Bit of a mixed one this. Nvidia are just about to release their new GTX 480 card which I'm guessing will be supported by Adobe but does anyone know how this would compare to the Quadro FX cards?

Nvidia GTX 480:

Voltage Tweak Technology
- Core Clock: 700MHz
- Memory: 1536MB GDDR5
- Memory Clock: 3696MHz (Effective)
- Memory Interface: 384-Bit
- Processing Cores: 480
- Shader Clock: 1401MHz
- Bus Type: PCI-Express 2.0
- Display Connectors: 2x Dual-Link DVI-I & 1x Mini-HDMI 1.3a (Includes HDMI & VGA Adapters)
- SLI Ready
- HDCP Capable
- DirectX 11 Support
- OpenGL 3.1 Support
- PhysX Enabled
- CUDA Enabled
- Warranty: 3 Years


Asus GeForce GTX 480 1536MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card [90-C3CH90-W0UAY0KZ] Graphics and Video NVIDIA GTX 400 Series (http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-222-AS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1750)

Nvidia FX5800

GPU Specs:
CUDA Cores 240

GPU Memory Specs:
Memory Size Total 4 GB
Memory Interface 512-bit
Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec) 102


NVIDIA® Quadro® FX 5800 provides professionals with visual supercomputing from their desktops delivering results that push visualization beyond traditional 3D. (http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_quadro_fx_5800_us.html)

Scan.co.uk: VCQFX5800G-PCIE-PB - 4GB NVIDIA Quadro FX 5800, PCI-E 2.0 (x16), GDDR3, SLi, DisplayPort/ 2xDL DVI-I/ Stereo Port, Retail (http://www.scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductID=925031&source=froogle)

So the GTX has more CUDA cores and more GB/Sec so would it be faster for Adobe Pr/Ae use in mind? I must be missing something as the GTX is £450 and the FX is £2500

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

The FX 5800 is probably the same GPU as the GTX 285, with 240 SPs or "Cuda" Cores. They charge a large premium (4x and more) from the Quadro over the Geforce equivalent with driver certification support, larger memory frame buffer, and other requirements from professional/workstation requirements (3D, CAD, and more). I'm also looking at the GTX 470 or GTX 480.

I'd love to see some CS5 benchmarks with these cards. C'mon Adobe!!

My understanding is that only the Quadro cards will do more than three layers of realtime with the Mercury Playback Engine.

So if you think you'll be doing that often, there's your answer.

yeah but how does one of the new 480s compare the last year quadros?

Maybe the Geforce models (GTX285, GTX 470 and GTX480) will be software restricted to three video layers, even though they have more streaming processors or cuda cores than their sister $1k-$2k quadros.

My understanding is that only the Quadro cards will do more than three layers of realtime with the Mercury Playback Engine.

So if you think you'll be doing that often, there's your answer.

No probably don't use more than 3 layers so its all looking good.

Maybe the Geforce models (GTX285, GTX 470 and GTX480) will be software restricted to three video layers, even though they have more streaming processors or cuda cores than their sister $1k-$2k quadros.

That would be very poor by Adobe to do that - To them doesnt matter what Nvidia card I buy?

I seriously doubt that. I think we need to look at it this way. In the early stages of course Adobe is going to use the heaviest hitters that Nvida offers. Now with the fermi coming out the consumer cards will have as much punch if not more than the older pro cards. So in the short term ( a year or so ) we'll really have to pay for performance but as cards drop I think we'll be able to get $200 to $300 cards to do what we need.

That would be very poor by Adobe to do that - To them doesnt matter what Nvidia card I buy?


David, yes, I'm not sure why Adobe would care what Nvidia card you would buy, but seemingly the slower Quadros will outperform the newer Fermi based GTX Geforces.

Per Mark Morreau's comment, according to Nvidia's website, it says

Experience real-time results when applying multiple color corrections and effects across more than three video layers – but only if the system has Quadro

Adobe Mercury Playback Engine (http://www.nvidia.com/object/adobe_mercury_playback_engine.html)

So either the Quadro's additional frame buffer memory, driver optimizations, or something else (artificial barrier??) is there to make the Quadro "outperform" its sister Geforce cards with additional video layer support, even though the Fermi based GPUs like the GTX 470 and GTX 480 (and even the GT200 based GTX 285) have more power than the older and pricier GT200 based Quadros (CX, FX 5800, etc.).

One additional thing to look for in a consumer model is how much RAM the video card has. That could be a possible future limitation. I have a 275 GTX, but it has 1792 MB of RAM, which is more than the reference design requires.

I can't say what impact this will have in CS5, but I do know that video software like the 2.5D tracker Mocha, that make use of the video card RAM to store textures, benefits greatly from having more RAM.

David, yes, I'm not sure why Adobe would care what Nvidia card you would buy, but seemingly the slower Quadros will outperform the newer Fermi based GTX Geforces.

Per Mark Morreau's comment, according to Nvidia's website, it says



Adobe Mercury Playback Engine (http://www.nvidia.com/object/adobe_mercury_playback_engine.html)

So either the Quadro's additional frame buffer memory, driver optimizations, or something else (artificial barrier??) is there to make the Quadro "outperform" its sister Geforce cards with additional video layer support, even though the Fermi based GPUs like the GTX 470 and GTX 480 (and even the GT200 based GTX 285) have more power than the older and pricier GT200 based Quadros (CX, FX 5800, etc.).



It seems Nvidia has got into bed with Adobe. Not offering support for the GTX 480 until Q3, limiting the consumer cards to 3 layered effects. I guess they have done it not to pee off the Quadro owners.

Hi
I ordered the FX 4800 14 days ago - now I orderd a GTX480 instead - newer , faster and cheaper. No support for mercury yet - but I can wait and I never do more than 3 layers of video.

Plus I think the 3 layers limit is for effects you can still have more than 3 layers just not with effects in RT. ie a 4 camera multicam switch.

Just a word of warning: The GTX 480 runs REALLY hot. If the fan is left at automatic, it's running temperature is 95C.

Plus, it's also fairly noisy when it comes to it's fan. Newer drivers from Nvidia have also suffered from stability issues, making TDR errors very frequently.

... you can still have more than 3 layers just not with effects in RT. ie a 4 camera multicam switch.

Randy, this is exactly the question I had. If this is true, then it's good news indeed. Can anyone else confirm this, i.e. a four-track multicam sequence doesn't count against the 3-layer limit? I mean, while doing the multicam edit you are playing back all four layers of HD, albeit at reduced resolutions...

Okay so I'm going to try pick up a GTX 285 second hand but is the MPE that good?

I've got a slowish AMD quad core 2.1 CPU and 8GB of ram with a Nvidia Quadro 3700. Since there is no support for this card is it worth as a stop gap to improve my rendering/exporting times?

I'd also need a new PSU but is it worth spending £200/$300 for the use of MPE?

David,

My experience with CS5 has shown performance increases around 40% across the board without hardware supported MPE. That is nice!!!.

I suggest you first get CS5 and try it. You may be pleasantly surprised by the speed increase and the stability.

In Q3 support for the GTX-480 Fermi card is expected and that may be a better investment than an end of the line GTX-285.

I would wait for the first benchmarks to appear, that show the performance gains from MPE.

Harm I think you are right. I'm also using Cineform NeoHD v4 and of course there isnt a GPU support for that so I might as well upgrade to Cineform V5 and save up for a decent i7 machine.

I'm exporting a 20 min Cineform file with some effects and what no and its took 2hours 40 mins and still 2 hours left.

If CS5 can knock of 40% of that I'd be happy!

David,

On my system a 26 second time line with four tracks, AVCHD 29.97i, HDV 1080 25i, XDCAM-EX 1920 25i and titles, heavily loaded with 3-way CC, Gaussian blur, fast CC, echo, motion/scale/position, opacity all keyframed with bezier curves, BW, blends and similar effects, exporting to H.264 took 28 seconds without hardware MPE. That is nearly RT.

Definitely good news Harm.

Anyone have any experience using MPE on a Mac? Would have to be GTX 285 or Quadro 4800 as those are the only two supported...