I'd like to know specifically what kind of performance boost I would see when upgrading to a Quadro 4000 from a ATI 5770 (when using Adobe Premiere CS6.)
My current system is:
- MacPro 2 X 2.26 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
- 16GB RAM
- OSX 10.7.4
- ATI Radeon HD 5770
- Red Rocket
I usually house the media on a G-Raid via esata.
I use Sapphire, Tiffen GFx and Twixtor quite a bit. I'd like to be able to experiement with these plugins without having to render or wait. Is this possible?
I'm having a difficult time getting a clear answer on specifically what effects and functionality would be improved as a result of this upgrade.
As far as I understand it, the Mercury Playback Engine is only utilized when a card like the Quadro 4000 is used... although I have also heard that CS6 will take advantage of other graphics cards (such as the ATI 5770) via open CL (or is it GL)?
There are only a handful of cards that are listed as being supported on the Adobe site (Quadro 4000 is one of them... and the ATI 5770) is not.
Can anyone kindly shed some light on this subject ?
Thanks in advance.
Michael
I use Sapphire, Tiffen GFx and Twixtor quite a bit. I'd like to be able to experiment with these plugins without having to render or wait. Is this possible?
Those are third party plug-ins. You'd have to check with their makers to verify if they get accelerated by the GPU, but my guess is they aren't.
Jim is right. Third party plugs don't get accellerated; at least not as much as the native ones.
There was another thread about this a day or two ago.
The difference with the native plugs is remarkable. I've been able to stack CC, blur, crop, scale on several composited layers and still get real-time playback with HD material.
Please add your voice to the chorus asking Adobe to allow third party developers to make accellerated plug-ins (I have.):
https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform
Jim Simon wrote:
You make it sound as if Adobe specifically prevents this in some way, as opposed to the third parties simply not doing it for their own reasons.
I'm curious, on what data is that conclusion drawn?
Some of it was gleaned from other sites. And then there was this, which I copied this from another thread about MB Looks not being accellerated:
From the Red Giant web site...
Paul – This is from Stu Maschwitz’s blog, and may answer your questions:
“Both Adobe Premiere Pro and Final Cut Pro bypass their own plug-in SDKs for their native 3-way color correctors. They use window configurations and graphics drawing routines that third-party developers don’t have access to. On some systems this can make UI interaction for third-party effects with Custom UIs slow. In the case of Premiere Pro, the slowness can be bad. Real bad.
Have you noticed that Premiere’s own 3-way color corrector has never been ported to After Effects? This is one consequence of the Premiere team’s choice not to use their own plug-in SDK. Another is that third parties cannot provide a fluid custom UI experience within Premiere Pro.
After Effects, on the other hand, “eats its own dog food,” and has no effects that don’t use the public SDK. This means that third parties can create excellent user experiences within After Effects. The benefits to us users are obvious — just look at all the amazing plug-ins available for After Effects.
Premiere Pro and After Effects actually share the same plug-in SDK. This is amazingly cool, because it means that, for example, you can start a project in Premiere, use Colorista II all you want, and then move the project to After Effects, keeping all your settings. But despite this shared architecture, plug-ins like Colorista II sing in After Effects and bog down in Premiere.
Red Giant has is committed to working with Adobe to resolve this situation. We love Premiere Pro and feel that it and Colorista were born for each other. The playback performance is amazing. We’ve done the best we can with what we have. If you try Colorista II in Premiere and find the performance lacking, please consider contacting Adobe and asking them to improve the performance of Custom UI plug-ins written to their own SDK.”
From the Red Giant web site...
That seems to be talking more about the UI than using CUDA.
Besides, as Red Giant plug-ins have always run on OpenGL, and need to work the same across a host of apps and platforms, it's unlikely we'll see this running in PP under CUDA.
None of this suggests that third parties don't have access to the CUDA architecture.
It seems to me that if a third party could take advantage of CUDA in Pr, it would definitely be a plus for selling their plug-ins. Boris, Red Giant, Sapphire and Tiffen all have color and effects bundles in competition. Whoever gets to market first could cash in, especially if the others weren't interested in competing.
North America
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Asia Pacific