Forums

"Certfied" Cuda cards...What does this mean?

The list of Cuda compatible cards is long.

What about the GTX 250, 260, 280 models?  These models are very close in terms of specs to the GTX 285.

Can the list be that rigid?  I hope not.  The GTX 260 can be had for $160.

The other side of the spectrum is the GTX 470 and 480.  The GTX 470 is at the same price range as the GTX 285.

Someone!.....HHHHEEELLLPPP!  

So as someone who has an NVIDA GeForce GT220 - does this mean that I will not be able to run Premiere CS5 at all? Or is there another playback option for those of us who can't splash out even more money on a new graphics card?

Thanks, I guess that's some consolation for us still in the stone age

It stands to reason that if CUDA architecture is supported in CS5, that all CUDA enabled GPU's should be able to take advantage of Mercury to one level or another.  The only difference between the GTX 285 and ALL the other CUDA enabled cards (as it relates to CUDA) are the amount of processing cores...that's it.  I have a GTS 250 and it works splendidly with Cyberlink Espresso, a CUDA enabled transcoding program.  So, the results are great with a program that can take advantage of my card.  I just don't understand why Adobe can't write software that's takes advantage of cross-GPU architecture, and only supports one of the many cards that have the SAME architecture.  I was looking forward to upgrading my PRE8 to Premiere PRo CS5, but I don't think I want to upgrade my already powerful GPU for one program.

As Curt said, there are ''Supported" cards, that allow hardware MPE support. If the card is not "supported", there is no support for hardware MPE rendering at MRQ. This may change in the future, but that is where it stands now.

Hi

I agree....also having the GTX260. It looks as if Nvidia and Adobe has made some kind of agreement, so one have to buy an expensive new Nvidia card to get the new mercury engine to run properly in Ppro CS5. I write this because I have read that fx. the GTX 260 is allmost similar to the Quadro CX - same chips etc. - but we can not expect either Adobe or Nvidia to give us customers presents - like making the mercury engine available to all CUDA enabled Nvidia cards....that does not make business - only happy customers....

But I can not wait for Adobe to support GTX260 in CS5. I need better performance right now editing AVCHD quicker and more smooth. Have had tons of issues the last year trying to get things running just reasonable with PPro CS4. I have i7 920 with 2 x SATA 1 TB disks and 12 GB RAM, Windows 7 Pro 64 bit and GTX 260 and in CS4 I can only preview AVCHD files without any kind of effects or tranisitions. Just a simple transition and PPro starts having problems playing back properly. CS4 crashes from time to time - not seriously - but it have to think a lot about almost everything some times....But there are no alternatives to Ppro unless you will spend a lot more money.

So I get stucked to PPro - and actually looks a bit forward to see what PPro CS5 can do...hope my AVCHD editting will be less frustrating. But it will certainly cost me some money and make Adobe and NVidia more happy than my bankaccount.

Anyway - what I am interested in knowing is how much difference are there between the cards supported when it comes to performance etc.? Is the Quadro CX worth buying instead of the Quadro FX3800? Or what about the FX4800? Is it so much better than the FX3800? I need more specific details and tests of how things works with these supported cards. It makes no sense that Adobe just writes that these cards are supported - we nedd to know how they perform too.

I can only see the technical details about the cards - but there are no information anywhere about how the cards perform compared to each other - when it comes to playback, rendering speed etc. in PPro CS5?

Adobe and Nvidia must have done some tests? Everytime we see how great the new Mercury engine works it is showed on a high class system with Quadro CX. But what if we showed the same work on a medium class system - say i7 920 with 8-12 GB ram and a GTX 285? Or is it not worth showing anyone - does it perform better or worse or is it almost the same? No one knows....only Adobe and Nvidia. But they won´t tell?

Are there any BETA-tester out there who have had the oppertunity to try things out with different cards?

I am honestly being quite tired of upgrading all the time...spended 4000$ on a new system last year - this year have to spend the same - just on CS5 upgrade and a new videocard....boy, am I a happy customer?

;-)
Morten

Denmark

He said... "this card is non-returnable to Newegg"

My little dilemma is...

I am currently having a 64 bit machine built (for CS5)

Quadro FX4800 is very expensive down here in New Zealand.

My business partner is going to be in the U.S late this week and I have found a PNY QuadroFX4800 at a much better price near where she is going.

I think I will take a leap of faith (in ADOBE and NVIDIA)  and get her to buy it NOW.

I was going to hold off on the Quadro and use a 285 card I have lying around but.......

Someone make the call for me will ya guys..... 

BTW: I am not going to see the CS5 software for at least two months from now but I am going to sort the new machine properly  in anticipation of it.

I was hoping that Nvidia's release of GeForce GTX 480 on the same day meant something.

nothing (including this thread) has answered to anyone's satisfaction the question of whether all CUDA-compatible nVidia GPU model numbers, OTHER THAN those few listed, have been "flicked off" from Mercury's playback engine to tap in for acceleration

The question has been answered.  The reality is that you don't like the answer.  Current cards that support CUDA acceleration in Premiere Pro CS5 are:

--Begin List--

• GeForce GTX 285 (Windows and Mac OS)
• Quadro FX 3800 (Windows)
• Quadro FX 4800 (Windows and Mac OS)
• Quadro FX 5800 (Windows)
• Quadro CX

--End of list--

I'm returning the GTX 260 I purchased.  Not even going to buy a 285 or wish for a quadro.

Can't wait for those reviews to come rolling in.

""What a typically arrogant answer.  Sort of like answering the question,  "Will my Ferrari run on standard unleaded gasoline," and answering,  "Ferraris are supported to run on premium unleaded gasoline," while  consequently mocking the question.  Thanks for nothing.""

Well put.

I've gotten the same smug answers here before.  If you lack the credentials here (<2,000 posts), there isn't much room for discussion.  We are crashing their exclusive club.

Fact, CS5 is going to give wannabe fimakers (me) some amazing tools.

First HD DSLR...Now real-time NLE...Amazing!

Imagine the crap you'll see in HD!  HAHA

Stan Jones wrote:

 

I know I missed something; I'm not going to pay  much attention to this whole thinkg till the reviews are in.  My CS3 is working well enough...

The specific question is whether GPU model numbers, even those that, e.g., exceed or approach the GTX 285 by a margin of near-insignificance, are functionally ignored for GPU acceleration by the Mercury playback engine, even though the operative word is CUDA which is a scalable architecture.

When Dennis (or Wil?) was talking about this early on, I did not get the idea that they were turning the functionality on or off, but that they would only certify cards that they had tested.  Can someone point me to the place where they said that cards that functionally would work won't be allowed to?

 

Also, isn't part of the issue that it is not just CUDA, but additional functionality that is being provided?

Further evidence that Adobe have created a P.R. train wreck; they (and their so-called "evangelists") are emphasizing the rote talking point that the Mercury Playback Engine speeds things up generally with respect to the CPU, in response to specific queries about whether the engine taps into the CUDA acceleration capabilities of the nVidia product line.  So far they are purposefully silent (as well as failing to explain why).  Until someone steps up, this is a joke (or a predatory marketing strategy involving collusion between Adobe and nVidia to stimulate hardware sales).

Jeff Bellune wrote:

 

If the answer is yes

 

The answer is yes.  You won't be able to turn on GPU acceleration for any unsupported card.  The MPE will stay in software rendering mode if the installed card is unsupported.

 

As for the question, "What were you thinking?", you'll have to ask the engineering team to get the real answer.  There are logical arguments to be made on either side of the issue.

 

-Jeff

How clever to stay strategically vague in the face of a bizarre outcome; you want to stay on Adobe's "good side" for some reason.  Yet it is exceedingly strange and nakedly dumbed-down for Adobe to "tick-on" GPU acceleration for the GTX 285, but "tick-off" GPU acceleration for the only slightly better-performing GTX 295 (and notably, these cards and many others share the scalable CUDA architecture in common).  I doubt that you or anyone else could fathom more of a "logical argument to be made on either side of the issue," than the stimulus this will create for a sudden increase in sales of specific nVidia GPUs - even with the absurd result of a GTX 295 owner tossing that GPU to downgrade to a GTX 285, merely to fit within Adobe's bizarre marketing strategy.

Start looking for this scandal on the tech blogs as CS5 launches, and if you do have a direct line to Adobe, it would be a big favor for them if you suggest they line up damage control.

Apart from the pressure from nVidia and the time constraints, the overriding concern was and is STABILITY. Every card certified must meet Adobe's stability tests.

If there has not been sufficient time to test other cards extensively to guarantee stability, they are not certified and thus not enabled. This is further complicated by all the driver changes that nVidia performs, which can cause instability with new driver versions.

Ed,

Welcome to the forums.

You have to realize that these forums are USER-to-USER FORUMS and Adobe presence here is limited, specially with NAB.

99.9% of what you read here are users posting, not Adobe.

The points you raise are valid, but the only one that can give you hard, tangible answers is Adobe. I suggest you contact Customer Service and try to get an answer from them. But realize that when developing programs or support for hardware, there are many intangibles in the development cycle, that may disrupt the intended RTM (release-to-market) date. Just consider the nVidia Fermi cards, the GTX-480/470 cards, which were intended to be released in November 2009, but only appeared in April 2010. Had nVidia met their deadline as announced last November, chances are that it would be included now in CS5 as a certified card, but nVidia missed their RTM date by 5 months. You can hardly blame Adobe for that delay, but of course it has repercussions on their own delivery of supporting the Fermi cards.

David,

You have to make a distinction between software and hardware support of MPE. Only certified cards support hardware rendering. All other cards use MPE as well but only in software mode and do not use the MRQ and maximum bit-depth settings that certified cards do.

The least costly one is the GTX-285.

Harm Millaard wrote:

 

Ed,

 

Welcome to the forums.

 

You have to realize that these forums are USER-to-USER FORUMS and Adobe presence here is limited, specially with NAB.

 

99.9% of what you read here are users posting, not Adobe.

 

The points you raise are valid, but the only one that can give you hard, tangible answers is Adobe. I suggest you contact Customer Service and try to get an answer from them. But realize that when developing programs or support for hardware, there are many intangibles in the development cycle, that may disrupt the intended RTM (release-to-market) date. Just consider the nVidia Fermi cards, the GTX-480/470 cards, which were intended to be released in November 2009, but only appeared in April 2010. Had nVidia met their deadline as announced last November, chances are that it would be included now in CS5 as a certified card, but nVidia missed their RTM date by 5 months. You can hardly blame Adobe for that delay, but of course it has repercussions on their own delivery of supporting the Fermi cards.

Harm, surely you do more harm than good by following in the steps of Adobe's "evangelists" who deflect the tough questions by playing into their wild cards, saying that the lack of time, resources or whatever to "test" the wide nVidia CUDA-compatible product line justifies disabling Mercury GPU acceleration completely despite the fact that CUDA is a standard, and scalable, and adjacent models in the product line such as the 285 and 295 are only marginally different.

You also tout the fact that the information here are from "mere users."  What exactly are you, other than a very very active participant with over 10,000 posts?

cts51911 wrote:

 

I saw a workflow video on  the lowest end 13" Mac laptop/Core 2 and the the performance increase in "software only" is significant.  The preview looked much, much smoother than what I see in CS4 with an i7 PC.

 

Looks like we'll all benefit from 64-bit and Mercury.

This logic means nothing to the issue.  It's like saying, I'm paralyzed and some researchers found a way to get one of my legs working!

zenviolence,

I got to talk some of the Premiere Pro team out in Las Vegas.  I was told that the logic behind limiting GPU-accelerated playback and rendering to a very specific set of cards was to guarantee a certain level of performance for anyone using Pr CS5 and one of the cards.  And yes, they seemed very aware that there will be an outcry from potential CS5 customers about why their favorite CUDA-capable card was excluded from the list.  Also consider the fact that only 2 cards are supported on the Mac.  So there's a whole group of Mac folks who will be even more unhappy.

FWIW, I'm disappointed that my GTX280 isn't supported.  I don't really want to pony up for a new video card.  Nobody does.

I tried to make my previous answers direct and to-the-point.  If you interpret that as arrogance, then I'm sorry.  The reality of the situation is (warning: direct and to-the-point answer coming): CS5's GPU-accelerated playback and rendering will *initially* only be available for certain nVidia graphics adapters.  That will undoubtedly change as time goes by.  Real Adobe Evangelists have said it's just a matter of time before new cards are supported.  It is your choice as to whether or not you upgrade to CS5, now or ever.  If non-accelerated playback and render performance in CS5 is a deal-breaker for you, then I recommend you hold on to your money until the list of supported cards fits your budget and your system.

BTW, I wish I was an "Evangelist".  They get paid!

-Jeff

This debate is interesting at many levels but heres a slant on it

.

It is not compulsory to use the MPE  Technology.  It is a switcheable function and CS5 will run fine with out it.  Those that want to wait ..or have to wait...can simply wait it out for whatever reason.

CS5 will either offer something else (like 64bit) that will make or break the decision to upgrade for these users or they wont bother. Its a choice thing not only based on the card.

Those that need it will jump in first.

I am in and will have a brand new Quadro FX3800 Card in a box on my desk this afternoon.

Harm,

I with you.  The specs on the Fermi cards are impressive vs. the gt200 cards.  Also, considering what the comments have been from Adobe (although vague), they look to be 2x the performance.

I may just pull the trigger now and see what happens.  I've got other GPU enabled software and I hope to see a huge improvement in speed.

I doubt this (MPE) will ever open up  to really cheap cards because I suspect that it needs the technology and specifics (eg DDR3 ram)  to make it work.

Cheaper cards ...definitely will evolve.

I am amused by how many (wannabees) consider this some kind of "business conspiracy" between Adobe and NVidia!

BTW: Easy for me to say as I now have choice of two cards that are supported waiting for install in a new system. (GTX285 & FX3800)

I am delighted that Adobe gave us the this heads up on hardware requiremnents by advance releasing the information.  Others can knock them but from me...CONGRATULATIONS on this and I thought it has been an inspired launch which will prove to be a serious entry to the Professional market.

I have always held the belief from my own experience with PPRO and FCP that it has been a serious  (and overlooked) contender since CS2 . My clients agree.

I think I just have to wait and see how bad my GTX260 will perform before I buy a new card. I would like to know wich card to buy, though...that´s why I am interseted in knowing the difference in performance between the supported cards. But I´ll try to patient.

About the Mercury Engine supporting CUDA - i just found this post: http://forums.adobe.com/message/2583980#2583980

It seems that the Mercury Engine was not initially build for CUDA, but just for 64-bit...that might be the answer to why all CUDA cards are not supported. But tell us the story Adobe and Nvidia!!!!

Could one of your evangelists or some one else from Adobe and/or Nvidia (no offense to all you great guys who have heard something from someone who might know etc) not enlighten us here, in this forum, before we start some kind of conspiracy theory about Adobe and Nvidia? Put the (video)cards on the table (so to speak ;-) ) and tell us:

1. What is the main reason why all NVIDIA CUDA cards are not supported? Is it techincal? A time issue? Or what? Why?

2. When will we know if older less expensive Nvidia cards like GTX 260 will also be supported? We need to know so we can see if we need to buy new cards or just stick to the old ones long eneough to get support....is this not a valid wish?

3. When will we get an overview of how the supported cards perform compared to each other in preview, rendering etc.? We need to know so we can get excact the card that meets our needs. Roight now I don´t know if I just need a GTX285 or the Quadro CX. I need to know how much more performance I will gain from buying a much more expensive card. If I get fx. a 50% performance boost buying the CX I will buy it at once. Is it only 2% I think I will buy the GTX 285...otherwise i would be a fool with my money.

These are all questions that would be nice to get answers to before the shipping of CS5 - so we can make our choices whether to buy new videocards and if - which to buy - or we would like to wait untill our existing older Nvidia cards is working with the Mercury Engine. If we continue to not get any information about these questions this could develop into be a karma-killer for both companies....And you both have good karmas with me untill now!

I very much like Adobes products - been using allmost every one of them them for years. I have also had several Nvidia Cards over the years and have only tried the ATI cards a few times with bad experiences. So i stick to Adobe and Nvidia - no matter what - have no choice either;-) But I will be a very unhappy and dissapointet customer and user, if this story ends up looking like some kind of dirty deal between two companines. But I guess there is an explanation and it has to come from your comapines directly - not from a second source.

You could avoid all this by being more open about this issue and tell us more - and no more sales-talk - we allready want your products - they are all great - but we need help to find out which and when to buy what....please!