Personal View site logo
Graphics card for video editing
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    My current understanding of the subject:

    1. It must be NVidia card, due to CUDA requirement by Adobe and DaVinci (and some plugins).
    2. Something relatively cheap, and not big and noisy.
    3. Maximum connections.
    4. Good memory size, important for DaVinci.

    My idea is GT640 based cards.
    Not very pricey. Do not consume big power. Usable in games, and some firms make versions with 10cm fans. Worst thing is that normal output config is 2xDVI, HDMI and VGA, I prefer to have DP instead of VGA.

    But if you are using famous cheap 27" monitors it must be ok.

    GT 640, 384 CUDA cores

    Other suggestion is powerful GTX 670, 1344 CUDA cores cards, they also have more memory options, can be good for future.

    GTX 680, 1536 CUDA cores

    Slightly cheaper option, has almost the same performance as GTX 670 cards (I mean only video editing related tasks)

    EVGA GeForce GTX570 HD 2560MB, about $320

    http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-GTX570-Graphics-025-P3-1579-AR/dp/B005AY5N9O/

    Useful references:

  • 129 Replies sorted by
  • mozesmozes

    Also something to keep in mind, Most video plug-ins support only cuda,

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @mozes

    Yep, and this is highly stupid :-)

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Extremely good info on subject:

    http://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5.htm

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Another info for Premiere:

    http://www.efxi.ru/more/premiere_cuda.html (use translator)

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    OpenCL vs CUDA real performance:

    http://blog.accelereyes.com/blog/2012/02/20/cuda-and-opencl-benchmarks/

    Slides: http://blog.accelereyes.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/CUDAvsOpenCL.pdf

  • nomadnomad

    FYI: I noticed that scaling in final output looks much better when using CUDA.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Btw, situation is quite humorous today:

    image

    image

    image

    Yet many software packages have bad OpenCL support or do not have any.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @nomad

    Yep, it is documented in second link.

    Adobe use crappy scaler, so if it start using hardware it becomes much better.

  • LohmatijLohmatij

    As far as I understand, Adobe uses fast scaler without GPU. If you want to have the same scaler, as with CUDA, you have to switch it on in Sequence settings. It's called "Maximum Render Quality" in sequence settings.

  • stipstip

    As far as I understand, Adobe uses fast scaler without GPU. If you want to have the same scaler, as with CUDA, you have to switch it on in Sequence settings. It's called "Maximum Render Quality" in sequence settings.

    It then uses the high quality Lanczos scaling algorithm, which requires heavy GPU. Without good CUDA card this will slow down rendering almost 10 times but it's vital if you have text or grapics in your edit.

    You can get a used GTX 580 for around 300€. If you're on a laptop, the brand new GTX 680M has 3-4 times the speed of the GT 650M (which is in the new Macbook Pro's) and is similar to GTX 580 performance which is incredible on a laptop.

    Be aware that there is a text file in the Adobe Premiere Pro, After Effects ect folder that's named 'cuda supported cards' or something. Not every CUDA capable card is supported yet, there's a workaround to just type in your Nvidia CUDA cards name, but it didn't work for my current one (GTX460), others have reported it worked for their non supported cards.

    EDIT: Vitaliy, yes it is sad, ATI/AMD cards usually always performed much better than their equivalent Nvidia card for the past few years. Unfortunately video software industry settled on Nvidia.

  • Pedro_ESPedro_ES

    It is also important to notice the the Kepler GTX line has worse computing (double - precision operations) capabilities than previous generations.

    It seems than Nvidia want to make a clearer distinction between the consumer line (GTX), professional line (Quadro) and computing line (Tesla) by crippling them in some aspects... the problem here is the professional and computing computing line have "professional prices"

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5699/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680-review/17

    http://www.chw.net/2012/03/kepler-a-fondo-explorando-sus-capacidades-en-computo-gpgpu/

    http://www.chw.net/2012/04/gpus-nvidia-y-amd-probados-en-aplicaciones-gpgpu-cudadirectcomputeopencl/?cp=all

    I hope software developers start to use OpenCl more and more for a better competition between Nvidia and AMD where we can only win.

  • ignatiusignatius

    If you head over to the adobe forums and check out the premiere pro 5 & 6 benchmarks, most systems that score high have a GTX 570 or 580. The Nvidia Kepler series are also reported to be working with the hack in Premiere Pro, but only the GTX 680 supports ray tracing in after effects after a CS6 update.

    The 4GB version of the GTX670 is considered to be best bang for the buck at the moment because it performs similarly to the GTX580, but runs cooler and uses less power. Also I believe the kepler cards support up to 4 monitors and 4GB of vram could come in handy for 4k red and multiple large images in photoshop etc. Most will probably think 4GB vram is overkill though.

  • ignatiusignatius

    @Pedro_ES,

    Yeah, does look like Nvidia want to make that distinction, but at the moment the kepler cards have been performing just as well (if not slightly better) than the previous generation (570,580). The fact that they run cooler and use less power (plus I don't think there's a lot in price difference) could be the reasons to get them at the moment. The general consensus is that the current Quadro cards (4000 for example) are not worth the money because they are outperformed by the GTX cards, certainly according to the Premiere Pro CS5 benchmark results. The only reason to get a Quadro at this juncture is if you have a 10bit monitor and/or do a lot of 3D work.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    I hope software developers start to use OpenCl more and more for a better competition between Nvidia and AMD where we can only win.

    I think two points prevent this:

    • NVidia pays good money to delay OpenCL to retain sales to niche markets.
    • Developers of this firms are also happy, as they are not very good at OpenCL.
  • Pedro_ESPedro_ES

    @ignatius,

    Yes, they are still a good choice for CS6, but they are worse for most applications that use double precision operations... and I think that if this doest change, next generation wont be the best choice.

    Also Adobe made an small but interesting move supporting OpenCL in CS6 for some AMD cards (AMD Radeon HD 6750M and AMD Radeon HD 6770M)

    It is just a prediction, but I guess that, unfortunately, next Quadro generation will be a better general computing card that the GTX line (for CUDA)... so, unfortunately again, Nvidia will make easier for us to justify spending a lot of money on this cards...

  • Pedro_ESPedro_ES

    @Vitaliy_Kiselev

    Yes... also they hit first this market and the positioned CUDA very well

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Also Adobe made an small move supporting OpenCL in CS6 for some AMD cards (AMD Radeon HD 6750M and AMD Radeon HD 6770M)

    This support is very limited. And works for Mac version only.

    Nvidia will make easier for us to justify spending a lot of money on this cards

    Look on chart on top. AMD cards are much better for GPU applications. Especially for double precision.

    Yes... also they hit first this market and the positioned CUDA very well

    It is very hard to tell who had been first. But it is true that ATI did not care for niche markets involving GPU applications. I think AMD managers made error hoping for OpenCL standard. Nvidia could not survive if it happens.

  • Pedro_ESPedro_ES

    Also for some CS5 benchmarks... (i think @ignatius was refering to this)

    http://ppbm5.com/

  • Pedro_ESPedro_ES

    @Vitaliy_Kiselev

    Thats why it is an small move :-)

    "Look on chart on top. AMD cards are much better for GPU applications. Especially for double precision."

    Yes!... all I have said before is refered to CUDA but AMD is doing some beast in general computing, but not well supported yet by software vendors

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Yes!... all I have said before is refered to CUDA but AMD is doing some beast in general computing, but not well supported yet by software vendors

    See my two points why :-)

    I'll try to talk with BM, but I am almost 100% sure that Adobe is getting money for OpenCL delays.

  • ignatiusignatius

    @Pedro_ES, Yep, that sounds like a plausible prediction. They're moving to make a clear delineation between gamer cards and professional cards, and of course anything that has 'professional' in the title means premium price. The next generation Quadros will leave the GTX series behind, but you'll have to pay through the nose to get at them!

    I've just dropped about £2550 on a new system and opted for the 4GB GTX670. Won't have that sort of money ever again (now that I'm married with talk of kids!)

    All the best

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    It is very interesting to see real benchmarks on real systems concerning major editors, and Davinci 9.

  • Pedro_ESPedro_ES

    @ignatius

    I still think that GTX670 is a great choice right now. At the moment it is quite good for CS6 and CUDA apps, gaming.... and 4 gig of memory let you do 4k editing, complex GPU 3d rendering...

    Also Quadro cards now are: very limited and cheap or very expensive.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    I still think that GTX670 is a great choice right now.

    It is always good to see some real benchmarks or measurements.

    and 4 gig of memory let you do 4k editing, complex GPU 3d rendering

    Are you sure that you need 4Gb?

  • ignatiusignatius

    @Vitaliy, No, I definitely don't need 4GB at the moment. But in the near future, who knows!? I do know that one of the guys that set up the PPBM5 tests has reported that the GTX680 slightly out performs the GTX580 and I'm pretty sure that was in CS6 (but don't quote me on it!) Bill Gehrke is his name.

    I'm intending on gaming as well as editing/compositing when I get my new system next week, and I have heard that there are some games that sit close to eating up 2GB vram. I guess I opted for the 4GB card for a bit of future proofing, but to be honest it probably wasn't worth the extra money.

Add a Comment