I am building a new system : CS5/W7-64, i7 930, GTX 285, P6T, 12 GB DDR3 , psu 850 W , HDD 4 TB : I trust this will master the power of CS5.
However, being curious, for now I'm testing CS5 on my old system to see what Mercury does ( W7-64, Athlon 64x2 6000+ , ATI X1950Pro, 4 GB DDR2 , HDD 2TB ).
Maybe I do miss something essentially about Mercury, but, without GTX285 cuda, it does not seem to speed up export rendering ( MPEG2 ) .
Nevertheless, while playback/preview, with some effects ( e.g. rotate 180 degr., sharpen, shadow/hilight ), the timeline seems to playback smoother indeed than under CS3.
Sure, again, I realize that after installing the GTX285 under an i7 930, export rendering with Cuda sould be much much faster than under my old CS3 system.
.But for now I am still puzzled why Mercury ( which has nothing to do with the type of graph card ) does not seem to speed up export MPEG2 rendering.
Did I miss something while having read that Mercuray does ALSO speed up export rendering anyway ?
Just for curiosity's sake : has anybody a clue as to how many times a CS5/W7-64/GTX285/i7 930/12GB DDR3 renders ( eport MPEG2) faster than my said old sustem CS3/W7-64/X1950Pro/Athlon 64x2/6000+/4GB DDR2 ??
Am I too bold to hope for a speeding up factor of 10-12 or more ?
Thanks for any help.
Thanks anyway but I've been there.
That data base does not include my old proc and graph card, so I cannot compare what I want.
Also, I am still interested in learning if Mercury ( without a CUDA card ) does speed up export rendering ( MPEG2 HDV50i ) or not.
And why ( not ) ? ( Is playback/preview the timeline not a way of ( Mercury -) rendering as well ? ).
Without a CUDA card, the speed increase of CS5 over CS4 was around 30% on my system.
If you look at the AMD Athlon X2 64 system at the bottom you see it is around 20 times slower than the top machines.