Mercury Engine playback CPU > GPU

[Will Keir]

All done in OS X Snow Leopard.

Doing a bit of testing on CS6. I had to install CUDA drives to enable to GPU support which was greyed out to start. I was thinking the GPU would be even faster than software only (CPU).

Looks like I was wrong.

R3D playback on preview from my bid at 1/2 is smooth in CPU software only but with GPU enabled for playback, I get only 1/4, 1/2 way too jumpy.

My GPU = GTX 285 1GB RAM
My CPU = 2x 2.93 Quad Core Intel Xeon

Conclusion: My software mode is more robust than my GPU mode?

I assume Ram has little to do with preview? I guess it makes sense, my CPU is a powerhouse, yet everyone raves about GPU CUDA for the mercury playback engine, just wondering if I'm skipping something.

Best,

Will Keir

[Mike P.]

I thought the GPU/CUDA only accelerates (certain) effects and scaling. r3d decode is always done on the CPU. Not sure why you're seeing a discrepancy in performance; maybe someone from Adobe will chime in.

[Cory Petkovsek]

You are comparing a high end CPU with a low end GPU. I'm not sure why you are complaining.

Are you sure CUDA is enabled? Installing the CUDA driver isn't enough. Since Adobe does not support your card with CUDA under PPro/AE, you have to enable it manually. You can tell it is properly enabled, when creating a new project you have both a GPU/CUDA option and a Software only option. You can tell under AE in the preferences, Previews..., and the CUDA section.

http://www.vidmuze.com/2012/06/how-t...e-cs6-for-mac/

[Les C.]

You are comparing a high end CPU with a low end GPU. I'm not sure why you are complaining.

Are you sure CUDA is enabled? Installing the CUDA driver isn't enough. Since Adobe does not support your card with CUDA under PPro/AE, you have to enable it manually. You can tell it is properly enabled, when creating a new project you have both a GPU/CUDA option and a Software only option. You can tell under AE in the preferences, Previews..., and the CUDA section.

http://www.vidmuze.com/2012/06/how-t...e-cs6-for-mac/

I'd be hesitant to call the GTX-285 a 'low end' GPU. He does have limited VRAM on this card, but it's not a bad card at all for running CS6 and is one of the cards Adobe recommends.

nVidia crippled opengl on all cards newer than the 285, and did some very interesting things to CUDA in the 680.

The 285 will run most opengl apps 10 times faster than the 680, very sad to say (think high end 3D animation).

This site, which has good info about making sure the cards are seen by CS (it probably already is), indicates that render times are at most 20% better when comparing a 680 with a 240 (not sure why the 285 isn't listed, it might actually be faster than the 680?).

http://www.studio1productions.com/Ar...remiereCS5.htm

My guess is that the low VRAM - and the fact that it's OS X, are what's slowing him down (I've seen article after article outlining how a PC is often twice as fast as OS X. BTW - I own a Mac Pro as well as Win7 boxes).

BTW - didn't mention how much RAM is installed in the Mac, or what kind of a Mac it is.

Also, is a cache drive being used? How full are the hard drives (OS X will slow to a crawl when they get full). Are you using RAID? Are you using fast hard drives? Are you using any 3rd party cards from AJA/Matrox/BlackMagic to an external monitor? There are just so many factors involved in getting the desired speed out of a box.

[Cory Petkovsek]

I'd be hesitant to call the GTX-285 a 'low end' GPU.

You're right. I was under the impression that the GTXs were unsupported by Adobe, and support started at the Quadros. Things might have changed, or I was mistaken. In any case I see the officially supported list includes the GTXs.

[Will Keir]

You are comparing a high end CPU with a low end GPU. I'm not sure why you are complaining.

Are you sure CUDA is enabled? Installing the CUDA driver isn't enough. Since Adobe does not support your card with CUDA under PPro/AE, you have to enable it manually. You can tell it is properly enabled, when creating a new project you have both a GPU/CUDA option and a Software only option. You can tell under AE in the preferences, Previews..., and the CUDA section.

http://www.vidmuze.com/2012/06/how-t...e-cs6-for-mac/

Upon creating a new project, I do have both options GPU & CPU. I believe the GTX 285 is one of four cards supported by PPro/AE. Regardless, if I am seeing both options, I've already solved the support difficulties? Do you think viewing R3D's from the bin is the best way to test the two modes? Maybe after the first play, the 2nd play is cashed?

"low end GPU," what options do I have past a 10%-20% gain? I'm not interested in building a new system, if there's a better GPU that's supported I'd love to go "high end."

[Will Keir]

BTW - didn't mention how much RAM is installed in the Mac, or what kind of a Mac it is.

48 GB Ram on 4,1 system.

Also, is a cache drive being used? How full are the hard drives (OS X will slow to a crawl when they get full). Are you using RAID? Are you using fast hard drives? Are you using any 3rd party cards from AJA/Matrox/BlackMagic to an external monitor? There are just so many factors involved in getting the desired speed out of a box.

All media, cash, renders are on my main drive. 15,000 RAID 5, 1.4GB (800GB open)
No 3rd party cards or external monitors, only my 30" Apple Cinema.

It might be worth a shot installing Premier on the windows bootcamp side for a performance test, but I'm already at 1/2 res. Am I really going to get Full res out of this rig?

[Aleksandar Colancevski]

Why Adobe in not making computers? Ooo I know why. They can blame hardware manyfacturer for sluggish performance.

[Les C.]

48 GB Ram on 4,1 system.



All media, cash, renders are on my main drive. 15,000 RAID 5, 1.4GB (800GB open)
No 3rd party cards or external monitors, only my 30" Apple Cinema.

It might be worth a shot installing Premier on the windows bootcamp side for a performance test, but I'm already at 1/2 res. Am I really going to get Full res out of this rig?

If you're saying you have 15K rpm drives, you've got a very fast system - and you've got a lot of RAM (I have 48GB also, and I want more).

The only thing you could do to increase playback speed past 1/2 res would probably be a RR.

Try to find a benchmark that shows the 285 against the 580 and 680 - and maybe get feedback from Adobe regarding how much the VRAM is used and how that affects CS6 before you jump on a new card.

Also, get feedback on how stable the new cards are. The 285 should be rock solid.

nVidia's weak point is in their drivers (at least on the PC, where you get new ones often, all built for gamers, and generally introducing memory leaks and other bugs - so you spend a lot of time looking for the best stable driver).

I can't even install the latest driver on my GTX-580 with 3GB VRAM as nVidia changed the installer after the 270 drivers and really screwed things up. They used to do a lot of testing on disparate computers, but now ... they fired all those people and just throw it out for the end-user to test. Even their forums are buggy (they got hacked and took them down - and as of this moment, they've been down since early July)

BTW - as you're on a Mac, do some searching on this site: http://www.barefeats.com/

They have a lot of bechmarks, and do testing with SSD's in a RAID (there's a way to fit lots of them into a MacPro) which really scream.

[Cory Petkovsek]

It might be worth a shot installing Premier on the windows bootcamp side for a performance test, but I'm already at 1/2 res. Am I really going to get Full res out of this rig?

This thread is about why your CPU gives better performance than your GPU. We've discussed that end. The low end/high end comparison is thus: your high end CPU street price is $1500. Your low end GPU street price is $250. Quadros start over 500. Nvidia has various high end and low end product lines. However as you stated, the performance difference between them might be around 20%, but they also offer 10-bit and among features.

However this question reveals your deeper motivation: editing in full res. Few of us are. First of all, you're not going to see full 4k or 5k res on a 30" monitor, even if you could. But if you want to work at full res the only thing that will get you there is one or more rockets as Les suggested. What's wrong with editing at 1/4 or 1/2 and rendering full?

Cory