Clear the confusion - Photoshop user buying a new Video card

[thatsright]

I am hearing conflicting information on getting a new video card. The main app I use is Photoshop CS4, and I NEVER do any gaming. I just edit pictures from my camera. So this is all strict 2D work. Now PSP CS4 can use very advanced 3d effects with open GL and Direct 3D, but I can't see ever doing this. I never work with Layers, pretty simple stuff.

So I thought I wouldn't need to spend more than $50 on a video card. But the sales person @ Microcenter (and others) said I will need to get a card with 1GB of ram. But if PSP is just doing 2D work, why would I need so much vid card memory? I thought the 6GB of system ram is handling all of the Photoshop tasks?

Then someone mentioned to get a NVidia car for its CUDA processors. But this would only help me out in PSP if I'm using 3D effects, correct? (Which I'm not.)

 

[jvroig]

I thought I wouldn't need to spend more than $50 on a video card.

Yes.

But the sales person @ Microcenter (and others) said I will need to get a card with 1GB of ram

Not at all. The more cores (CPU) you can throw at it, the better. The more system RAM you throw at it, also better. Video card, not as useful.

Now PSP CS4 can use very advanced 3d effects with open GL and Direct 3D, but I can't see ever doing this. I never work with Layers, pretty simple stuff.

You closed the case the moment you mentioned this. Get the fastest CPU you can get, get the most RAM you can afford for your machine, then get a cheap $50 video card as you planned and call it good.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Now PSP CS4 can use very advanced 3d effects with open GL and Direct 3D, but I can't see ever doing this. I never work with Layers, pretty simple stuff.

Hmm, well, this is a bit tricky. CUDA helps some of the most basic features of Photoshop-

http://www.nvidia.com/object/adobe_photoshop.html
Watch the little movies they have on that link. The tricky part here is that if you want to make good use of this, you need to have enough GPU memory to store the image to make use of the capabilities of CUDA. Pretty much, if you want to use CUDA and see the benefit of it, a graphics card with a decent amount of memory is likely going to help your performance out enromously for those tasks shown. If that is important to you, then a more powerful graphics card isn't likely a bad choice. That said, I would look to something like a 1GB 9600GT or comparable, maybe $90ish, tops, for your uses.

 

[jvroig]

Hmm, well, this is a bit tricky. CUDA helps some of the most basic features of Photoshop-

http://www.nvidia.com/object/adobe_photoshop.html
Watch the little movies they have on that link. The tricky part here is that if you want to make good use of this, you need to have enough GPU memory to store the image to make use of the capabilities of CUDA. Pretty much, if you want to use CUDA and see the benefit of it, a graphics card with a decent amount of memory is likely going to help your performance out enromously for those tasks shown. If that is important to you, then a more powerful graphics card isn't likely a bad choice. That said, I would look to something like a 1GB 9600GT or comparable, maybe $90ish, tops, for your uses.

Wow, I didn't know CS4 was this much CUDA-optimized. Photoshoppers seem to have no other reasonable choice but go nVidia. How come Wreckage never mentions? He ought to put this as a major win for nVidia.

 

[BenSkywalker]

How come Wreckage never mentions?

Heh, he may still be tired from the whole Batman fiasco. This is precisely the same thing going on, just in a different market.

 

[Denithor]

9800GT 1GB: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814133304
GTS 250 1GB: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814261062

Both considerably stronger than a 9600GT.

 

[Voo]

I'm using a 4870 with 512mb RAM and I wouldn't like to miss the features - nothing worldshaking but I instantly miss them if I don't have them. I'd say it's worth the money.


Also Photoshop only needs OpenGL2.0 or something like that, because my 4870 has exactly the same features as listed on the Nvidia site and I'm rather sure it doesn't have CUDA

So Ati cards are an option as well, you just have to find the cheapest card that supports the necessary OpenGL standard.

Edit: "For Photoshop to access the GPU, your display card must contain a GPU that supports OpenGL and has enough RAM to support Photoshop functions--at least 128 MB of RAM--and a display driver that supports OpenGL 2.0 and Shader Model 3.0."
http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/404/kb404898.html#supported

So just get the cheapest card that fulfills that requirements (no idea which that'd be) - I don't think any card would be overstrained by it.

There's also a list of tested cards here: http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/405/kb405711.html - but it's rather short and there are many more that should work (just add the 4870 to the list for example..)

 

[jvroig]

Also Photoshop only needs OpenGL2.0 or something like that, because my 4870 has exactly the same features as listed on the Nvidia site and I'm rather sure it doesn't have CUDA

So Ati cards are an option as well, you just have to find the cheapest card that supports the necessary OpenGL standard.

Just to be clear, you are saying that all those features in the nVidia webpage about Photoshop are also true for ATi cards with OpenGL2.0?

BenSkywalker just said this was another Batman AA fiasco... your post, at least as I understand it, contradicts that. Any clarification would be appreciated.

 

[Fox5]

Yeah, I don't think Photoshop uses CUDA (not yet anyway), just OpenGL. And I'd imagine at this point, Adobe would go with OpenCL over CUDA anyway. (but maybe not)

Anyhow, any 512MB card in the Geforce 8 series or better or the Radeon 4000 series or better is probably sufficient. But get a mid range (9600 or 4600) card just to be safe.

 

[Voo]

Just to be clear, you are saying that all those features in the nVidia webpage about Photoshop are also true for ATi cards with OpenGL2.0?

I have ALL the features listed there (e.g. the stuff on the front page I didn't look to close - zooming, pixel grid, panning,..) with a 4870 and the Adobe support page lists the mentioned requirements - nothing about CUDA. There could be some other things I missed but if even Nvidia doesn't mentions them on the front page I don't think they exist.

So just get a card with OpenGL2.0 and Shader Model 3.0 support and you should be fine. Maybe someone can help you out and recommend some cheap cards that fulfill these requirements, because I have no idea

http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/405/kb405711.html

These are the ones especially tested by Adobe, so you probably can't make anything false with one of these and it seems a lot of rather old cards fulfull the requirements so you should be able to get something for a fair price..

ATI Radeon

ATI Radeon 4850 512 MB
Radeon x3870 x2 512MB
Radeon x2900HD 512MB
ATI Radeon HD 2400 256MB
Radeon x1900XT 512MB
ATI Radeon x1800 - 512MB
Radeon x1800 256MB

nVidia geForce

nVidia 260 GTX 896MB
nVidia 9800 GTX 512MB
nVidia 9600 GT 512MB
nVidia 8800 GTX 768MB
nVidia 8800 GT 512MB
nVidia 8600M 256MB
nVidia 7900 GTX 512MB
nVidia 7900 GS 256MB
nVidia 7800 GTX 256MB
nVidia 7600 256MB
nVidia 6800 256MB

 

[BenSkywalker]

I have ALL the features listed there (e.g. the stuff on the front page I didn't look to close - zooming, pixel grid, panning,..)

All those features work with integrated graphics, click on the videos. That is really all I can say, if you don't see what I'm talking about after watching them, heh.

 

[dguy6789]

Photoshop CS4 can do every feature it does on Nvidia cards on ATI cards too since it does everything through OpenGL. It doesn't take advantage of anything CUDA.

 

[Voo]

All those features work with integrated graphics, click on the videos. That is really all I can say, if you don't see what I'm talking about after watching them, heh.

Sorry but I have no idea what you mean here. The features don't have anything to do with integrated graphics, CUDA, Ati/Nvidia or anything else - it just depends on Shader Model 3.0 and OpenGL2.0 support..

 

[jvroig]

I think BenSkywalker is hinting that the features are all there, except that they are "more awesome" when CUDA-supporting hardware is detected, hence he recommends watching the videos and comparing the video presentation with your own ATi-based experience.

I have neither CUDA nor an OpenGl2.0/Shader Model 3.0 capable card, so I have no way to test myself. And I don't have Photoshop CS4, too.

Have you really noticed no difference, Voo?

BenSkywalker, can you be a little more frank with the actual difference?

 

[Wreckage]

Photoshop CS4 can do every feature it does on Nvidia cards on ATI cards too since it does everything through OpenGL. It doesn't take advantage of anything CUDA.

100% false. You are doing a poor job of AMD marketing today.

CUDA 2.0 has Photoshop plug-in acceleration.
http://www.tgdaily.com/software-fea...da-20-delivers-photoshop-plug-in-acceleration
http://www.nvidia.com/object/adobe_photoshop.html
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?Itemid=34&id=9602&option=com_content&task=view

 

[jvroig]

Hi Wreckage, nice of you to drop by. Aside from the CUDA 2.0 plug-in acceleration, can you comment on the basic features of photoshop that is accelerated by nVidia as shown in the nVidia webpage linked by BenSkywalker? Is the acceleration different/better when using nVidia card versus an ATi card?

 

[Voo]

I think BenSkywalker is hinting that the features are all there, except that they are "more awesome" when CUDA-supporting hardware is detected, hence he recommends watching the videos and comparing the video presentation with your own ATi-based experience.

Watched them and it's exactly the same as with my Ati card - or at least I can't see any differences.


@Wreckage: Your link to the Nvidia site is exactly the same we already had and as I said: There's nothing which doesn't work without CUDA.
The other links say that you could write plugins that use CUDA functionality, do you have any links to some of these plugins? Would be an advantage if there are some plugins that bring new stuff to the table. Though you could always put it under "future investment" even if there are no useful plugins atm - depends if there is a healthy interest from the development side I assume. In this case a Nvidia card would be better, at least if it isn't much more expensive than a comparable Ati card.

 

[dguy6789]

100% false. You are doing a poor job of AMD marketing today.

CUDA 2.0 has Photoshop plug-in acceleration.
http://www.tgdaily.com/software-fea...da-20-delivers-photoshop-plug-in-acceleration
http://www.nvidia.com/object/adobe_photoshop.html
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?Itemid=34&id=9602&option=com_content&task=view

Isn't Cuda just a name that means G80/G92/GT200 architecture? It's not an API right? Cuda accelerating Photoshop just means G80/G92/GT200 cards accelerate Photoshop, which is true. I feel it's misleading to say "Cuda accelerates Photoshop" because that implies ATI cards don't, but they do.

Both of those articles probably have no idea that AMD cards do the same thing in Photoshop.

Edit: "Let me remind you that this works only on Geforce 8 and 9 series GPUs and it might not run on Radeons, as ATI doesn’t support Cuda at this time. We will investigatete about this."

Yup.

AMD marketing? Hardly. I'm just making it clear that the features that are being advertised on Nvidia's site are not Nvidia only features and work just fine on AMD video cards.

 

[thatsright]

Ok...so it sounds like, if its just 2D pictures I am editing, etc, it places all of the data in the system RAM. But it will ONLY use the GPU memory if PSP is using Open GL or D3D, or Shader 3.0 etc. effects in PSP. I'm not doing any high end 3D graphics in PSP, so it sounds like I shouldn't shoot for the moon and get crazy on the feature set.

1. Given that I prob won't use Open GL or Shaders, etc will 512MB on-board memory suffice?

2. Does the memory bandwidth still count? i.e. 128-bit memory vs. 64-Bit memory bus. If I'm really just doing 2D work, does this matter?

 

[Wreckage]

Isn't Cuda just a name that means G80/G92/GT200 architecture? It's not an API right? Cuda accelerating Photoshop just means G80/G92/GT200 cards accelerate Photoshop, which is true. I feel it's misleading to say "Cuda accelerates Photoshop" because that implies ATI cards don't, but they do. Both of those articles probably have no idea that AMD cards do the same thing in Photoshop.

Sigh, wrong again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compute_Unified_Device_Architecture
"CUDA provides both a low level API and a higher level API. "

AMD marketing? Hardly. I'm just making it clear that the features that are being advertised on Nvidia's site are not Nvidia only features and work just fine on AMD video cards.

Nope, no CUDA features work on AMD cards. Sorry.

 

[dguy6789]

Sigh, wrong again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compute_Unified_Device_Architecture
"CUDA provides both a low level API and a higher level API. "

CUDA stands for Compute Unified Device Architecture. It looks like I was right(It's an architecture). CUDA means G80/G92/GT200 hardware. You quoted "CUDA provides both a low level API and a higher level API." Which is fine, I never said it didn't have software support.

Nope, no CUDA features work on AMD cards. Sorry.

Are you trolling or trying to have a serious discussion? Every single Photoshop feature that works on an Nvidia GPU works on the AMD GPU. That is a fact. Don't even try to debate it, it would be absurd to. I can open Photoshop and do all the stuff that is advertised on Nvidia's site with my ATI card. Does Photoshop take advantage of Cuda software for Nvidia GPUs and take advantage of AMD GPUs through another means? Or does it not use Cuda at all? Does anyone even care how it happens?

 

[Voo]

Nope, no CUDA features work on AMD cards. Sorry.

He's saying that the features marketed on the Nvidia site are also working with Ati cards (they do) because they don't need CUDA.

But you haven't answered my question, do you have any links to some CUDA plugins? Would be interesting.


@thatsright: To clarify: If you want to do anything with the GPU you'll need Shader 3.0 and OpenGL2.0 - otherwise Photoshop will just ignore it. If you have these requirements you'll get the stuff you see on the Nvidia site (rotation, zooming, pixel grid and so on). If you want the possibility to use CUDA plugins you'll need a Nvidia GPU - we'll have to wait on Wreckage to provide links to some plugins to see if it's worth.


512mb Ram will surely suffice - at least my 4870 doesn't have more and that's enough for my usage (but I rarely work on pictures larger than 3000x5000px and usually around 600dpi - but I just tried with a 1200dpi, 2000x3000, RGB picture and noticed no problems). I wouldn't worry about stuff like bus width and Co - Photoshop is hardly challenging for the GPU.


My recommendation would be to get the cheapest card that fulfills the basic requirements and maybe prefer a Nvidia card if everything else is equal (at least if it supports CUDA) - who knows if there will be a CUDA plugin you could use.

 

[Wreckage]

CUDA stands for Compute Unified Device Architecture. It looks like I was right(It's an architecture). CUDA means G80/G92/GT200 hardware. You quoted "CUDA provides both a low level API and a higher level API." Which is fine, I never said it didn't have software support.

You said "It's not an API right?" and I proved you wrong. It's both an architecture and an API.

Are you trolling or trying to have a serious discussion? Every single Photoshop feature that works on an Nvidia GPU works on the AMD GPU. That is a fact. Don't even try to debate it, it would be absurd to. Does Photoshop take advantage of Cuda software for Nvidia GPUs and take advantage of AMD GPUs through another means? Or does it not use Cuda at all? Does anyone even care how it happens?

Again no, the CUDA plug-in acceleration will not work on AMD cards. I can't explain it more simply than that.

 

[dguy6789]

Can you post some Cuda only Photoshop plugins so I can see what I'm missing out on?

 

[KeithP]

OP, from your description of what you are doing, I can't imagine GPU acceleration will have any meaningful impact on the performance of PhotoShop.

That being said, I am using a MacPro with an ATI 2600 (256MB) of RAM, and it seems to accelerate PS just fine.

Here is a link to Adobe's page on the subject:
http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/405/kb405745.html

Get a $50 card and don't worry about it. If you want to spend some extra money, make sure you have two hard drives and set PS's scratch disk to a different drive than the OS's page file disk.

-KeithP