Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

AVCHD/H264/Quadro vs 285 CS5 benchmarks

Apr 30, 2010 6:17 AM

ok finally finished with preliminary #s on a 980x stock and Over Clocked. Xeons coming as well as red footage

some interesting things.

 

1) a media cache drive is useless we tried 1TB 64meg and an SSD. (intel)

2) SSD OS drive useless (makes windows snappier but thats it.

3) going from 2 drive raid 0 sets to 4 drive 0 did little (all were done with new sata 3 (sata 600) and 64meg cache drives with the new Intel Sata 600 Sas)

4) the 285 is definately limited to 3 layers, it is as fast as a quadro until the 4th layer. once you hit 4 layers you have to render out first before encoding.

for this 30 minute clip it added 48 minutes for render time. so for those who do more than 3 layers and time is money a Qaudro is recommened.

we are working on "breaking" that limit as the only reason its there is to get you to buy a Quadro. remember a Quadro 5800 is a 285.

 

Premiere Pro CS5 Testing

980X at 3.33GHz

12GB Redline at 1600 CL 6

Intel SAS 600 Controller

4 WD 1Tb Sata 64 Meg Cache 600 Drives in 2 Raid 0 arrays

Video material - AVCHD 1080P 24 Frame Each Cut to 30 minites of material

Export Codec - H264 HDTV 1080P 24 Preset Default

4 Effects per Layer - Fast Color Corrector, Brightness & Contrast, Video Limiter, Sharpen

Each Layer Scaled to 50% for 4 frame PinP view.

285 GTX

3 Layers - 43:39

4 Layers - 52:46 plus 48 minutes effects render on 4th Layer

Quadro CX

3 Layers - 42:50

4 Layers - 47:34

980X at 4.0GHz

Quadro CX

3 Layers - 36:08

4 Layers - 45:22

980X at 4.0GHz

285 GTX

3 Layers - 36:13

4 Layers -  49:01 Plus 42 minutes effects render on 4th Layer

980X at 4.0GHz

285 GTX

4 Drive Raid 0

3 Layers - 35:10

4 Layers - 47:03

980X at 3.33GHz

285 GTX

4 Drive Raid 0

3 Layers - 41:47

4 Layers - 55:02

4 Layers Mercury Engine Software only - 2:10:00 <-- really need an approved MPE card!

980X at 3.33GHz

285 GTX

4 Drive Raid 0

1 WD 1TB Sata 64 Meg Cache 600 Drive for Media Cache and Temp Files

3 Layer - 41:38

4 Layer - 55:25

980X at 3.33GHz

285 GTX

4 Drive Raid 0

Intel SSD 160GB OS/Cache Drive

4 Layer - 55:27

Scott

ADK

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 6:26 AM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    Scott fantastic information!  You have done the Adobe user community a hugh favor.  I would imagine that a very high percentage of the forum members will be perfectly happy with the GTX 285.

     

    Thanks much!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 6:35 AM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    Thanks for reporting that, Scott.

     

    In the past there circulated software modifications that tricked GT cards to be seen as a Quadro. Maybe they are still available. Try here: http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=539

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 6:49 AM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    I hope it works. I'm very curious.


     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 7:09 AM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    I just went shopping and found out that for instance PNY quit making GTX 285 cards several months back.  Both store fronts that I checked (Microcenter and Best Buy) do not handle the GTX 285 any more.  Not so with some other online venders but I suspect that Scott's findings are going to cause a minor run on GTX 285 cards.  Just a word to the wise.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 7:52 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    The current version of RivaTuner does not have the options from that link nor will it officially support Win 7 or the current Nvidia Driver. The current version is 2.4C. If you can take a look at it Harm and have any ideas, please let me know so I can try that.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 8:38 AM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    Hi Scott

     

    Thx for you info. What about playing back inside PPro CS5? Are there any difference to see? I have just installed Master Collection CS5 and PPro CS5 does not playback well in the preview monitor. Actually it looks sometimes more stuttering than in CS4. I run i920 2,8, 12 GB RAM, 2x1,5 TB HDD and Nvidia GTX 260 - Win 7 Pro 64 bit....Will I see smooth performance playing back sequences with effects and transitions using a GTX 285 because that card supports Mercury Enigine? Or will I need a more expensive card? i reaaly can´t find out wich card to buy to get smooth performance playing back inside PPro CS5 and also quick exporting/encoding....It looks as if the GTX 285 does a preety nice job compared to the much more expensive CX Quadro?

     


    /Morten

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 9:19 AM   in reply to Moxtelling

    In the process of testing and running those benchmarks, the playback realtime was very smooth up to the 3 layer limit if you have a supported driver installed with the 285 GTX. Beyond that I had 6 layers total playing back smooth with the I7 980X at 3.33 without issue. Any layer above the first 3 will shift the effects load to the CPU and only process the playback through the GPU on the 285 GTX. That means your CPU will decide your playback quality for any layers above the 3 layer limitation. Now another consideration is the effects. Some of the effects are not CUDA accelerated so those will hit the CPU regardless of the layer they are on. You will know by the red render line above the sequence. Also the Codec will decide the playback as well. I will check the Red 4K hopefully starting today and let you know on that.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 9:23 AM   in reply to Moxtelling

    Sounds like you need to run my PPBM4 PremierePro Benchmark and see how well your system is tuned and set up. When you send the results I can compare to the data on the results page and tell you of any tuning or configuration problems.  While it was designed for CS4 it works fine in CS5 as you can see from the results that Harm has provided.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 10:24 AM   in reply to Bill Gehrke

    Scott,

     

    Would you be so kind as to mention the Motherboard you were using with the 980x, please

     

    Thanks

     

    Tom

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 10:46 AM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    Well, that doesn't help my buying decision at all ;-)

     

    Strange you list anything else....  you wouldn't feel like emailing me a recommendation, would you  :-)

     

    Tom

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 11:30 AM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    Hi Scott

     

    Any chance you can tell us if the GTX 260 is about to be tested, ever will be tested or never will be tested or supported? I would feel like a complete foll if I went out buiyng a GTX 285 next week just to see the GTX 260 (wich I have) being supported in two weeks or so....

     


    Morten

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 11:34 AM   in reply to Moxtelling

    As it stands now there will not be any more 200 series GTX cards added to the supported list. That likely wont change in the future either since the supported list will be expanded with the Fermi cards down the road.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 12:16 PM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    No good....!!!

    Hmmmm....when do you figure the next CS update will be and is the 480 worth waiting for - compared to those allready supported? I need som kind of advice here...help me out, please. I want to buy a card - but wich one? Or do i also need a CPU upgrade? This is my system - and as I wrote elsewhere I have 100% CPU when editting 720 50P with colourcorrection and Brightness/Contrast turned on.

     

    Operating System
    MS Windows 7 64-bit

    CPU
    Intel Core i7 920  @ 2.67GHz

    Bloomfield 45nm Technology

    RAM
    12.0GB Triple-Channel DDR3 @ 532MHz  7-7-7-20
    Motherboard

    Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. EX58-UD4 (Socket 1366)
    Graphics

    SAMSUG SyncMaster 2494HM/2494HS/2494HSI(Analog)

    And EIZO Flexscan S2410W

     

    2688MB GeForce GTX 260 (nVidia)

     

    Hard Drives
    2 X 1500GB Seagate ST31500341AS ATA Device (IDE)

     

    Optical Drives
    PIONEER DVD-RW  DVR-216D ATA Device

    Audio
    M-Audio FW 410

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 1:11 PM   in reply to Moxtelling

    If you want to spend money now, do it on your hard disk setup. That is your weakest point now.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 1:41 PM   in reply to Moxtelling

    I can't get more than a confirmation that the 480GTX will be added down the road. That is all either Adobe or Nvidia will confirm. Earliest date I have heard for any update is June/July but that is rumor and not fact. That is just the absolute earliest you will have even a chance of the 480GTX support in CS5. They also may only release an update for the Fermi Quadro cards at first and save the GTX cards for later. That could mean 6 months or more before that update happens. If your playback is suffering with your editing style and material, then I would get the 285GTX now. It's not a big investment and you could always use it for a backup later when the 480GTX is supported and you get one.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 2:06 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Hi Harm

     

    But it is not my disks that is complaining, but my CPU that runs 100% during playback wen editting. My disks perform quite well - I can copy large files in no time from disk to disk. How can my disk be the problem concerning playback? I guessed that buying one of the supprted cards would take care of that problem - giving me smooth playback and faster encoding? But am I wrong in asuming that?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 2:11 PM   in reply to Moxtelling

    Moxtelling wrote:

    - giving me smooth playback and faster encoding? But am I wrong in asuming that?

    Possibly but the test benchmark would tell us exactly what is wrong.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 2:29 PM   in reply to Moxtelling

    Morten,

     

    Fluid editing and playback depends on the weakest link in the chain. The fact that all the top performing machine in the http://ppbm4.com benchmark have (massive) raid arrays with lots of disks ought to tell you something.

     

    OTOH, your CPU usage at 100% does indicate that your CPU may be the limiting factor (the weakest link). To figure out whether that is indeed the case, can you post a screenshot from Process Explorer, that shows all the running processes. Also check the services running in the background with Windows 7 Service Configurations by Black Viper

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 2:46 PM   in reply to Bill Gehrke

    Hi Bill

     

    I tried to run the test - but eventually when I try to click the Statistics.vbs - in question nr. 2 it gives me a Overrun [number: 1E+99], Code: 800A0006 (at lie 121 - 1...

    I can not see any little icon under export settings in Media Encoder CS5....

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 3:01 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Hi Harm

     

    OK - I see. I just tried to copy the Master Coellction file (4.7 GB) from my physical D to my Physical E drive - it took less than 25 seconds. I guess that might be enough for showing fx. 30 seconds of AVCHD in 720 50P relatively smoothly?

     

    Oh my....the Blackviper site - I get so tired just looking at all these services and figure out wich I need and don´t need etc.

     

    Anyway - here is som screendumps...

     

     

    My Processes when running a AVCHD file in PPro CS5:

    MT2.gif

     

     

     

    My servicesMT3.gifMT4.gifMy joblist... while edditting AVCHD files....in CS45 PPro MT1.gif

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 3:06 PM   in reply to Moxtelling

    CS5's Software engine playback of AVCHD is not good enough if you use more than 1 layer. You really need the hardware acceleration if you want to edit more than just 1 layer at a time. AVCHD's compression ratio is just to high still for the software engine with effects or more than 1 layer.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 3:21 PM   in reply to ECBowen

    thats excactly my experience. I therefore need to buy a new videocard as well. But wich one? I consider the GTX 285, but Harm tells us it gets hot - and maybe I would like to get something just a little bit more powerfull and lownoise/cool? So I have seriously considered the Quadro FX 3800....but I can´t tell if the 285 is almost as good? And what about noise and heat? Any one who can help?

     


    Morten

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 3:47 PM   in reply to Moxtelling

    Pity that you didn't use Process Exporer to show what processes are running.

     

    Your CPU usage graphs shows peaks at 100% but then consistent drops to around 0%, clearly indicating wait stages for other components to finish. If your system was bottlenecked by the CPU, you would see a straight line at 100% or slightly lower, not the peaks and lows your graphs show.

     

    You have a serious bottleneck in your system and my guess is that it is your disk setup and/or processes/services.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2010 4:31 PM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    You have way to much junk running get rid of all that Google crap, Outlook,

    and most of these:

    Remove.jpg

    I see 80 processes running here get this down to mid 30's

    MT1.gif

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2010 12:42 AM   in reply to Bill Gehrke

    Hi

     

    I have now tried to uninstall and KILL a lot of the "crap" - but this machine is not just for Video - but also for Photoshop, illustrator etc. Thats why Ihave the Master Collection ;-)

     

    But still - after this - I get bad performance - and Harm - I do think that fx. a GTX 285 would give me better performance in playback - it seems my CPU gets a lot of work. So I have tried Proces explorer - here is what it showed when I played back some AVCHD with 5-6 transitions and colourcorrection in full res. And the picture looked even worse than when I used Premiere pro CS 4 with Windows XP.....

    I can not imagine this is caused by bad disk performance. My disks are quite fast and they don´t seem to even work very hard when playing back. Only sound is from the CPU and GPU fans - they aork a bit harder during this of course.

     

    Any clues? Will this performamnce issue in playback not be solved by putting in one of the supported cards that use the GPU to plaback?

     


    .Morten

     

    CPU_PProCS5.gif

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2010 2:43 AM   in reply to Moxtelling

    Hi again

     

    I think I have found what is going wrong....I use Shadow Highlight on this sequence - and that is NOT accelerated in any way. As soon as I disable the ShadowHighlight it plays back a lot more smooth.

     

    I have tried to make a new sequence - using fast colourcorrector, sharpening and contrast/brightness - and it plays back nice. But still frequently using about 90-98% CPU...

     

    I also tried something else - downloaded and installed Sony VEGA 9 - and guess what - it played back AVCHD 720 50P movieclips with tons of effects in realtime full res - only using 700 MB memory (compared to PPro CS5 using 1,5 GB) with excact same movieclips. And it only used 20-30% of the CPU compared to PPro CS5s 80-100%.

    So no doubt that PPro CS5 is a heavyuser of CPU - and very much more demanding than fx. VEGAS. I just do not like VEGAs GUI and I am used to PPro CS and all my old editting files are in PPro format...but I can´t stop thinking why PPro is so demanding compared to VEGAS? PPro litterally sucks all power out of my i7 920 CPU and at the same time WANTS me to buy a NVIDIA QUADRO videocard to do the same things as I can do in VEGAs without investing in more hardware at all....:(

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2010 10:16 AM   in reply to Moxtelling

    Morten, you still have too many processes running I could see about 10 that are not necessary for CS5.

     

    You also state that your disks are "quite fast" have you tested them?  Specifically with an application benchmark?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2010 12:19 PM   in reply to Bill Gehrke

    Hi Bill

     

    First of all - thx so much for answering and helping - you are great all you guys keeping up! Big applause!!!! ;-)

     

    I ran a benchmark inPC Wizard 2010 that showed this:

     

    Sequential Writing :                  113.77 MB/s (Cpu usage : 2%)

    Sequential Read :                       124.12 MB/s  (Cpu usage : 2%)

    Buffered Writing :                      149.77 MB/s  (Cpu usage : 2%)

    Buffered Reading :                    223.21 MB/s  (Cpu usage : 2%)

    Random Reading :                     33 MB/s  (Cpu usage : 2%)

     

    Random reading sometimes gets higher - 50-60 MB/S - but how much does PPro use Random Reading?

    Are there another benchmark software (preferably free) you could recommend that might be better testing performance for PPro?

     

    And yes - I agree - there are stills ome services left to "KILL"...

    But as I stated before today - I think I got my problem solved - it turned out that I had used ShadowHighlight in my sequence - and turning that of made the sequence play smooth and nice....ShadowHighlight is not accellerated in any way - there are no icons for accelleration or anything....

     

    Anyway - I have two disks in the system...one I use for data another I use for applications. How do I get these to run in RAID without having to start all over reformatting and installing everything from the top? Is that possible at all? Or could I buy fx. two new disks and set them up for RAID and still use my two old ones for apps and backup? I´m not very much into that RAID thing - had a very bad ecperience 8 years ago - crashing a whole system lost a lot of data - after that haven´t touched it...

     

    /Morten

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2010 12:37 PM   in reply to Moxtelling

    You can't convert to raid0 without losing all data on your disks and it would be a mistake to configure the boot disk as a raid0.

     

    Look here: Adobe Forums: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2010 1:14 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Hi Harm

     

    I saw your great article about RAID. Nice work - but a rather big step - maybe my issues will be smaller if I buy a Quador card? At least the editting playback...I have nice and smooth playback with AVCHD wit no effects. If I make a crossdissolve and at the same time have fx. colourcorrection - the tranisition stops during playback and then pauese for some seconds before it starts again - CPU 100%. I guess - because fx. both colourcorrection and crossdissolve is hardware accellerated with Quadro - it will play back much more smooth.

     

    BTW - if I should convert my AVCHD files (like 720 50P) to another format with no quality loss - that PPro would handle better without these huge playback issues - wich format would you suggest? I guess converting AND new Quadro videocard would make a huge difference - and I do not think I are ready for RAID yet - it seems so overvhelming - and comlicated - and I have to start from the top installing, making a lot of backup routines etc. Thats not what I need at this point.

    I have tried MPEG2 but it is not much better playing back - still too much compression I guess?

    Maybe a format that the Adobe Media Encoder could handle? It works quite well - converting a 300 MB AVCHD to MPEG2 in 15 secs.

     


    Morten

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2010 1:27 PM   in reply to Scott Chichelli

    Thx Scott.

     

    I considered the FX3800? But how much better than the GTX 285 is the FX 3800?

    I need a card that does not makes too much noise or heat - because I often makes speak sitting in front of the PC while editting - and if it makes too much noise it could be a problem. The FX 4800 could also be an option, but then I reaaly need to know if that will perform so much better that it is worth the money. The FX5800 is far from my budget....that goes almost for the FX4800 too, so I hope the 3800 is a descent choice. Really hope to see some detailed tests comparing all the supported cards with each in different setups - like a low, mid and high end system. That would be a good way to figure wich card to buy to wich system setup.

     


    Morten

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2010 2:17 PM   in reply to Moxtelling

    Morten,

     

    I understand your anxiety to get the most from your system, but from my perspective, which may differ quite significantly from yours, I would first like to see in benchmarks and tests what hardware MPE will bring over my current card, so I will wait a bit to see what the Fermi cards will give, instead of rushing out to get an end-of-line Quadro card or GTX-285. My middle-of-the-road system can still keep up with a lot of other systems.

     

    I guess that the Quadro will give you a nice performance gain, albeit at a price. Maybe some clever chap will be able to trick the GTX-285 to be seen as a FX-5800 (which has the same hardware, apart from the memory) and lift the (articificial) limit of three tracks Adobe has imposed to make an even better buy.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2010 3:22 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Hi Harm

     

    Thx. I get your point. Nevertheless I have just ordered the FX 3800...well I know - I should wait - but i can´t. I do videos for a living - among other things - but I have quite a few gigs in near future and i want my system to be running well and smooth at the time - can not wait to see if someone might be able to softmod the GTX 285...so...figured the FX 3800 should do the trick....

     

    Anyway - what made me do this was actualy this:

     

    "....And here's a helpful hint: if you're choosing a graphics card for use in Premiere Pro only, Adobe told me you'll enjoy almost exactly the same Mercury Engine performance out of the cheaper Quadro FX 3800 graphics card (the one I used for testing here) as you would from the highest-end, much pricier Quadro FX 5800. So save your money if Premiere's your game".

     

    From the test of PPros CS5 at http://www.videoguys.com/Blog/E/Adobe%2BPremiere%2BPro%2BCS5%2BMercury %2Bwhere%2Bhave%2Byou%2Bbeen%2Ball%2Bmy%2Blife/0xf637dfcf4c08ce77cf011 baf3d321a24.aspx

     

    I use Adobe only - almost - Master Collection - and no 3D or games - so....

     

    OK - then again - some one from Adobe told the guy this - but....still - I choose to trust him and buy the FX 3800. I guess it looks as if it is a bit more of a prof. card than the GTX 285...so - I hope it will turn out to be a good choice for me....

     

    I will be back writing about my experiences with the card and PPro CS5 ASAP. If this does not help me getting rid of most of the playback stuttering-issues I will be digging into the RAID world, Harm..But I try to stay away from it as long as possible - I just have too many bad memories about loosing data, crashing PCs...And even though I have a Buffalo with 4 TB disk space for backups, I forget to make backups often enough. And RAID is just too risky for me I guess....but if that´s the only way to get smooth performance - even with a new FX 3800 - i will have to go for it I guess....yikes... But I need the new card afterall - to get the Mercury Playback Engine to work....so...

     


    Morten

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 2, 2010 12:44 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Harm Millaard wrote:

     

    If you want to spend money now, do it on your hard disk setup. That is your weakest point now.

    That advice is doing more Harm than good (as well as merely promoting your write-up on hard drives).  Most hard drives purchased in the last couple of years run at 7200 rpm on fewer platters than ever (mine has read speeds faster than a RAID 0 from two years ago) and simply will be the least bottleneck in a workflow compared to the performance gains from GPU/CUDA acceleration and 64-bit expanded memory addressing.  This is particularly true with low-bitrate codecs like AVCHD which have small file sizes.  It is a great disservice to send off people first to upgrading their hard drives, and your timing when CS5 has just reached the market is downright bizarre.  CS5 made it all about RAM and GPUs.

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
Actions

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