Skip navigation
stynkrbelle
Currently Being Moderated

Do I really need tesla/maximus for editing on CS6

Jul 27, 2012 10:44 AM

Tags: #hardware #video #cuda #premiere_pro

My graphics card Quadro 4000 just "bit-the-dust" so I need to replace it. My pc has 24 GB RAM, all programs operate on a 256 GB solid state drive, my scratch disk is solid state, I have 12 TB of hard drive on board. I am an editor for an independent hollywood producer. I work in all HD media, I will be working with 4K media in the near  using multiple Adobe programs; AE, SG, PrePro, Photoshop, Illustrator, Audition. I would like to stay with Quadro for my graphics card but do not know if the added expense of "maximus" will give me the best "bang-for-the-buck." Can I function at the high end with the Quadro 5000?

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 27, 2012 11:31 AM   in reply to stynkrbelle

    No way!!!

     

    The much touted Maximus solution, at least by Adobe, is an utter waste of money, because it requires a very expensive Quadro card plus a Tesla C2075 card, that is even slower than a simple two generations old GTX 470, for the simple reason that it lacks CUDA cores and memory bandwidth to make it faster. We have several Maximus solutions in the current PPBM5 benchmark and despite prices up to € 6000 for the Quadro 6000 plus a Tesla C2075, these solutions are easily outperformed by many GTX 470/480/570/580/670 and 680 cards, that cost only a fraction.

     

    BFTB wise, the 670/4GB is the much better option and is significantly faster than even the Quadro 6000 plus the Tesla C2075 for less than 10% of the price.

     

    If you want a pro card, wait for the K20 to appear in Q4.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 27, 2012 12:28 PM   in reply to stynkrbelle

    All the GTX cards I mentioned have CUDA cores and sufficient VRAM to allow the use of hardware accelerated MPE.

     

    However the Tesla C2075 has only 448 CUDA cores and a memory bandwidth of around 150 GB/s. The GTX 580 has 512 CUDA cores and a memory bandwidth of 192 GB/s, so it is way faster, but does not cost € 2300, only € 350. Same argument applies to the latest Kepler range (670/680).

     

    The problem is that nVidia keeps the prices of Quadro/Tesla artificially high and does not deliver any value over a simple Fermi/Kepler card for a fraction of the price.

     

    Put it another way, when you have to commute 30 miles each day in the vicinity LA, with all the traffic jams, you can use a Maybach (€ 700,000) or a simple Lexus RX450H (€ 75,000) to get you from A to B, what do you think is more economical?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 27, 2012 12:41 PM   in reply to stynkrbelle
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 27, 2012 1:42 PM   in reply to stynkrbelle

    No, since PR can not use more than 50% of that cards capabilities. PR only uses ONE GPU, so the second one is money down the drain.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 27, 2012 2:02 PM   in reply to stynkrbelle

    We have some new information from a couple of users.  Apparently, you can get CUDA to run on a secondary card, even if it's a "lowly" GTX and not a Tesla card.

     

    So theoretically, you could pick up a new 4000 as the main GUI card (the only real advantage of which is the 10 bit output), and then use something like the 580 to handle the CUDA processing.  The trick is to remove the 4000 from the supported cards list and add the GTX model you end up with.

     

    Theoretically.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 27, 2012 8:06 PM   in reply to stynkrbelle

    No GTX cards have 10 bit output, you need a Quadro for that.  Unfortunately, Quadros come with a significantly higher price and significantly less performance.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 27, 2012 10:41 PM   in reply to stynkrbelle

    Keep in mind that to use 10 bit output, you also need 10 bit HP Dreamcolor (€ 2100) monitors or better, like Eizo Colorgraphic (€ 3500). A simple Dell Ultrasharp or Apple Cinema monitor will not do.

     

    If you only use 10 bit monitors like the models above - you did not tell that - then I would suggest the Quadro 6000 plus the Tesla C2075 and two Colorgraphic monitors. It does not fall in the best BFTB category with a price of € 13,000 just for the video card and monitors. That amount is around the same as SIX to SEVEN complete and very decent PC's that are used by many here.

     

    If you haven't spent huge amounts of money on very expensive 10 bit monitors, you are best off with a single GTX 670/4GB card for less than € 500.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 28, 2012 1:39 AM   in reply to stynkrbelle

    If you are planning on using SpeedGrade ..you will need a card that accomodates its requirements SDI out put  specific..

     

    The rest of the CS6 suite will recognise and use the cards suggested by Harm and Jim.

     

    High number of CUDA Cores is an advantage.

     

    The GTX 670 - 4GB is an excellent choice with 1344 cuda cores.

     

    All advice from myself and Iam sure Jim and HArm...assumes the rest of yoru system is up to a certain spec ( high)

     

    4K - well ...you may need a Red Rocket Card as well or a workfow that "works" around the demand of this footage

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 28, 2012 10:10 AM   in reply to shooternz

    I am getting amazing performance from my new setup with 4K files in a 1080P sequence. I dont plan on using speedgrade for color correction so I added the GTX 570 to the system. I veiw at 1/2 resolution and have gotten realtime playback on a 6 way compositied animated split screen. Using Source Setting I also can do realtime 1 light of the R3D files.

     

    HP Z820  ( 2 - 2687w CPUs)

    64 GB ram

    GTX 570

    Dulce ProDQg2 16 TB raid (5)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 28, 2012 12:06 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    A simple Dell Ultrasharp will not do.

     

    Why not?  The U2711 is an IPS model that can accept and display 10 bit video.  And it costs only $900.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 28, 2012 1:52 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    That might be a PrecisionColor model, not the simple Ultrasharp, and btw, Dell does not even mention 10 bit color depth on their site, maybe because it is not really 10 bit. IPS has nothing to do with color depth.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 29, 2012 3:42 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    It is a PremiereColor model.  Under the specs it says "1.07 billion colors"  That's 10 bit.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 29, 2012 3:45 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    But that is not a simple Ultrasharp, whether that is TN or IPS. So you were wrong.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 30, 2012 8:29 AM   in reply to stynkrbelle

    The performance difference between the 670 and the 680 will be hard to discern, so from a BFTB view, the nod goes to the 670.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 30, 2012 9:25 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    But that is not a simple Ultrasharp.  So you were wrong.

     

    Fair enough.  I didn't realize there was a distinction between a "simple" UltraSharp and the PremiereColor models.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 30, 2012 1:54 PM   in reply to stynkrbelle

    The 670 is slightly less power hungry than the 680.   170 vs 195 watts max

     

    I have satisfied the SDI output in a different set-up.

     

    How?

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points