the gtx 580 would have been around 2x faster than the gtx 460. the gtx 750 ti is somewhere in between those in speed. if you are going to buy new, look for a gtx 750 ti close to $130 or gtx 960 around $200. the gtx 960 is even faster than the gtx 580. if you want to try buying used again, try to find a gtx 570 or above for around $100.
I had a different GTX 750 Ti (an MSI OC edition, with a single large fan) in my main i7-4790K rig before I upgraded to an eVGA GTX 960 FTW 2GB edition, then to the current eVGA GTX 970 4GB SC edition. I have this to say about factory overclocked GPUs:
The factory OC'ed GPUs provide zero tangible improvement in performance over reference-clocked versions of the same GPU (assuming sufficient cooling on the GPU).
That said, the GTX 750 Ti performed about the same as a non-Ti GTX 560 (which itself is slightly faster than the GTX 460) for MPEG-2 DVD exports but slightly faster than the GTX 560 for H.264 Blu-ray exports. (This is on CS6, CC 2014 and CC 2015.) The GTX 580 would have been faster than the GTX 750 Ti, especially for MPEG-2 exports.
And if you're going to run just the Adobe Creative Cloud apps on your PC, don't waste your money on the GTX 960 right now: Even on CC 2015, the GTX 960 isn't sufficiently faster than the GTX 750 Ti to justify the $50 or so price difference. In fact, I found a bigger difference in performance between the GTX 970 and the GTX 960 than I did between the GTX 960 and the GTX 750 Ti.
i see on your testing, the gtx 960 did poorly in mpeg2, but showed good results in the h.264 encode. Is the GeForce GTX 960 worth the extra cost over the GTX 750 Ti?
gtx 750 ti = 640 CUDA Cores, gtx 960 = 1024 CUDA Cores, gtx 970 = 1664 CUDA Cores
the cuda core count alone suggests the gtx 960 should be 2x as fast as the gtx 750 ti, while other benchmarks place it around 70% faster. it doesn't show 2x as fast on your benchmarks as premiere is still using the cpu for most of the work.
i've played with the lumetri color tools in premire cc 2015, and turning on every option to force a heavy workload on the gpu. it placed the largest demand on my gpu from premiere i have ever seen. i expected this coming from speedgrade, and so it has changed my recommendations. if lumetri color can do that much alone, without even hitting gpu effects, the gtx 960 will be the new minimum i'd recommend for anyone using premiere.
CUDA cores is no longer the determining factor and can not be used to compare performance between different generations.
For Premiere Pro editors the most significant changes are the fewer CUDA cores compared to Kepler and the memory bus of only 256 bits.
However, next to the improvements mentioned above (ROPS, L2 cache, etc.), the much higher clock speed of the GPU can make the GM204
a worthy successor of the 700 range of cards. How much faster it will be remains uncertain now. We are awaiting the first benchmark results.
- Claims by nVidia of 30 - 50% performance improvements are probably overly optimistic, but 5 - 10% may well be possible.
I want to thank everyone for their replies. No doubt I have some highly useful information to go from. I am thinking I will just be patient and keep my eye out for a 3GB version of the GTX 580, sticking with EVGA if at all possible. Unfortunately it is the 1.5GB editions are all over the place. That makes the smashing of the 3GB version I bought all the more bitter. What a loss. Why can't eBay sellers take even minimal precautions?
yes im aware maxwell architecture is very different from kepler and previous gens, and it isn't a simple cuda core vs cuda core decision when choosing between those gens. however all of those cards i listed are maxwell and it was a simple way of showing a comparison of the cards performance. mostly that the gtx 960 should run alot faster than the gtx 750 ti. thanks for informing others though.