Video Editing Rig

[UpstartXT]

So that sounds to me like a second GPU WILL have a positive impact on performance, assuming the software you are using is appropriately coded?

BTW, video card thread I started here http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=31373020#post31373020

 

[Davidh373]

I'm assuming that the two GTS 450s are just to run 3 monitors? I don't believe that you will get any CUDA benefits.

Yeah, I instructed him to do that to give support for 3-4 monitors.

 

[mfenn]

So that sounds to me like a second GPU WILL have a positive impact on performance, assuming the software you are using is appropriately coded?

Yep. Who knows if CS5 utilizes though.

 

[Davidh373]

Yep. Who knows if CS5 utilizes though.

CS5 needs very little for CUDA to kick out the Mercury Playback Engine. Either way, he needs 2 cards to output to 3 or 4 monitors. If he doesn't want to use all 3 he should certainly save some money and stick to one card.

 

[UpstartXT]

CS5 needs very little for CUDA to kick out the Mercury Playback Engine. Either way, he needs 2 cards to output to 3 or 4 monitors. If he doesn't want to use all 3 he should certainly save some money and stick to one card.

Yeah, but remember I already have some old 8800 GTSs sitting around, so if I buy one 450 for CUDA and two monitors, and pop in the 8800 GTS to run the third or fourth monitor, that would save me the $120 for buying the second 450 card.

That is, of course, if I would see no difference between having a second 450 instead of the 8800

 

[Davidh373]

Yeah, but remember I already have some old 8800 GTSs sitting around, so if I buy one 450 for CUDA and two monitors, and pop in the 8800 GTS to run the third or fourth monitor, that would save me the $120 for buying the second 450 card.

I don't think you can do that can you? using different cards in SLI?

 

[UpstartXT]

Well, actually you can, but I wouldn't be running SLI anyways. You can't use SLI with multiple monitors.

 

[Davidh373]

You can't use SLI with multiple monitors.

That's news to me. I thought you could. Non-SLI cards should work though.

To answer your question, if a non-SLI configuration would not make use of any multi-card set up as far as I know.

 

[UpstartXT]

That's news to me. I thought you could. Non-SLI cards should work though.

To answer your question, if a non-SLI configuration would not make use of any multi-card set up as far as I know.

Well maybe I should be more clear. SLI can use dual monitors, both plugged in to the primary card. But, you would not get any display on the third monitor that was plugged into the second card.

http://www.slizone.com/object/sli_multi_monitor.html#confoptions

^I also just hit SLI on my current computer and lost one of my monitors, as the drivers indicated would happen before I hit apply. So I can personally attest to this.

And from a gaming standpoint, you're right, having a second GPU not in SLI wouldn't help you because it would be sitting idle. However, CUDA I think can use both GPUs regardless of whether or not they are in SLI.

Also, I'm wrong about SLI being able to use two different GPUs. I was mixing that up with SLI being able to use two GPUs with different manufacturers and or clock settings.

 

[mfenn]

That's news to me. I thought you could. Non-SLI cards should work though.

To answer your question, if a non-SLI configuration would not make use of any multi-card set up as far as I know.

SLI does nothing for CUDA. The multi-GPU abstraction is only present for DirectX and OpenGL calls.

 

[UpstartXT]

I'm at a total loss as to what to do now.

I'm thinking maybe I should just buy a 570 for my gaming computer, and use its 470 in my workstation along with an old 8800 GTS to power the second monitor?

 

[mfenn]

I'm at a total loss as to what to do now.

I'm thinking maybe I should just buy a 570 for my gaming computer, and use its 470 in my workstation along with an old 8800 GTS to power the second monitor?

That seems like a huge amount of power and heat load to put into a non-gaming rig.

 

[UpstartXT]

That seems like a huge amount of power and heat load to put into a non-gaming rig.

Haha, well if it isn't obvious by now, I'm not exactly an expert so I'd love to hear your 2 cents about what you would suggest. I feel like I'm pretty much all the way there due to David's suggestions, but as far as the GPU there's been a lot of confusion about which to go with if you have 3 monitors and are looking for a good CUDA GPGPU.

I have been cruising this list: http://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5.htm

It seems like the 470 has so many more processors than the 450, which is why I was possibly considering doing that option I said above and getting a new card for my gaming rig. On the other hand, you're right that may be overkill I just don't have any experience with CUDA processing and CS5. Not to mention it would be burning a hole in my pocket.

Again, here is the current build:

Case : Cosmos S (owned)
PSU : Corsair 750 TX (owned)
CD DRIVE : CD DVD drive (owned)
Display : 3 Samsung 22" monitors (owned)
Input : keyboard/mouse (owned)
OS/App HD : Intel X-25M 160GB (owned)

RAM : 2x G.SKILL Value Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10666) Desktop Memory Model F3-10666CL9D-8GBNT
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231424

CPU : Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz (3.7GHz Turbo Boost) LGA 1155 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor BX80623I52500K
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboD...t=Combo.618217

HSF : COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 Plus RR-B10-212P-G1 "Heatpipe Direct Contact" Long Life Sleeve 120mm CPU Cooler Compatible Intel ...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboD...t=Combo.618217

MBOARD : GIGABYTE GA-H67A-UD3H-B3 LGA 1155 Intel H67 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813128475

Source HD : SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822152185

Render to HD : SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD502HJ 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822152181

CUDA GPU : ????

Second GPU to drive 3rd/4th monitor : ?????

Parts laying around : 2x 8800 GTS, i7 870, could use the GTX 470 in my gaming rig and buy a GTX 570 for it

 

[mfenn]

I'd probably just go for the 2xGTS 450 route that David suggested. Should run you about $200 and be very cool and quiet. You also don't want to go for the combo of a H67 board, discrete GPUs, and a 2500K. Grab the Gigabyte GA-P67A-UD3 instead. Finally, I question the necessity of 16GB of RAM.

 

[UpstartXT]

I'd probably just go for the 2xGTS 450 route that David suggested. Should run you about $200 and be very cool and quiet. You also don't want to go for the combo of a H67 board, discrete GPUs, and a 2500K. Grab the Gigabyte GA-P67A-UD3 instead. Finally, I question the necessity of 16GB of RAM.

I was under the impression, the more RAM for After Effects, the better, because you will be able to have longer RAM previews?

Good call on that different board, I don't need/want integrated graphics, and from what I can tell the H67 chipset doesn't let you overclock while the P67 does. Also, going the 2xGTS 450 route, certainly saves me money and you're right, won't run as hot I assume.

 

[mfenn]

I was under the impression, the more RAM for After Effects, the better, because you will be able to have longer RAM previews?

Well, I'm no After Effects expert, so I don't know how far that scales. If it will help you out significantly, then go for it.

 

[UpstartXT]

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/698981?tstart=0

Post #8 this guy says he wouldn't run AE with anything less than 12 GB. I've always been a 4GB is more than enough guy because I've been into gaming, but for this I think this is the one time that 16GB of RAM may actually do something lol

 

[Davidh373]

Well, I'm no After Effects expert, so I don't know how far that scales. If it will help you out significantly, then go for it.

It scales up to 16GB with CS5. Heck, I guess you notice a difference with any larger amount of RAM in CS5. The need for more ram only arises if it is used though. If you only have like 3-4 layers, you aren't likely to need it, but if you get up to 20+ layers, then every bit of RAM you can stuff into it will be used.

Post #8 this guy says he wouldn't run AE with anything less than 12 GB

I use AE with 4GB. It isn't a huge issue to use less than 12GB... Again, it just depends how complex your layering is. If you have a professional effects scene open you're likely to have 30 layers with an insane amount of masks and particle effects, and PNG sequences with transparency and all sorts of craziness. That is when you really need every single bit of RAM you can stuff into a system. If you are simply using it to do some basic color correction, or maybe some motion blur or whatever, you shouldn't need over 8GB... 4GB may even be enough.

 

[UpstartXT]

Yeah that's true, that guy seemed like doing video editing was like, how he made a living, so he probably does work involving some pretty complex stuff requiring that amount of RAM.

 

[Davidh373]

Yeah, I do production work with it. I've put down some pretty complex stuff and it'll chug on ya. I am close to upgrading to 12GB. If you can afford it (and lets face it RAM is CHEEEEEAAAAP right now) do it.

 

[Kingkazma]

hey you should really think if the 2600k might be worth the extra cost, for me it is since use aftereffects extensively and the 2600 has pretty significant performance gains in that department.

multithread applications generally work faster on the 2600k

 

[UpstartXT]

hey you should really think if the 2600k might be worth the extra cost, for me it is since use aftereffects extensively and the 2600 has pretty significant performance gains in that department.

multithread applications generally work faster on the 2600k

I am not up to speed on sandy bridge at all, I looked at the two (2500k vs 2600k) and assumed the only difference was the 100mhz clock speed. Is there more to it?

 

[mnewsham]

I am not up to speed on sandy bridge at all, I looked at the two (2500k vs 2600k) and assumed the only difference was the 100mhz clock speed. Is there more to it?

There is but if you arent doing anything very highly threaded the 2600k wont matter and isnt worth the 100 bucks.

 

[UpstartXT]

There is but if you arent doing anything very highly threaded the 2600k wont matter and isnt worth the 100 bucks.

Well, I'm doing video editing and rendering on Premiere and After Effects, what do you think about the 2500k vs. 2600k with regards to this type of use?

 

[mnewsham]

It depends on how the program is coded, im not sure exactly sure if CS5 is highly threaded.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=287

That is the difference between the two, as you see they are quite similar.