..How could that be? NVME is supposed to be a lot faster right?

Are you sure that 250GB of SSD storage and a 1TB spinner is sufficient for photo/video editing?

No, I'm not. I have been working with a 250GB hard drive on my laptop and 1TB external for a long time though. but I do anticipate creating more/having more footage regularly not that I'm going to have a better machine and take this a bit more seriously.
If were to expand one or the other, do you know if it would make more sense to get a bigger SSD or a bigger spinner?
in other words, is it likely that I would ever need more than 250GB on the SSD for the OS/current work?

Or does the 'current work' generally take place on the HDD?

[neo von retorch]

For most people, a hybrid drive is a good bet. However, with video editing, it's really nice to have the SSD be where you do the work. And as stated earlier, you get higher performance with larger SSDs, because they are able to increase the channel width (made up term, but I think you can get the gist.) So I'd start with a 500/512GB SSD, and do "the work" on that drive. Only use the HDD for "storage" - not where you'd write video as you process it.

[ketchup]

For most people, a hybrid drive is a good bet. However, with video editing, it's really nice to have the SSD be where you do the work. And as stated earlier, you get higher performance with larger SSDs, because they are able to increase the channel width (made up term, but I think you can get the gist.) So I'd start with a 500/512GB SSD, and do "the work" on that drive. Only use the HDD for "storage" - not where you'd write video as you process it.

I'd agree with this.  Like I said upthread, my GF has a separate 1TB SSD for "current" photos she's working with (in addition to the boot drive, but it doesn't have to be that way).  Hard drives are just for storage of previously complete work.  With the heavier I/O of video, I'm sure it makes even more of a performance difference.

[FrugalFisherman10]

I'm about 75% sure that the RAM will simply run at the maximum speed that the motherboard is able to. The extra headroom may be "wasted" but for $12, it seems like a reasonable choice. The CAS latency of 16 isn't the "best" (CL14 is a little better in the DDR4 zone) - you might have been able to get better CL with slower RAM. But overall it probably will not make much difference.

Your motherboard would support "onboard graphics" if (and only if) you bought an APU instead of a CPU. In your case, you're plugging in a dedicated graphics card, and the onboard graphics will be 100% unused (and unusable.)

Overall I think you made very good choices. I'm sure I could "nitpick" but it would just come from a place of bias... (I prefer ASRock/Asus and Gigabyte motherboards, Samsung SSDs, Corsair power supplies, etc... but in computer tech terms, I'm an ancient dinosaur.)

The RAM I bought is not going to be compatible with the motherboard..doh!
So I'm looking into different RAM and will be returning this one.

I don't know much about CAS latency...so you say 14 is better than 16..is 13 better than 14?

I'm also seeing that Single is better than Dual in terms of Rank.

I think this one will work, but it's CAS 16, and it's Dual rank:
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/y9rcCJ/corsair-memory-cmk16gx4m2a2400c16

The 14 and 13 options from Corsair, 16GB are not technically listed on the compatibility chart for my motherboard: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/B350-TOMAHAWK.html#support-mem-11

[neo von retorch]

Lower latency is better, but if your CPU or motherboard cannot take advantage of it for some reason, i.e. it's not compatible, don't sweat it. Also, to be sure, it's not a performance difference you'll be able to detect! (Tiny details exaggeration syndrome!)

Picking from the compatibility chart is solid. I actually don't know anything about "single" vs "dual" rank.

I do know "dual channel" is preferable to single channel. But clearly that's a different thing. And you're getting 2x8 so you're good there!

[Livethedream]

Don’t skimp on CPU cooler, most AMD’s already run hot, sounds like since it’s hooked to tv it might be in a cupboard as well?

Operating system?

[BobTheBuilder]

Don’t skimp on CPU cooler, most AMD’s already run hot, sounds like since it’s hooked to tv it might be in a cupboard as well?

Operating system?

Only the first part is true. Having a good cooler is nice for quiet operation, but this CPU has a thermal design power of 65W only, which is easy to cool to begin with. And unlike Intel, AMD solders the Ryzen (w/o graphics) CPU directly to the heat spreader, which greatly improves heat transfer.