34 Replies Latest reply on Dec 8, 2014 11:30 AM by ECBowen

    geforce titan or quadro k4000?

    axeminster

      Hello all -

       

      I'm hoping to get a little help/clarification on which card would better suit my needs, and appreciate any/all help. I'm probably at an intermediate level of understanding when it comes to the technical aspects of computers, so some of the finer points escape me.

      In short, i'm looking at two graphics cards to purchase as an upgrade: the geforce titan http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-titan/specifications or the quadro k4000 http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro-desktop-gpus.html  .

       

      Currently, my setup is as follows:

      Intel Motherboard Dual Socket Xeon S5520SC

      Intel Xeon CPU Fan Heatsink STS100C

      2 x 2.26GHz Intel "Nehalem" Xeon Quad Core [8MB]

      12GB 1333MHz DDR3 Triple Channel SDRAM (6 x 2GB)

      1TB High Speed Hard Drive [64MB Cache, 7200RPM]

      StormDrive Dual Layer CD/DVD Writer

      850W Silent Power Supply

      Windows 7 Pro [64-bit]

      NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800 Workstation Graphics Accelerator [1GB]

      PCI 3 Port FireWire [TI Chipset]

      (additional) 1TB High Performance Drive [64MB Cache SATA 3 6GB]

       

      I use my workstation for projects and not gaming. And i used CS5 and Toon Boon Harmony as my two mediums for editing/creation. With CS5, it's my understanding that the quadro cards are preferred as they utilize some useful functions (such as mercury playback), and that they handle after effects better for the 3d issues. Conversely, Toon Boom Harmony suggests a geforce card over a quadro, as it corresponds with their software more "inherently" than a quadro. Granted, both programs would work well with either type of card, but is there one that is better fit to run both? And given my setup listed above, would the Titan card be massive overkill/be bottlenecked by slower components? Additionally, can anyone testify to a head to head matchup between these two cards?

       

      Thanks.

        • 2. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
          axeminster Level 1

          cc_merchant --

          Thanks for your response. i ran across that page earlier today in my searches. it led me to my tag on question of "And given my setup listed above, would the Titan card be massive overkill/be bottlenecked by slower components?"

           

          the article helps me in the abstract but not the concrete/case specific with my setup, unfortunately. Basically, would jumping up in a graphics card be only partially beneficial due to other parts that may restrict it? For example, will i only get maybe 30% of an improvement from a great new GPU due to my processors, which may not be able to fully utilize the card?

          • 3. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
            cc_merchant Level 4

            With the 'old' Xeons, only 12 GB memory @ 1333 MHz, with the limited disk setup a Titan would be serious overkill IMO. A GTX 760 would be more than enough, even when you start upgrading your system to a dual E5-2697 v2 with 64 GB. A K4000 is only sensible if you use 10 bit monitors.

             

            You would probably profit more from upgrading memory from 6 x 2GB  to 6 x 4GB.

            • 4. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
              axeminster Level 1

              This is where things get a little fuzzy for me: processors. I imagine my "nehalem" xeons are discontinued at this point, but they were still part of the i7 intel chips, right? Would dual e5-2697 be a downgrade from that (though still an upgrade because they're newer)?

              When i'm using Toon Boom or CS5, the lagging I sometimes experience is a result of ram then? I was under the impression that with my 12gb of ram (regardless of 2 or 4 gb per stick), would be more than enough for editing and such...

              • 5. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                axeminster Level 1

                Oh. Also, the quadro k4000 wouldn't improve function whatsoever, or it would only be marginal?

                • 6. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                  cc_merchant Level 4

                  Would dual e5-2697 be a downgrade from that?

                   

                  If you go from two quad cores @ 2.26 GHz, DDR1333 and with 8 MB L3 cache to two 12 cores @ 2.7 GHz, DDR1866 with 30 MB L3 cache and call that a downgrade, you must be kidding.

                  • 7. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                    axeminster Level 1

                    I'm admittedly not completely keen on the technical aspects of computer hardware such as processors, so I assure you I was  not kidding but rather searching for genuine answers.

                    • 8. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                      SebastiaanFP Level 1

                      Axeminister,

                      It would be a huge upgrade in processor power. In regards to GPU, the more expensive Quadro's only make sense if:

                      • you need 10 bit color depth, and
                      • have 10 bit color depth monitors to visible reproduce this level of output for you (only through display port output / cables afaik, not through HDMI, DVI or VGA signals).
                      • Mercury Playback works on all NVidia cards that have more than 1 GByte of dedicated VRAM, so both on the Quadro and GTX platforms. Even if they are not officially supported by Adobe. There are quite some tutorials out there on the web how to direct the Adobe apps towards your NViadia graphics cards.

                       

                      If you do not need 10 bit color depth, or do not have 10 bit monitors, then the extra money on the Quadro line is simply lost, and you can stay with the NVidia non-Quadro line, because then only the Cuda-cores and VRAM amount are important as far as I know, but I am also quite new to CC and computer hardware. But really, studying the articles on Harms PPBM website / Tweakerspage practically answers all these questions.

                       

                      Greetz SebastiaanFP

                      • 9. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                        axeminster Level 1

                        thanks sebastiaanfp. i appreciate the help. if you had a suggestion (and a moment of time), which dual processors would you suggest to match up well with a geforce 770? quick searches of that gpu yield about a 400 price range, which would leave me looking at maybe 600-750 for a pair of processors.

                         

                        thanks again.

                        • 10. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                          ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                          I would not suggest upgrading the CPU's unless you can also upgrade the board. Any of the current or even E5 V1 Xeons will require a new board. You would also want to add ram. If you want to upgrade the current system I would suggest the video card and more ram. You really dont have enough ram for GPU acceleration with that many threads in play.


                          Eric

                          ADK

                          • 11. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                            axeminster Level 1

                            Ahhh. Good to know. The hardware/tech stuff on computers eludes me a bit. The other person in this string mentioned jumping up to 6 4gb sticks of ram. Would that sufficiently supply the new card? Additionally, would just adding addition 2gb sticks be helpful or would it still cause mini bottlenecks?

                            • 12. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                              axeminster Level 1

                              And if i go with the 6 4gb sticks, would you have a specific suggestion on what kind? Do they still have to be 1333MHz DDR3 Triple Channel SDRAM in order to comply with my system?

                               

                              Thanks so much.

                              • 13. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                SebastiaanFP Level 1

                                AXE,

                                I am not qualified to answer on the CPU part, but it seems to be adequately answered already by Eric and CC_merchant, if you want new CPU's, then you would start a build of a new workstation basically.

                                afaik about RAM/CPU-cores, if I remember correctly from a recent online course I followed you want at least 3GB of RAM for each CPU core to use it to its optimum, but again, better google this, shouldn't be to difficult I guess to track this information somewhere on the web, but there is some optimum in regards to processor cores / RAM & video editing performance. So I recon 2 quad core = 2 x 4 cores x 3 GB of ram means an upgrade to 24GB of RAM would improve your system, together with a more powerful Nvidia GPU with more Cuda cores and more VRAM. And this would be the maximum what you can do with your present system. Or if you want extra/new CPU's you will better go for a new workstation build or buy.

                                And if you are not using 10 bit color workflow, then you can save yourself a lot of money by leaving the Quadro line alone (because they are meant for 10 bit color workflow as only extra benefit afaik against the GTX line) and going GTX-line.

                                • 14. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                  ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                                  I would highly suggest the 6x 4GB sticks. Dont get more 2GB. The board may not handle 1600 ram so I would check before you get DDR3 1600. Dont even bother looking at 1866 or higher with that system. 24GB would be far better than what you have with 16 threads currently and will be enough for either of the video cards I suggested.

                                   

                                  Eric

                                  ADK

                                  • 15. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                    axeminster Level 1

                                    I'll stick with the 6x4gb at 1333 then. Looking at the gtx770, i've noticed they have a 2gb model and a 4gb model. Would both be compatible with my system? And would you suggest evga or pny? sorry for the battery of questions, this is just getting into the deeper waters of computer knowledge and i'm trying to tread the water.

                                     

                                    for example, would this one work?

                                    http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-Classified-Dual-Link-Graphics-04G-P4-3778-KR/dp/B00DBPU8B2/ref= sr_1_2?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1386109387&sr=1-2&keywords=gtx+770

                                    • 17. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                      SebastiaanFP Level 1

                                      Axe,

                                      This is straight from Harms Tweakers page copy/pasted:

                                       

                                      "As a rough guide, how much VRAM should be installed on the video card, think along these lines:

                                      • For SD material, 1 GB is enough
                                      • For HD material, go for 1 - 2 GB
                                      • For 3K or 4K, go for 2 - 4 GB
                                      • For 5K+, go for 4 - 6 GB"

                                       

                                      http://ppbm7.com/index.php/tweakers-page/83-balanced-systems/94-balanced-systems

                                       

                                      Just spent some time there and I think you can find many answers. I find Harm is also very willing answering any body asking serious questions. You can post comments on his site there. He answered my questions too, and I am really at beginners level.

                                       

                                      If the price difference isn't to big, (less then a 100$ or so?) I would stay on the save side and buy the 4GB card. Just so you know it will definitely not be the bottleneck on your system. Or you can continue your research, but time is also money....

                                       

                                      I find for myself that there is basically no way around it to give this some study time, or the other option is to just go to some professionals and pay the extra money for custom build video editing workstations. But that again is actually great, because understanding your PC-system is actually really interesting!

                                      • 18. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                        ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                                        Both the 2GB or 4GB will work. It really just comes down to warranty and failure rate. I would highly suggest the EVGA and leave it at that.

                                         

                                        Those Crucial are Dual Channel modules and not Tri Channel. I would suggest looking for a Kit of 6 or 3.

                                         

                                        Eric

                                        ADK

                                        • 19. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                          forgottenrebell Level 1

                                          Your getting alot of miss information regarding your initial question so heres the correct answer.

                                           

                                          Quadro cards are not for gameing, they are for highlevel content creation. Especially 3D like Maya and 3Ds max, CAD softwares and 2D applications  like Autodesk flame (150k software)  and Foundrys Nuke software (8k). Quadro cards are much more stable from custom proprietary drivers and far more graphic programs support Quadro rather than gamer cards. Window refresh and especially interaction , 3d content creation / modeling control and much higher poly count is possible with Quadro. Quadro cards will run 24/7 rendering and geforce will not. Games require single floating point and Visual effects, scientific calculations and 3D rendering require double floating point percision for look and accurracy not to mention anti aliasing quality. Stereoscopic creation only possible with Quadro. Quadro has 10 bit color accuracy for professional level visual effects and color grading, Some Adobe software is designed for open GL will run faster and more stable with Quadro, Adobe light rays for example are about 400% quicker than any geforce card but these results are " special" case scenario.  Yes open GL is still far superior but open CL is catching up so by 2016 who knows. The new Quadro K series have 4 simultanious diplay outputs and do 4K at 10 bit.

                                           

                                          If you do not require to run any of the above softwares and especially do not do any 3D then you do not need a Quadro. theres still other caviats like direct x is best for max etc but it would take much more writting to list all the points required. suffice to say, choose your software first and let that dictate your GPU.   There are simlply many advantages to a Quadro card and you can not see them from reading charts and reviews as most reviews cannot measure the Quadros advantages without first purchasing the highend 2D and 3D softwares to test with ( and thats not happening). Its that simple. Best of luck.

                                           

                                          Oh yes, Nvidia purposly turns off hardware on there geforce cards via the PCB board and drivers for Quadros advantage. Thats capitolisim at work. Also d not judge a card on the amount of cuda cores. This used to be possible but no more.  For example the new Kepler architecture runs at half the frequency of Fermi so it will take basically twice the cuda cores to equal the older Fermi cards. Thats what they call creative accounting!

                                          • 20. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                            ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                                            Actually the Geforce cards have better cooling and run much cooler than the Quadro cards on average especially the higher end Geforce cards. The load put on the Geforce cards by games on average is higher than the load Adobe puts on the cards most of the time. The Geforce cards handle rendering long form fine with their temps averaging 40 to 65C including 24/7. Many of our clients have been doing that since CS5 released. Max like many other 3D applications are moving to Direct X so the Open GL acceleration on Quadro cards specific to their drivers is far less utilized. Geforce cards are better than Quadro cards for Direct X. Quadro cards do give you 10 bit color preview in Adobe but I/O such as Blackmagic and Aja are often better solutions for that coupled with a Geforce card. Open GL is an API and Open CL is GPU acceleration. They are completely different and pointless to compare. Cuda is what you compare to Open CL right now. GPU acceleration performance in general with regards to the video cards is tied to the raw specs. That means more cores and ram bandwidth decides the performance you will see from GPU acceleration. The higher end Geforce cards have far better specs than the Quadro's other than the K6000 which is extremely expensive. You could get 2 Titan Black edition cards for half the price which would perform far better. Many Red users use Titan cards and Blackmagic recommends them for Davinci because the performance is the best at lower cost. Geforce cards in general are a far better buy than the Quadro cards for GPU acceleration. We have also seen a lower failure rate with the higher end Geforce cards 760GTX and above than we have the Quadro K4000 series and above. The Quadro's just don't have correct fan profiles for the cooling which allows them to heat up too hot especially over long periods. Nvidia also has not artificially limited the Geforce cards due to the Quadro cards. The Geforce cards are vastly out performing the Quadro cards currently so if they had limited them then they failed badly. The GPU clock speed and memory clock speed likely were reduced because of the amount of cores added to the latest GPU's. That is the main benefit to parallel processing. More cores equals better performance even with far lower clock speed. X86 CPU processing is completely different which is why clock speed has far more impact. Right now the current CPU's are just not pushing the current higher end Geforce cards to their limit. It takes Dual Xeons to push a single Titan at this point due to how GPU acceleration works. The performance ceiling on the 700 series cards is far higher than the 500 series.

                                             

                                            Eric

                                            ADK

                                            • 21. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                              Bill Gehrke Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                              If anyone in the world has experience to back up their opinions it is Eric.

                                              • 22. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                forgottenrebell Level 1

                                                Blind faith, Wow. What experience is this you speak of? Sorry to inform you of this but Geforce cards were indeed neutered via both hardware and driver to not perform at full potential. You were misinformed. To prove this is quite simple, all one needs is either of two certain GTX cards and a bit of solder and a tweek on the driver to turn there GTX cards into a full on Quadro cards. Unfortuately, Nvidia has fixed this oversite now. And further,  to equate brute cuda core power as the only important factor is in error as I stated previously quite clearly. As far as direct X goes , you are correct with regards to 3Ds max although I did already kind of touch on that earlier as I did already mention Direct X. I noticed you did not mention any software that indeed specifcally requires the use of Quadro cards? I can asure you it is best to be fully aware of what these cards can do in other applications before haste in judgement. I have already listed qute a few show stoppers that would indeed prevent anyone running a geforce card ( titan or otherwise) from submitting there results for visual effects or scientific computes in some (but not all cases.) To disregard this most important fact is completely misdleading to all readers of this tread. Two titan blacks may work perfect in resolve for example ( and they do indeed ) but they are totally unuseable in Flame for example where the Quadro K6000 will work in both flame and Resolve. There is a reason Quadro cards cost twice what a gamer card costs and if you do not agree that is indeed your choice. Myself I realize the true benefit and far superior interaction that Quadro cards supply ( especially running 2 K6000's !) and I also realise after many of my own short cut attempts over the years to save money in most cases you get what you pay for.  I do want to touch on what you mentioned also regarding black magic and AJA cards, I find the AJA kona 3G is far superior for output. Stability and sandards may not be important to yourself but in my work environment it is parmount. As I stated earlier, If some one at home wants to use a non Quadro card it will indeed work but thats not the entire story ( but the ATI w8000 is a good alternative). Quadro cards were never designed to be fast, they were designed to be the standard amoung high end graphic and scientific applications giving consistantly highest order results and they still do. The gap between gamer and Quadros have significantly lessoned of late to be sure ( its not like the old 3Dlabs days / SGI onyx systems at a million dollars each ) , but it isint closed just yet. Simply put, anyone can build a go cart that goes a 100 mph in a straight line ( like a game card) but some people need to turn safely and have dependable brakes and thats a Quadro !

                                                • 23. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                  ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                                                  I listed observations and testing results. The editing applications that have GPU acceleration and perform better with Geforce cards are professional applications used in all the media content creation industry. Davinci and Adobe are far more prevalent now than what few applications that benefit from the Quadro Open GL plugins. GPU acceleration in general has supplanted Open GL as the primary GPU processing. Since it has, the raw specs of the cards decide the performance. This has been tested and shown with results by far more people than myself. So these are not opinions. The 700 series cards are showing greater performance than the previous gen Nvidia cards so obviously the cards were not limited that much if at all. The applications caching models are currently limiting the performance of the current cards as are the CPU's available. The CPU's themselves have to decode the data first that get's GPU processed and create all of the buffers that transit the data down to the GPU for processing. That is where the current limitation is for the GPU processing load. GPU-Z is reflecting this when monitoring the GPU load during application processing. Only certain codecs with resolutions greater than 2K such as red are using enough frame data to really push the cards. This points to applications limiting performance and not the hardware. There are far more applications now using GPU acceleration that gain the benefit from the specs of the cards than there are applications that take advantage of the Quadro Open GL plugins

                                                   

                                                  Nothing you have mentioned supports any professional stability argument for the Quadro cards. I actually listed a current problem with the Quadro cards that effects any processing unit and that is heat. That has been observed in testing and long term support here with failed video cards. The Quadro k4000 series due to the single slot profile, limited cooling, and poor fan control has the highest failure rate. Those cards are averaging well over 80+C with GPU acceleration applications especially since they are using lower end GPU chips that are often at 75% load or greater. Time, experience, and results show the higher end Geforce cards have a higher stability probability due to heat generation and constant long term load percentage. The only reason scientific, medical, and engineering GPU acceleration applications are used with the Quadro cards is the ECC ram option. When processing data sets that take weeks to complete or have extremely high cost involved in research, errors due to GPU ram is not something those R&D entities want to risk. In those scenarios the Quadro cards are the best choice. That is the only stability based advantage the Quadro cards bring to the table. That however no real impact on media content creation which we are discussing in this forum.

                                                   

                                                  Results and observations don't require a resume of experience to validate. Simply perform the testing as other have done like myself and list them here. I am stating results and observations that have been reported by many others so the validation is the simply the number of results that reflect the same data. If you disagree then report your results and let others either duplicate or disprove. That is not blind faith but simply data. Listing a bunch of marketing material as facts does nothing to validate your argument and are not facts as you state. They are marketing points that can be interpreted any number of ways hence the lack of any real value to the actual editors or content industry in general.

                                                  • 24. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                    forgottenrebell Level 1

                                                    I call B S. 700 series, i never mentioned what series I was referring to and if you knew anything about Quadros you would  have known that a Quadro 6000 is not even in that series. I already stated very clearly that for photoshopping or a bit of color correction a game card would be just fine. I also specified some examples of when a Quadro would be advantageous and you unwisely think ECC is the only apparent stability advantage.  Just try comping a hundred or more 2k film layers in 16 float in Flame or Nuke with any kind of usable interaction with a gamer card and see what happens. I'll tell you what happens, nothing, the bloody car wont even start. This is a normal everyday work flow for myself so in my world a gamer card is a none starter. In your opinion blank screens, popping pixels , anti aliasing issues and real time interaction to name but a few are none issues but in mine they would be a real disaster especially given clients pay a few grand per hour billable. In both commercials and feature vfx these are very real concerns and time and mistakes cost money in my world. As far as heat issues with the K4000 you may indeed be right in this matter but i would not know as our current Z820's run dual K6000's each with zero issues. We agree to disagree, you stick with the gamers cards and ill stick with the Quadros.

                                                    • 25. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                      ONeillSG Level 1

                                                      I agree with Eric. I run a very old GTX 560Ti, and it works just fine with AE, Premiere (MPE working just fine), Maya, Cinema 4D, TFD (fire and smoke simulation plugin for C4D that uses CUDA), and RealFlow. Most CG software today will use most GTX and Quadro cards just fine. I see no need to purchase a Quadro unless you require a feature that they come with, like 10-bit out, stereo-out, SDI-out, Sync, or perhaps there is certain software that requires a Quadro in order to work. I remember MARI once required a Quadro, but now it can use a GTX. Octane renderer (along with other CUDA renderers) generally recommends a high end GTX (like 780 or Titan) for GPU rendering.

                                                      • 26. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                        ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                                                        You assume the gamer cards produce drawing out anomalies versus the Quadro cards and they don't. I hate to break it to you but the Open GL code is updated with the drivers and is not on the machine code. If the Geforce cards draw out with anomalies so would the Quadro cards unless its simply a version difference in the 2 driver sets. The processing for the compositing of 200 layers as you mention is CPU side and not GPU side other than the draw out on the screen. So once again the Geforce cards would have the same stability or quality as the Quadro cards. The only difference with the applications that use the Quadro Open GL plugins would be acceleration on panning or movement. You really need to understand how the applications process and work before you assume how the cards will perform. I suggest you also try the Titan cards before you assume they perform differently than the K6000 cards. If the Geforce cards performed that poorly do you really think film productions would use them with Davinci, Vray, or Eyeon Fusion among others besides Adobe. I hate to break it to you but someone sold you marketing and you bought into it well beyond the actual results. I am sure the K6000's perform for your needs. However many have found that the 3 Titan's they can buy and still spend less than 1 K6000 offers far better return on investment without any anomalies or drawbacks. The K6000 is a 700 series GPU. The Quadro 6000 is not but has no chance of outperforming a Titan.

                                                        • 27. Re: Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                          forgottenrebell Level 1

                                                          Firstly, doing color correction on davinci resolve is magnitudes easier than compositing the same resolution and color space footage in 100 plus layers. There is no comparison whatsoever and you were foolished to even try using that comparison.  Secondly, Flame for example wont even boot up with a gamer card installed so you must use a Quadro card to even initiate the software so why would you even suggest a titan here? Thirdly, we have compared titans and 700 series cards to various Quadros in Nuke, Max and Maya and other vfx related applications and the Quadros in most but not all cases were indeed superior for many reasons especially ones already listed.  In heavy scenes there was just no comparison period, end of debate. Also, in production the software venders like autodesk for example will only help in a support case when both hardware and software configurations are supported so once again in the majority of cases advantage Quadro.  I simply do not have the time nor patience required to exchange numbers or "findings" in any further detail with you as I have already given my advice pertanent to the topic of this thread and if you choose to ignore it,  thats quite fine with me. I for one will not lose any sleep over this fact.   I will re-state the obvious that the drivers for Quadro cards are both updated and optimised long before any geforce cards as this is by design and agreement and is a major part of their advantage and stability, although as I have also clearly stated  this advantage is dissapearing or has already dissapeared in some cases. In sofar as the industry using geforce as you said, I can assure you that in the commercial and film vfx industry most everyone I know still use Quadros except the very small boutique places and only then when on budget constraints. In the large professional facilities Quadros still reign supreme. With regard to Davinci resolve usung Titans etc that is only very very recently and is an acception to rather than the rule ( since black magic bought davinci and started giving resolve "lite" away free so now the masses mistakenly think their qualified color graders ) and again thats simple color correction and this case it works very well.


                                                          Will Quadros loose their advantage? Yes. Have they yet? No. Would I use one at home for fun. Yes, I actually do currently but in all honesty id be fine with a titan as its just for fun and experimenting. Would I use one at work? If it did the job required yes.  Does it fill that requirement now? Absolutely not.

                                                           

                                                          You sound like the mechanic telling the driver that it should go fast when as a driver im saying its clearly not. You can spout your "facts" all you want, as you have ignored mine I will now decidedly ignore yours. Oh yes , you said the process of rendering out in my case was CPU and not GPU based, hmm, well then Einstein explain to me why I can render twice the footage / speed when I render with the second K6000 pluged in and turned on in the flame menu? Whats that, cat got your tounge? Thought so. Well, I have clients to get back to and earn some of that ROI.  Good day and good bye.

                                                          • 28. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                            ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                                                            Stating such in such is fact with no actual information, observations, and results does not make it so or the end of the debate at all. If you don't feel like wasting your time then simply don't respond. However the debate will continue whether you agree or not and your beliefs do not change that at all.

                                                             

                                                            Compositing applications and grading applications such as Davinci are different animals. Stating Davinci's processing especially since it has GPU acceleration in the mix is magnitudes easier is also a matter of opinion and not fact. Considering grading is done with layers upon layers there is similar complexity in the application buffering ie player buffering and processing. The difference is often the render engine which would be player based in Davinci. Whether Flame will initialize with a Quadro is not the cards but the application programming limiting the device initialization. Why they chose to do that is beyond me other than Nvidia likely offered them some concessions if they did so. There is nothing specific to the cards that would cause them to program the application that way. Hence why Maya and solid works all function with GeForce cards but there may be a feature not available without a Quadro card present. Solidworks for example turns off 1 feature without a Quadro card but there is no real reason beyond what was agreed to by the company with Nvidia. The performance is the same for everything in solid works whether you have the Quadro or Geforce card. Once again this is marketing based and not due to the hardware.

                                                             

                                                            Actually the Geforce card drivers are on a much faster update cycle than the Quadro cards and the Geforce cards are always available first in distribution when a new series releases before the Quadro cards. So no the Quadro cards are not optimized first. The reason Autodesk and other companies only offer support if you have a Quadro card has to do with what they are given by Nvidia for in house testing and development. Nvidia gives them Quadro cards so that is why they only support them in configurations. However do you really believe a Quadro K2000 has any prayer of outperforming a 780Ti card in any application? Please list 1 single application where you see that result. Yes somehow the Quadro K2000 is supported but the 780Ti card is not. Please it doesn't take any serious amount of sense to realize the reasons behind such non sense and none of it has to do with the hardware.

                                                             

                                                            GPU acceleration does not handle the Decoding and encoding of data/media. GPU acceleration handles other aspects. That means the compositing applications are processing all of the data at the CPU including the layer data and then send to the GPU for other processing such as scaling and interpolation. After that the data is sent back to the CPU for final encoding. The aspects handled by the GPU's require a tremendous amount of CPU power to process on CPU's where as GPU's already have the machine code and other such coding besides the parallel processing to handle those frame aspects far more efficiently. So once again yes the compositors are CPU processing the data as I stated above and the GPU processing itself could be done on any card that supports the GPU acceleration standards. As you can see I did have something to say about this. Maybe you should have more of an open mind instead of the earth is flat syndrome.

                                                            • 29. Re: Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                              forgottenrebell Level 1

                                                              Everything you just mentioned as an advantage or requirement for a Quadro card I had already listed as a reason and advantage for using the Quadro. So you just proved my point thank you.  My comments were both on what can work and what would be optimal. ( Gamer cards can work but Quadros are simply in majority of cases optimal). Given always present time constraints in my industry Quadros still reign supreme.  And AE / Premier are actually the home DIY version of softwares and are not by any means the prevailing softwares in use at professional vfx facilities. Having said that most facilities have at least one AE system and artist for vector related design graphics and treatments etc. There are of course different levels of facilities out there and I am talking solely high end commercials and vfx as that is my only experience. Premier on the other hand I have never seen used in a professional environment anywhere. I remember when for almost a deade the lists Premier outputted were not even frame accurate. For off lining I've seen Avid, light works , final cut and now smoke used but never Premier.

                                                               

                                                              Adobe photoshop is the one Adobe software and standard used en mass everywhere for still frame touchups, matt painting and texture manipulation / creation etc. PersonallyI have been using it since release version one and remain both a fan and user. Although I must mention there was a program called "live picture" that was far superior to photoshop that unfortunately never made it because of price. Bottom line is cheap always wins eventually. This does mean Quadro cards will eventually loose their advantage but as I said, not just yet.

                                                              • 30. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                                ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                                                                Avid had their time and their current state including removal from public trading was the lack of fruits of their labor. I don't believe too many houses are that enthused with the current progress of Media Composer. Pro Tools atleast has some innovative features that justify it's place in the Pro Audio industry but Media Composer brings very little innovation to the current market. Avid's financial situation reflects the current state of their core editing application. The only reason many media content creation industry business's have not walked away from them yet has to do with the massive investment they made with Avid already. They have yet to get the return on that investment and would take a significant loss to re-train staff and update systems to move to Adobe or another editor. So they continue to wait and wait for Avid to finally catch up to where the market is going. I believe FCPX and the debate of it's current status has been exhausted. How many are moving to FCPX versus how many are moving away. Lightworks is the 1 shining light that you mention and I hope the competitor Adobe requires to keep them innovating at the current pace. If Adobe doesn't have real competition then that bodes ill for everyone. Smoke is facing a serious problem with Autodesk's pricing model when compared to other applications out. Autodesk really needs to consider this before they end up down the same road Avid has. To big to fail doesn't exist in this industry and applications such as Fusion or even Blender to some extent are really giving alternatives that provide more than enough for 90 to 95%. You cant have a pricing model that high when the alternatives are half the price or even free but still handle most compositors, or FX editors needs.  Now add into that AE and you have far less reason to make those large license purchases anymore. The business's that are adjusting to the tech investment and options are thriving. The ones who are not are facing major challenges. With 4K to 12K frames starting to evolve for production the tech investment and roll over at a faster pace is becoming far more important than the reputation of applications used in the past. If a company has to buy new systems and software licenses every year then expect the far cheaper solutions that work to by far dominate the content industry.

                                                                • 31. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                                  esse bi

                                                                  your post is really interesting to me,

                                                                   

                                                                  you mention a setup with geforce and blackmagic to obtain 10bit/c, but does it work also in photoshop or only via blackmagic software/preview?

                                                                   

                                                                  Have you tested it? Id prefer to buy a blackmagic device instead of a quadro,

                                                                   

                                                                  thanks a lot

                                                                   

                                                                  best regards

                                                                   

                                                                  sam

                                                                  • 33. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                                    esse bi Level 1

                                                                    hi Eric,

                                                                     

                                                                    thanks for your reply; I've read all the thread, but I can't actually find an answer.

                                                                    I know from bmd that: "The HDLink can accept 4:4:4 and 4:2:2 10 bit SDI video and the Ultrastudio Express can send out 10bit colour precision. If you were in a video grading workflow, then this would work fine with for example, our software DaVinci Resolve. However with something like Photoshop, there is not a live retouching feature that you can use, only a final render out that would be seen on your monitor."

                                                                    but you stated that: "Quadro cards do give you 10 bit color preview in Adobe but I/O such as Blackmagic and Aja are often better solutions for that coupled with a Geforce card. "


                                                                    Were you referring to softwares other than photoshop?

                                                                    Since I would need a bdm device only for it [which one is not completely clear to me by now, but in case I'll deepen it later], I assumed I couldn't use it after the answer I got from bmd staff, because a 10bit live output isn't available inside photoshop [while with a quadro or a firepro it is].

                                                                     

                                                                    thanks a lot for your help,

                                                                    sam

                                                                    • 34. Re: geforce titan or quadro k4000?
                                                                      ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                                                                      Yes I was referring to Premiere and AE mainly.

                                                                       

                                                                      Eric

                                                                      ADK