Best PC builds under $1,500 for multimedia editing?

It runs After Effects and other multimedia software.

Look, the 3950X isn't strictly mandatory—the 3900X is probably the better value here—but the real question is whether it actually makes sense to sink that much cash into something else given the budget.

Look, you really need to be more specific about what "the rest" actually refers to here. If we're talking about working in DaVinci Resolve / Fusion, for instance, wouldn't it make more sense to put that extra budget into a 2080Ti rather than dumping it all into a beefier processor? On the other hand, if by "the rest" you mean things like Blender or Cinema 4D, then isn't the CPU and its core count going to be the absolute deciding factor?

And honestly, if you set up a Hackintosh on an AMD system, aren't you looking at a CPU that's roughly 35% faster in the same software, with a GPU that can sometimes perform twice as fast depending on the task? ☕

Does a Hackintosh actually run well on AMD?

Wait, given how poorly Microsoft optimized for Ryzen, I figured things would be way worse with Apple since they don't even use AMD processors.

Or is it just down to certain specific programs running better on macOS?

BTW, setting up a dual boot isn't exactly rocket science.

wiredotter14 said:Does a Hackintosh actually run well on AMD?

Wait, given how poorly Microsoft optimized for Ryzen, I figured things would be way worse with Apple since they don't even use AMD processors.

Or is it just down to certain specific programs running better on macOS?

BTW, setting up a dual boot isn't exactly rocket science.

It seems like Adobe programs have some quirks where you have to disable certain settings and such; I'm not entirely sure if that's linked to using AMD, but it feels somewhat expected from them... once everything is running, the speed is roughly comparable, and Cinebench 20 shows very similar results, though for Blackmagic Design software, performance tends to lean more toward the Mac side... I'd say overall performance depends heavily on the type of software, as some might just be better optimized for Mac versions since they don't have to worry about compatibility across a massive range of hardware vendors... for instance, AMD GPU support is native in newer versions of macOS, and it's quite clear that Apple's GPU drivers outperform AMD's drivers for Windows...

It isn't a major hurdle as long as you follow the instructions and don't make any silly mistakes like I did... like forgetting to reset the BIOS to default...

I get the whole argument about certain software being better optimized for macOS, but if that optimization is tied directly to the hardware, does that advantage even exist on a machine using an AMD processor that Apple doesn't officially support?

wiredotter14 said:I get the whole argument about certain software being better optimized for macOS, but if that optimization is tied directly to the hardware, does that advantage even exist on a machine using an AMD processor that Apple doesn't officially support?

It's an interesting thought, isn't it? I honestly can't wrap my head around how you could have hardware optimization for components they don't even support, yet based on every benchmark I've run so far, AMD seems to perform just as well, if not slightly better, on macOS than it does on Windows...👍 Could it be that the operating system is simply coded so cleanly that it doesn't really matter which x86-64 processor is under the hood? One thing is certain, though; power management is definitely where things start to fall apart with AMD...

Is Microsoft’s optimization really this much of a joke?