PDA

View Full Version : What graphic card do I need?



JIKIJI
07-07-2012, 08:20 PM
I have a sony vaio with 6gb ram, Intel core i3 CPU M 350 @ 2.27Ghz.
I can't run CUDA for resolve so i guess I either need an Nvidia graphic card or buy a mac pro if this is too slow.
What you guys think, Do i need to buy a graphic card, if so which one would be cheapest?
Or do you guys think I should upgrade for a mac pro?

Brad Ferrell
07-08-2012, 10:08 AM
I'm looking at two (2) EVGA GTX670 with 2GB of RAM. These list for $399.

You're going to need to increase your RAM to 16 or above, I suggest 32 GB. Maybe replace your motherboard too just to run Resolve. Resolve uses two graphix cards if you let it.

A used Mac Pro is one way to go but there is no need to run the Adobe Creative Suite or Resolve on such an expensive machine. You're better off building a PC and gettting the added performance your money will allow.

popcornflix
07-09-2012, 12:43 AM
Let me play Devil's Advocate for the Mac. Though you can spend less up front on building a Windows machine, Macs cost much less to maintain, both in time and money. (http://arstechnica.com/apple/2010/03/survey-macs-cost-notably-less-to-support-than-windows-pcs/) If you'd rather spend your time doing creative work, rather than troubleshooting your system, you should consider a Mac Pro. (Also, if you buy a top-of-the-line PC like the HP z820, you will spend as much or more than on a comparable Mac.)

blahey
07-09-2012, 02:45 AM
^+1 Keep an eye on eBay and CL, I just got a killer deal on a Mac Pro 2xQC 3.0 16gb ram for about $1000. I've had VAIO's and Sony is pretty tight on there upgrade path. HDs & RAM, G-cards on desktops and thats about it. Way less headaches with macs. But, maybe if you gave us the model number of your VAIO, you may get better options,

Brad Ferrell
07-09-2012, 08:26 AM
Let me play Devil's Advocate for the Mac. Though you can spend less up front on building a Windows machine, Macs cost much less to maintain, both in time and money. (http://arstechnica.com/apple/2010/03/survey-macs-cost-notably-less-to-support-than-windows-pcs/) If you'd rather spend your time doing creative work, rather than troubleshooting your system, you should consider a Mac Pro. (Also, if you buy a top-of-the-line PC like the HP z820, you will spend as much or more than on a comparable Mac.)

I don't find this accurate to my experience over the last decade. Windows 64 is rock-solid or I'd have a Hackintosh.

stip
07-09-2012, 08:34 AM
I don't find this accurate to my experience over the last decade. Windows 64 is rock-solid or I'd have a Hackintosh.

yes. Stability is not an argument for Mac anymore and bang for buck speaks for PC systems. Around me I've even noticed a slight shift in the 'creative', especially video field towards PCs.

JIKIJI
07-09-2012, 01:04 PM
maybe if you gave us the model number of your VAIO, you may get better options,
this is my model number for my sony vaio; VPCEB2MOE

I'm thinking of saving up for a mac pro though, but that will have to wait.

Andrew_HD
07-09-2012, 04:00 PM
I did not have a single problem with HP xw8600 workstation for last 3 years. Average person my find easier to maintain MAC Pro, but with current limitations compared to PC and no OTHER advantages it's way not worth it.


*(Also, if you buy a top-of-the-line PC like the HP z820, you will spend as much or more than on a comparable Mac.)
You will spent as much, but for something what you can configure as you want, not for an already old technology. Win7 is as stable as MAC OS- gap is gone. MACs are more and more restricted with less stability compared to old days, where PCs are going opposite.

mattbatt
07-12-2012, 08:52 PM
For my Hack, I'm looking at getting some more CUDA cards. Been doing research over at CreativeCow and other sites, the GTX 6xx series do not seem to be adding performance at all over the 570/580. Looks like NVIDIA changed the computational algorithm - these 6xx series favor shaders over computational instructions. In other words: great for games not as good for production.

I wrote Blackmagic to see if they have some benchmarks they can throw our way.

mattbatt
07-12-2012, 08:56 PM
Oh, PS: Andrew, I'm still a Mac fanboy but left the Pro line in early 2011 and have a really neat hackintosh. 6 cores running 3.8 ghz really low temp, RAIDs, SSD, 24GB 1600+ mhz ram, blu ray, Nvidia GTX 285 (gonna add some more cards).

I have Windows 7 and 8 beta. OS X is still more stable with less hickups - more intuitive with gui. Every install in windows wants to know what is going on. Sometimes browsers act weird, slower performance in windows 7. I do like the activity monitor in windows 8.

I'm thinking windows 8 is going to unnerve people with the re-design though.

stip
07-12-2012, 09:12 PM
For doing grading in apps like DaVinci you want a GPU with lots of RAM. If you want to get a used one, older GTX570 with 3GB RAM should still be great performers.

these 6xx series favor shaders over computational instructions. In other words: great for games not as good for production.

I wouldn't say they're 'not as good for production' :)

Brad Ferrell
07-13-2012, 08:34 AM
so a 2.5Gb GTX570 would do better than a 2.0Gb GTX 670 even though it has 1300+ cuda cores?

Brad Ferrell
07-15-2012, 07:43 AM
bump

Brad Ferrell
07-16-2012, 06:10 PM
Got my answer on Creative Cow. The 580 is what is recommended for Resolve as it is tested and proven.

Margus Voll
08-08-2012, 01:17 PM
mostly on mac stuff just works if set up correctly, we will see what future brings. good pc cost even bit more than mac pro imo. with cheap pc you have all kind of problems.

JIKIJI
08-08-2012, 11:19 PM
okay so I just bought a new Desktop with i3 processor, 8GB Ram, 1 TB HDD and GeForce GTS 260M with Intel GPU as well. Do I need a better GPU like Geforce 500 series? I'll build more Ram as i go along.

Brad Ferrell
08-09-2012, 08:22 AM
okay so I just bought a new Desktop with i3 processor, 8GB Ram, 1 TB HDD and GeForce GTS 260M with Intel GPU as well. Do I need a better GPU like Geforce 500 series? I'll build more Ram as i go along.

The minimum RAM config for Resolve is 12GB. Try your card, it should be good enough for the GUI. If you're going to add another GPU, you'll need to upgrade your power supply to 1000W to support both. This will only add to your rendering power. If you have $250, try a refurbished GTX 570 with as much RAM onboard as you can find, 2GB or 2.5Gb. This will help.

Kevin Marshall
08-09-2012, 10:55 AM
Just another voice throwing support to the 2.5GB 570. I've got one by EVGA in my system as the GPU card, and I've yet to even stress it with 1080p material - my processor isn't fast enough to effectively test against RED 4K/5K, which I have to grade at 1/4 res. Noise reduction might kill it - but I don't have the full Resolve license, and am more keen on picking up Neat Video, anyway.

Brad Ferrell
08-09-2012, 04:27 PM
I'm finding Neat Video a bit "extreme" in some cases (in AE). I though maybe fading it in on an adjustment layer might work, but I do love the look.

I'm looking forward to trying the Resolve noise reduction too.

I took Kevin's recommendation for the 570. Definately an excellent buy.

Kevin Marshall
08-09-2012, 06:16 PM
I haven't used Neat Video, but I can say I wasn't fond of Resolve's NR when I used it...granted that was one day, so it's safe to say I'm no master with that particular tool - but first impressions were shaky. It does have the appeal of not having to transcode like I would sending Neat Videoed material into Resolve, especially appealing to the RED jobs I do.

On the other hand, I'm told it will bring graphics cards to their knees real quick...decisions, decisions...

Brad Ferrell
08-09-2012, 06:21 PM
With the two GTX 570's the rendering in AE of Neatvideo takes two frames of time. It's not a hit at all.

What was the deal with the Resolve NR? What didn't you like? I'm assuming it's good because it's Resolve.

Kevin Marshall
08-09-2012, 08:01 PM
I probably just need to play with it more...it seemed to just kind of take small pixely noise and make it larger and splotchy, and completely destroyed even large detail. This was on 4K Epic/Scarlet footage in a 1080p timeline. And I'm actually worried about the performance in Resolve, not Neat Video. Footage that played back at 15fps dropped to like 2fps with minimal NR settings on a Quadro 4000, radius of 1 ground everything to a halt. Since I don't have a full license, I haven't had the chance to test it on my machine, but I don't expect much better performance.

I'm more interested in Neat Video because of the ability to tell it where the noise is so that it can sample it, where Resolve's NR seems to be just global adjustments (Threshold, Radius, Blend). It just seems smarter. It's just that that extra transcoding step would be a pain for my all-RAW workflows.

Cheezweezl
08-10-2012, 01:45 AM
i haven't gotten into the resolve NR, but i can say that neat video is pretty awesome. try it on greenscreen footage before the keyer. even on clean shot native iso footage, it makes for the cleanest keys ever.

Andrew_HD
08-10-2012, 04:03 AM
With the two GTX 570's the rendering in AE of Neatvideo takes two frames of time. It's not a hit at all.

What was the deal with the Resolve NR? What didn't you like? I'm assuming it's good because it's Resolve.

Well- don't assume to much- better try it and compare :)

Michael Millichamp
08-10-2012, 09:35 AM
okay so I just bought a new Desktop with i3 processor, 8GB Ram, 1 TB HDD and GeForce GTS 260M with Intel GPU as well. Do I need a better GPU like Geforce 500 series? I'll build more Ram as i go along.


Yikes.

Did you buy the computer at walmart or something?

A Desktop with an i3?

My current set up is Ivy Bridge i7 3770k, 16bg RAM, 240gb SSD, 5TB Storage HDD, GTX 580 and Asus Sabertooth Z77 Mobo. This might be a little overkill for the BMCC, but once you get deep into Resolve and AE, you need more.

Peter Chamberlain
08-10-2012, 10:13 AM
Resolve NR is quite GPU intensive if you want high resolution in real time, which in HD is possible with two high power CUDA GPUs. It can however act on a specific isolated area and/or color and can be used in any layer/node for every shot.
Peter

Kevin Marshall
08-10-2012, 10:37 AM
Resolve NR is quite GPU intensive if you want high resolution in real time, which in HD is possible with two high power CUDA GPUs. It can however act on a specific isolated area and/or color and can be used in any layer/node for every shot.
Peter
Well that's good to know, thanks Peter. I didn't mean to knock Resolve's NR, and I assumed that the slowdown was just my system being vastly underpowered for it. Now I see the part on limiting noise reduction in the manual, I must've skipped that paragraph before. If I get the chance, I'll have to play with that to try and save a couple of shots...

JIKIJI
08-10-2012, 10:48 AM
Yikes.

Did you buy the computer at walmart or something?

A Desktop with an i3?

My current set up is Ivy Bridge i7 3770k, 16bg RAM, 240gb SSD, 5TB Storage HDD, GTX 580 and Asus Sabertooth Z77 Mobo. This might be a little overkill for the BMCC, but once you get deep into Resolve and AE, you need more.

bought it cheap on ebay, I'm going to build my own desktop as I go along anyways, I'm thinking of starting with Intel DZ77RE-75K motherboard (has thunderbolt) with 16gb Ram and I'll go from there.