Thanks Chris an Bill, what I meant to say is that is very big woahh about the graphics cards (to gamers) that are 1GB of memory (geforce 9800 gx2) and my question was if those were so good for editing in comparison to those who are specialized to editing systems but smaller in memory like 512MB (Quadro 1700). Because those who I named was in the same price range.

To clarify a little I think go with premiere cs3 in Win XP, maybe 4gig of ram, a Quad core processor and I was wondering about which graphic card to chose, with yours answers Im little more convinced to acquire a Quadro and maybe the 1700 because its dirx10 and perhaps in one year the vista platform could be good to go with almost all the software for post-production and I wont spend more money to change the Dirx9 card that i have used only a year. :)

Am´I in the right path??

PS:I have the sony ex1 if someone ask about what I`m going to edit. :)

Hi Bill,

I certainly agree that 256mb for editing is plenty. Where I have found a bit more is desirable is when you are doing titling and graphics. The frame buffer of the video card is used in most titling/graphic applications and when you are doing HD titles and especially 3D ones (which use the card much the same way games and engineering applications do) and having a little more memory is better.

Chris

I think you are on the right path. If you are going to run XP then only put 2gig of ram in the box. Due to how XP allocates memory any more than 3gig can cause performance decreases. Buy 4gig as 4 1gig modules and put 2 in now to make sure you take advantage of the full DDR capability of the chipset. Save the other 2gig for when you install Vista.

Chris

Thanks Chris for your answers, I kept on investigating and I have found this. http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/...0-geforce-9800
I leave the address if others have the same question as I'm.

You guys are missing an important point. I do not see which NLE Alfredo is using. That is KEY when selecting a card. I think Chris is a Avid Liquid guy like me, so ATI 19xx series it the best for Liquid. 2xxx, 3xxx cards are a problem because of what Chris outlined with DX10. That applies to Avid Liquid because of how it uses the GPU intensively. AL abhors nVidia too.

Sony Vegas seems to like the gamer nVidia cards and may even like the hottest DX10 cards. Its performance is not DirectX related. Same for Adobe, but Adobe even has specific cards made for it and does like some Quadros. Avid's main series likes very specific Quadro cards. And it goes on.

What NLE?

Changed the words readability and I cannot edit because of a code filter at work.

Yes George, I think I said in a couple of messages that I will use the Adobe suite, with premiere, after effects, etc. (for the time with Win Xp, but in the future I will go Vista)
So, what do you think is the better option? (I have already an inclination to a Quadro 1700, but I have my mind open for more opinions)


Thanks!

Video Cards?
 

What would you think about using one of each kind of card in the same editing computer? Use the OpenGl card (like a Quadro from nVidia) for the support of the editing application and After Effects of course but use a not top of the line gaming style card (like the nVidea PCIe 7950 GX2 1GB two in one card) to have more screen real-estate with multiple monitors?

This could save a lot of money instead of buying a nVidia Quadro FX 4500 X2 for 3599.95!

Or does having any DirectX card interfere with say After Effects?

Has anyone tried this? Has anyone heard anything from nVidea or ATI about this idea?

Aloha from Honolulu
Grayson