5 Replies Latest reply on May 10, 2013 9:53 AM by Harm Millaard

    Should I replace an AMD Radeon HD 7770 with Quadro Pro FX 3800 graphics card?

    HkSkylerr Level 1

      Hi Everyone,


      I am an entry level editor that does in-house corporate videos.  Here is the situation (I hope this isn't too basic of a question):


      I've just aquired Adobe's Master Collection for a newly purchased Dell XPS 8500,with an i7 processor, 24Gbs of Ram, a 1 TB disk drive and an entry level Radeon graphics card.   I intend(ed) to replace the AMD with the FX 3800 but in looking at the specs, the AMD card appears to be pretty powerful:  two GBs of GDDR5 memory and PCI Express 3.0 x 16 bus with max resolution of 4096 x 3112.  The FX 3800 was purchased a year ago, it has 1 GB of GDDR3 memory and PCI Express 2.0 x 16 bus interface but  has Adobe certification for GPU acceleation. The FX3800 has two display ports and a Dual Link DVI port with 2560x1600 resolution. 


      I will shooting AVCHD on an NEX 5N.


      Appreciate any thoughts you would have. 

        • 1. Re: Should I replace an AMD Radeon HD 7770 with Quadro Pro FX 3800 graphics card?
          ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

          You want an Nvidia card for the hardware MPE support. AMD cards are not supported right now on the PC side with Open CL. There is the option of getting a 600 series Geforce card versus using the Quadro which would give you the same or better specs than the AMD card.




          • 2. Re: Should I replace an AMD Radeon HD 7770 with Quadro Pro FX 3800 graphics card?
            John T Smith Adobe Community Professional & MVP

            >a 1 TB disk drive... shooting AVCHD


            You REALLY need a second hard drive (never a partition on your main drive !!!) for your projects and video files


            My 3 hard drives for video editing are configured as...


            1 - 320Gig Boot for Win7 64bit Pro and ALL program installs (2)


            2 - 320Gig data for Win7 paging swap file and video project files

            When I create a project on #2 drive, the various work files follow,

            so my boot drive is not used for the media cache folders and files


            3 - 1Terabyte data for all video files... input source & output export files (1)


            (1) for faster input/output if you have 4 drives

            - use drive 3 for all source files

            - use drive 4 for all output files


            (2) only 70Gig used, for Win7 & CS5 MC & MS Office & other smaller programs


            An EXAMPLE concerning trying to use only ONE Hard Drive for Video Editing
            You are a music conductor, with a baton that you use to point to various parts of the

            orchestra... this is like Windows pointing to various parts of the hard drive to do

            Windows housekeeping or to load program segments for various functions
            Now, at the same time and with the same hand... while still using the baton to conduct

            the orchestra... pick up a bow and play a fiddle... this would be doing something with

            your video file at the same time as all the other work
            You as a person cannot do both at the same time with the same hand
            A computer is a LITTLE better, in that it can switch from one kind of task to another

            very quickly... but not quickly enough for EASY video editing
            You need AT LEAST two hard drives (separate drives, never a partition

            http://forums.adobe.com/thread/650708 for more on partitions) with Windows (or Mac OS)

            and software on your boot drive, and video files on a 2nd drive so the boot drive is

            not slowed down by trying to do everything
            External eSata or USB3 are both fast enough for video editing... eSata is better
            I find that the three drives I use work very well for me, for editing AVCHD video...

            some people use a 4th drive, so video INPUT files are on drive three and all OUTPUT

            files are on drive four... I only bought a mid-tower case instead of a full tower case

            (my bad... but had to fit in the space available on my office desk!) so I use the three

            drives that will fit

            1 person found this helpful
            • 3. Re: Should I replace an AMD Radeon HD 7770 with Quadro Pro FX 3800 graphics card?
              Harm Millaard Level 7

              The choice is simple:


              1. The AMD card is not suitable for hardware acceleration. Getting a nVidia card with at least 1 GB VRAM allows for hardware acceleration.


              2. The Quadro FX 3800 with 1 GB VRAM is around € 900, has an older architecture and can steer 2 monitors.


              3. The GeForce GTX 660 Ti with 3 GB VRAM is around € 310, has the latest architecture, can steer 4 monitors and is around 3 times faster than the FX 3800.


              That makes the choice pretty obvious, doesn't it? Sell your current FX 3800 and you can get a GTX 660 Ti practically for free.

              1 person found this helpful
              • 4. Re: Should I replace an AMD Radeon HD 7770 with Quadro Pro FX 3800 graphics card?
                CalebFrost Level 1

                Thanks Harm! Noticing you on here a lot and appreciate your input.


                I'm planning to buy a similar computer as listed above...http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883155801

                Coming from a Mac back to PC (computer transition due to job transition) and on a tight budget. I need to get a machine up and running asap and this looks like the BFTB. Is the GTX 660 Ti supported for GPU acceleration b/c it isn't listed on the spec requirments...http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere/tech-specs.edu.html

                I'm sure this is newbie stuff but please advise. If so, is this a good option...http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133466 

                • 5. Re: Should I replace an AMD Radeon HD 7770 with Quadro Pro FX 3800 graphics card?
                  Harm Millaard Level 7

                  Roughly speaking, the GTX 660 TI is a great card for a $ 2500 system. If your budget is tighter than that, say $ 1600, then the GTX 650 Ti Boost may be the better option. There is no sense overspending on one component, when it is held back by other components. On a 1155 platform, the 650 Ti Boost is a great BFTB card, on a 2011 platform with sufficient memory and a good disk setup the 660 Ti may be the better choice to keep everything in balance.


                  Since Dell has a crippled BIOS and can not be overclocked at all, I suggest the GTX 650 Ti Boost as absolute top, especially since the PSU is around bare minimum with only 460 W. A lesser card like the GTX 650 would be better suited for such a Dell  configuration.