This content has been marked as final. Show 26 replies
Have most of you tried the PP CS4 demo yet?
I ordered the demo and couldnt even try EX1 footage in it because it didnt have the preset and in general I saw it as VERY sluggish in all areas so I have decided to upgrade to only CS5 (if that will be better, that is!)
Everything is sluggish/time consuming: You want to make a quick still from the timeline, it will go thru a couple of crashes before AME actually will give you a chance to proceed and then there is a delay, and THEN you start the cue and wait more! All this just to extract a still frame! Export audio, there is only one format choice AAC. Okay it exported but Encore will not recognize it as an importable file, you have to give *.* to see the file. Then, for no reason, the file was shorter than the timeline. Exported again, making no changes, it was the right length! Go figure. And it's only the tip of the iceberg.
I have Core2 Duo Quad, 4 gig memory, 512 meg graphics and tons of space. XP SP3. Still not good for CS4.
Everyone except Jim :)
Most likely your not getting answers because you question is odd and very subjective. Your gonna have to be way more specific about your system. What kind of video cards do you have, you talk about GPU accelareted FX in CS3 so I'm guessing you have an editing card, Blackmagic, Decklink something like that maybe?
I find CS4 to be at least as fast as CS3 if not faster when editing my footage of choice P2 MXF. I get realtime previews no problem. Mini-Dv is also so fast anyway I couldn't tell the difference.
What kind of footage to do you edit with?
How is my question odd? It is a simple question of RT performance. I also think you have it backwards my friend. I should be asking the question not you. Do you use an NTSC monitor while editing Josh? If you edit using a professional NTSC monitor then you should now about the accelereated GPU Effects option for playback in PP CS3. It uses your graphics card to out put to the NTSC monitor not an expensive editing card. You need a dual head graphics card for it to work. I don't think you will be much help to me with this thread but I think others may edit the same way as I do.
The CPU and GPU are not the issue. PP CS3 played them great. I admit having a better GPU and CPU would make them both perform much better. The question is do you notice a performance hit when using an NTSC monitor with PP CS4? Did you like the CS3 option better?
Your right I can't help much because I have never had a problem in CS3 or CS4 using a NTSC monitor hooked up to my nvidia 7800, 8600, 8800. I've had dual monitors for like 5 years now. Works with cheap *** tube tv's, broadcast monitors, flatscreen and Plasma HDTV's.
Not a single problem with real-time ever.
If you think it's irrelevant to give your computer specs then you'll find no help from anyone here brother.
Cheer up Jim, For one thing, they say there might've been life on Mars!
Sorry pal. Download the demo and I'll never be able to throw you under the bus like that. I'm actually feeling bad for throwing you under the bus so often :)
Josh, PP CS4 does indeed work just not as good. I am not sure if your system works as good as my CS3 system does. In a nut shell if I opted for standard as opposed to Accelereated GPU Effects for the RT playback then I imagine my CS3 would take a hit. When set to compatible PP CS3 does not out put to the NTSC monitor at all. I wonder if you are indeed using PP CS3 in standard mode since you seemed to be in the dark about the Accelerated GPU Effects setting. I am getting a little info from you although I am not sure our sytems are configured the same.
If you must know. I use an Nvidia 7600 with 500 MB of RAM. A Core 2 Dual at 2.13 GHZ and 2 GIGS of RAM. I don't doubt that a Quad Core with an Nvidia 9800GT would make PP CS4 perform much better. My question to others that do not have a high end sytem is if the RT of PP CS4 is less than that of PP CS3. I did search the forums and did find anther thread that did mention PP CS4 was more of a resource hog. On a system with lots of RAM and a Quad Core CPU PP CS4 can shine.
>Download the demo
Ah, would that Adobe allow me to do so without their downloader...
(I use nothing by Akamai, one of the Internet's biggest offenders in the arenas of malware and advertising. So big, in fact, that Microsoft once moved Windows Update onto Akamai servers, and so many people had those servers blocked by adware, spyware and Antivirus programs that MS eventually had to take Windows Update off those servers. Like Circuit City for their full-screen DivX fiasco, Akamai needs to die!)
The demo downloaded OK. I think on a high end system PP CS3 and CS4 would preform about the same. From what I have read CS4 can make use of 8 gigs of RAM.
Is this what you want to hear?
Your system is maybe to slow and your video card is outdated. CS4 has more GPU acceleration than CS3. In fact Adobe has said it that Cs4 is optimized for Vista 64 and a quad core and at least 4 gigs of RAM 'are recommended'.
Your computer specs are a few years outdated so CS3 will be faster than CS4 on our computer.
That is a fact. If you would have given your computer specs when first asked we could have cleared this up.
If I'm wrong someone will correct me. You need to update your video card badly if you want to use CS4.
There is your answer. Newer versions of software tend to require more updated computers. This is how things work. Does this answer your question?
I'm speechless. You won't upgrade out of moral principal because you don't like the company that created the internet installer? I'm speechless man. You want me to buy you a dvd of the trial? I will if you can't afford it. email me your address if this is the case. email@example.com Your smart and you could help out alot here if you just tried the software instead of just going by what you read on forums to give people advice.
Josh, below are the specs for PP CS4. My system easily meets the spec. So the answer is yes. PP CS4 most likely will not have the same amount of RT on a mediocre system. On a faster system it might have slightly more RT. That would have been the wise answer to give. I did research and found the info on the internet (a few reviews helped).
2GHz or faster processor
Microsoft® Windows® XP with Service Pack 2 (Service Pack 3 recommended) or Windows Vista® Home Premium, Business, Ultimate, or Enterprise with Service Pack 1 (certified for 32-bit Windows XP and Windows Vista)
1GB of RAM or more recommended
9.1GB of available hard-disk space for installation; additional free space required during installation (cannot install on flash-based storage devices)
1,280x900 display with 32-bit video card and 16MB of VRAM
Some GPU-accelerated features require graphics support for Shader Model 3.0 and OpenGL 2.0
Some features in Adobe® Bridge rely on a DirectX 9capable graphics card with at least 64MB of VRAM
QuickTime 7.4.5 software required for multimedia features
Broadband Internet connection required for online services*
Okay so you answered your own question. Happy?
>You won't upgrade out of moral principal because you don't like the company that created the internet installer?
No, no. I just won't download the trial that way. I'd rather order the disk. I'll upgrade when funds become available.
You are too young to remember the Circuit City/Divx fiasco! Surely, your parents told you about it!
I am with you on the trial downloader though. I'll wait for the early adopters to fill in the blanks for me, then purchase the Master Collection suite, as an upgrade.
I would advise both of you to give CS4 a miss altogether. Seriously.
CS5 will be what CS4 promised but did not deliver ...if Adobe gets back on track and stops giving us what we did not want or ask for.
In all previous versions I could make a still from the timeline in about 3 seconds. In CS4 trial version it takes more like 3 MINUTES. Is that improvement? May be it is, in some way that I have not fathomed yet.
May be Adobe developers have never tried this:
Quad core Q6600, Win XP SP3, 4 gig ram (ok whatever XP will recognize of it), nVidia 8600GT with 512 meg.
First timeline with two cameras synced. That timeline cut on second timeline with multicam enabled. Both video 1 and 2 clips color corrected (Fast Color Corr) on the second timeline. NTSC SD wide screen. Try to export targa still from the multicam timeline it takes a long time, more like three minutes. If you do a few stills that way you don't get control of the timeline for about three munites! I don't know if trial is different from the real deal but I am not eager to upgrade.
I blame the beta testers. :-(
That's what we are doing right now, isn't it - beta testing ... for CS5?
I am sorry it is not three minutes. I tried to make the 13th tga still (for DVD menu) from the timeline and the AME still says it's waiting, after 20 minutes!
Btw, if you close AME after it's done, and you try to export one more tga file from the timeline AME will crash on restart. Will have to try exporting a couple of times before AME will come back on.
I myself have had enough of CS4's sluggish/freezing/stuttering behavior. It just doesn't run on a Gigabyte P35 motherboard with a nVidia Quadro FX4600. I've been through 3 driver revisions and still no closer, so back it goes.
CS3 installed and running like a charm now. All I miss is XDCam support in AE. :-(
I prefer PP CS3 myself. I don't doubt PP CS5 will be better.
>I don't doubt PP CS5 will be better.
I wonder how many people wrote that about CS4 when CS3 first came out.
The nature of people is to be expecting things to improve, the reality is often the opposite. Just take the last six months as an example.
You could include me in the camp of those that are "happier" working in CS3 (or even CS2) for time critical projects.
There are a number of CS4 issues including "playback" smoothness and weirdness but I would point out I do not get crashes or freezes in CS4.
Despite the new cool stuff in CS4 I find I now use it interchangeably,almost like a separate utility application (like QT Pro). ie it does somethings really well and for others, its not worth the time.
Not much to add Craig said it the best.