Return-Path: Received: from mail-vx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.220.169] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4689817 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 16:32:00 +0200 Received: by vcbfk14 with SMTP id fk14so5412212vcb.28 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 07:32:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=B64UwMNQaCiWxiSDAHJVivep3K9430au6zXEK/C9Hbs=; b=DGiQtX1WRdWoWSqHdgX0MEIXjx2saoEsbiQN+lUPKmI0kErAiVkL4plqyUBLGV2KBV hw53ILQ07MadbqVWLWUv0Arb1U13qtYTj1ttiK0ZQGokZS842R2NBTYsBWgB3D1d7h9t Z33gvjbTmVy/0ulYx5CA4JYkuqmnW0OTsnyiPVWYqu/zGDJEd4+OW0M4SPnhLToiPo6/ lSE8BynQ7t8LRl7GpHUZS0iiAs69ljKoBnetmLV0OVZQSwTmqvxSRVwcBV2G5tw32RD3 yuJsfJB/Aq10/UTmSQeUMALH1rax/FcDF+HEdNmxTJcyzD3GnuGiQZ3cOPzRLTJLz0g1 DM6w== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.98.200 with SMTP id ek8mr1066815vdb.36.1334759575945; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 07:32:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.149.70 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 07:32:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:32:55 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] GTX 580 in CS6 (should have been GTX 580 vs Quadro 4000) From: rendernyc To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307abf5d62826904bdf4ee62 --20cf307abf5d62826904bdf4ee62 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Whats also going to be important to AE is the number of CUDA Cores gtx570 - 480 Cores gtx580 - 512 Cores quadro4000 - 256 Cores So either of the GTX cards would be much more valuable than the Quadro card but that gtx680 with its 1536 Cores... thats the one i want :) On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Robert Houghton wrote= : > Now if Adobe would support the 680 we would probably end up choosing tha= t > > ------------------- > Robert Houghton > Houghton Media > Motion Graphics, Compositing, Animationwww.houghtonmedia.com > > > On 4/18/2012 6:14 AM, Gary Berendsen wrote: > > The performance price choice is: > > gtx570 2.5GB =80339 euro > gtx580 1.5 =80359 > gtx580 3 =80589 > Quadro 4 =80718 PC > =80843 mac > > In what I can find, gpu benchmark and c4d benches show the 570 and 580 > are pretty close. > > > *Gary Berendsen - VFX Generalist* > @DuintjerCS Kamer 1.009**** > Vijzelstraat 72 > 1017 HL Amsterdam > gary@garyberendsen.com > mob:+31 6 1438 5398**** > http://garyberendsen.com > > > > > > On Apr 17, 2012, at 8:51 PM, Satya G Meka wrote: > > +1 for GTX 580 (3GB). I've recently got one and I'm very satisfied with > its CUDA performance. I don't have any benchmarks against Quadro 4000, bu= t > it certainly feels faster. > > Satya G Meka. > > On Tuesday, April 17, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Robert Houghton wrote: > > That makes things interesting since the price difference between a > Quadro 4000 and the 3GB 580GTX is less than $250 depending on where you > shop for parts. I would love to hear from anyone who's tried CS6 with the > 580. I suppose if someone were to do a render test in Premiere Pro 5.5 it > might give an indicator of what advantage you could get with either card > but without a base to compare it to this is all speculative. If you go wi= th > raw Cuda cores the 580GTX has twice as many plus more RAM than the Quadro= . > That alone should make a major difference but it's all about the drivers. > > -Rob > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Chris Meyer wro= te: > > The specific advantage of more VRAM is you can fit larger layers into > memory instead of having them swapped out for processing. This is > particularly an issue with environment maps in AE CS6 (see the first page > of my review on PVC - http://tinyurl.com/AECS6onPVC). So I'd go for the 3 > GB flavor. > > - Chris > > > -- > Robert Houghton | Motion Graphics Designer > www.houghtonmedia.com > ph. 503.347.2234 > email. rob@houghtonmedia.com > > > > --=20 danny princz exposedideas.com --20cf307abf5d62826904bdf4ee62 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Whats also going to be important to AE is the number of CUDA Cores
gtx570 - 480 Cores
gtx580 - 512=A0Cores
quadro40= 00 - 256=A0Cores

So either of the GTX cards would = be much more valuable than the Quadro card

but that gtx680 with its 1536=A0Cores... thats the one = i want :)



On Wed, Apr 18, = 2012 at 10:12 AM, Robert Houghton <gfxguy74@gmail.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Now if Adobe would support the 680 we would probably end up choosing that

-------------------
Robert Houghton
Houghton Media
Motion Graphics, Compositing, Animation
www.houghtonmedi=
a.com

On 4/18/2012 6:14 AM, Gary Berendsen wrote:
The performance price choice is:

gtx570 2.5GB =80339= euro
gtx580 1.5 =80359
gtx580 3 =A0 =80589<= /div>
Quadro 4 =80718 PC
=80843 mac

In what I can find, gpu benchmark and c4d benches show the 570 and 580 are pretty close.


Gary Beren= dsen - VFX Generalist
=A0 @Duintjer= CS Kamer 1.009
=A0 Vijzelstr= aat 72
=A0 1017 HL Amsterdam





On Apr 17, 2012, at 8:51 PM, Satya G Meka wrote:

+1 for GTX 580 (3GB). I've recently got one and I'm very satisfied with its CUDA performance. I don't have any benchmarks against Quadro 4000, but it certainly feels faster.

Satya G Meka.

On Tuesday, April 17, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Robert Houghton wrote:

That makes things interesting since the price difference between a Quadro 4000 and the 3GB 580GTX is less than $250 depending on where you shop for parts. I would love to hear from anyone who's tried CS6 with the 580. I suppose if someone were to do a render test in Premiere Pro 5.5 it might give an indicator of what advantage you could get with either card but without a base to compare it to this is all speculative.=A0If you go with raw Cuda cores the 580GTX has twice as many plus more RAM than the Quadro. That alone should make a major difference but it's all about the drivers.

=A0 -Rob





--
danny princz=

exposedideas.com
--20cf307abf5d62826904bdf4ee62--