Debating between two EVGA cards for a new build.
I don't game at all, but I want the most kickass system I can for After Effects CS6, Premiere Pro CS6, and Sony Vegas.
Fermi option: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814130687
Will spending more and waiting for Kepler net that much of a performance gain? Is there anywhere with good benchmarks on GPUs just for Adobe products and video editing? Which matters more and for what: OpenGL, Cuda, Memory Size, Clock speed?
It's not pointless. I know which cards are supported and which aren't. I'm not confused about which is supported. I know the 680 is not explicitly supported (yet?), but OpenGL and CUDA will still provide some benefit or no?
The GTX 580 and GTX 570 seem to "compute" far better than the GTX 680. I was kind of wondering real world what that mean for PP and AE and what it didn't mean.
I guess some of my interest is in understanding practically what a few more CUDA cores will do or what makes the OpenGL performance of a card better: Cuda, Memory Size, Clock Speed...what.
Ie, is the GTX 680 justified when it seems like it might not be a big enough bang for the buck.
To be precise, Jim's statement should be this:
The GTX 680 can't be used by the current version of After Effects for GPU acceleration of the ray-traced 3D renderer.
If you look at our recent history with Premiere Pro, you may have noticed a pattern of updates adding support for specific GPUs. One might presume that the After Effects team would behave in a similar fashion.
I am making no promises, and I will not comment on specifics of what may or may not come in future updates or future versions.
I recommend paying close attention for updates as a matter of general practice.
Europe, Middle East and Africa