Urgent HELP !!! - GPGPU - Nvidia or AMD

[pc999]

Hi, first post here , but usually just see because it seems a good source of info .

I do music production and my dual core CPU still have enough in it to last the day, it is in need of some replacement but it can wait to see what buldozer can do.


But I will need to do, very soon (in a few days so I need to get the card fast), some video editing, I will probably use PowerDirector9 and my gfx card just died a few days ago. Thing is my CPU cant take that much beating so instead of getting a new CPU/PC now I thought in just getting a new gfx card as it seems the GPGPU side of video editing is very good.



What would be better?

A AMD 6670-6750 or a Nvidia 540-550 card?


GPGPU performance first, power consumption second and gaming third (although if it could game well it would be wonderful, but I do prefer consoles, so it isnt a big problem)

On a side note, does GPGPU really take a good hit out of the CPU? Any other video editing software is better on the GPGPU side of things?


Many many thanks.

 

[thundermitty]

I suggest the GTX 550 Ti.
I've seen it go for as low as $114.99 after rebate with free shipping:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814121435

If you can afford to spend more, consider the GTX 560 Ti or a GTX 460. I've owned both and the performance they offer is outstanding.

 

[AnandThenMan]

GPGPU performance first, power consumption second and gaming third .

What software do you plan on running?

 

[pc999]

What software do you plan on running?

At this moment CyberLink PowerDirector 9.

They have quite a showing (3x the performance, it would suffice my needs) here http://www.cyberlink.com/products/powerdirector/truevelocity_en_US.html


But I am demoing others, like Adobe Premier (Elements) that is downloading right now.

 

[Red Hawk]

There's no such thing as a Geforce 540 desktop card. When it comes to raw processing power the order is Geforce GT 440<Radeon HD 5670<Radeon HD 6670<Radeon HD 5750/6750 (same thing)=Geforce GTS 450<Radeon HD 5770/6770 (same thing)<Geforce GTX 550 Ti.

As for which is better for GPGPU tasks specifically, it really depends on the application. For example, Nvidia cards are better for Folding@ Home while AMD cards are better at bitcoin mining (the 5000 series specifically).

 

[ViRGE]

The primary GPU accelerated task in PowerDirector is encoding. The GPU is not significantly used in the other steps of the editing process such that you'd notice a difference.

The last time I saw a good comparison between NV and AMD's encode quality and speed, it was AnandTech's Sandy Bridge article. The results were that the NV encoder did notably worse than the AMD encoder in quality, but it was notably faster. Based on that I'd recommend the AMD cards (particularly a 6750) unless the encode quality was of little concern to you.

 

[tviceman]

gtx550ti hands down. Fermi is better at gpgpu processing than AMD's juniper line (which is the 5700/6700 cards).

 

[pc999]

There's no such thing as a Geforce 540 desktop card. When it comes to raw processing power the order is Geforce GT 440<Radeon HD 5670<Radeon HD 6670<Radeon HD 5750/6750 (same thing)=Geforce GTS 450<Radeon HD 5770/6770 (same thing)<Geforce GTX 550 Ti.

You are right there is a 540 on laptops but not on desktops.

The primary GPU accelerated task in PowerDirector is encoding. The GPU is not significantly used in the other steps of the editing process such that you'd notice a difference.

Wouldn't I notice any difference during the editing itself, it is really a bad time to upgrade anything else, it is also the cheaper upgrade, even considering a soon to be obsolete architecture (like AM3 that is a dead end)

But it should help according to their website

Competitor A's preview is sluggish and unresponsive during editing. The PowerDirector 9 preview remains smooth throughout.

The last time I saw a good comparison between NV and AMD's encode quality and speed, it was AnandTech's Sandy Bridge article. The results were that the NV encoder did notably worse than the AMD encoder in quality, but it was notably faster. Based on that I'd recommend the AMD cards (particularly a 6750) unless the encode quality was of little concern to you.

Isnt that application dependent, anyway if there is differences in this app I could always do the final rendering offline on the CPU only.

 

[ViRGE]

Wouldn't I notice any difference during the editing itself, it is really a bad time to upgrade anything else, it is also the cheaper upgrade, even considering a soon to be obsolete architecture (like AM3 that is a dead end)

But it should help according to their website

So during editing it's just using the GPU as a graphics device. It's akin to Aero on Windows - even the slowest GPU is fast enough for drawing a UI like that. So yes it's GPU accelerated (which is better than not being GPU accelerated), but a faster GPU won't make a difference because the GPU is not the bottleneck.

Isnt that application dependent, anyway if there is differences in this app I could always do the final rendering offline on the CPU only.

AMD, NVIDIA, and Intel all provide encoding APIs, which Cyberlink, etc hook into. As a result the choice of software has little impact on the quality of the encode, because it's really being controlled and executed by the GPU. This means that the encoder software is just feeding frames into the encoder, which functions as a black box.

 

[pc999]

So during editing it's just using the GPU as a graphics device. It's akin to Aero on Windows - even the slowest GPU is fast enough for drawing a UI like that. So yes it's GPU accelerated (which is better than not being GPU accelerated), but a faster GPU won't make a difference because the GPU is not the bottleneck.

I though that once it I am playing the preview all the time it would help...:\

AMD, NVIDIA, and Intel all provide encoding APIs, which Cyberlink, etc hook into. As a result the choice of software has little impact on the quality of the encode, because it's really being controlled and executed by the GPU. This means that the encoder software is just feeding frames into the encoder, which functions as a black box.

I wouldnt mind using the CPU to do a offline (if needed) final renderization.


Anyway I am going to look at the upgrading options again.

Thanks.