-
12-core Mac Pro – Nvidia or RAM
I just purchased a new Mac Pro since the one I’m using now runs 8 processors and the extra 4 can really help out, I just want to know what I can do to help my situation out.
I usually do work in AE for some clips do a dynamic link back to Premiere, and place color correction effects on other clips (from the basic 3-way color corrector to colorista, looks, etc.) and export my videos using CPU since I do not have an Nvidia card to use GPU’s yet.
Along with the 12 core processing power, what will help speed up my exports? I know a combination between more RAM and a Graphics Card will, but I want to know which will help kick it into faster gears more so I know which to purchase first.
Would getting an Nvidia Quadro 4000 help my exports more by working with the GPU’s rather than adding more RAM? Or would adding more RAM help my exports more than working with the GPU’s?
Just to be clear, I will be adding both to the computer, I just want to know which to purchase first that will get me the best results I can and then purchase the other at a later date.
-
9 Replies
-
It’s hard to say, you didn’t mention how much RAM you have currently. Or, if this is a new system, how much you plan on getting as a base amount.
I will say, though, that simply because you mentioned Colorista (I assume Colorista II, I don’t know if this holds true for the original Colorista) that you should go for a GPU card. Why? This effect performs much faster when set, in the effect options, to use OpenGL rendering than it does CPU rendering. If you’re grading all of your footage, this could slice a good amount of time off your final render. If you’ve been using a MacPro with an AMD card, chances are it’s already using OpenGL; you might not see an astounding increase in render time, but an upgrade there should be noticed.
-
Actually, CUDA cards do many helpful things, but they dont help speed up Colorista since it is not coded to take advantage of the card. The Adobe accelerated effects are fast, but personally I prefer Colorista 2 as well.
Tom Daigon
Avid DS / PrP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
Mac Pro 3,1
8 core
10.6.8
Nvidia Quadro 4000
24 gigs ram
Maxx Digital / Areca 8tb. raid
Kona 3 -
Actually Colorista II is accelerated by OpenGL (Both in Premiere and After Effects) within the plugin itself. A good updated GPU regardless of Cuda compatibility should save some processing time.
-
Well, all I can tell you is I cut a 4.5 minute instructional show where every shot had to be color corrected. On my fast system it took about 12 minutes to export. When I replaced Colorista with Adobe 3 Way CC (which I dont really care for) it took 4 minutes to export.
Tom Daigon
Avid DS / PrP / After Effects Editor
https://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
Mac Pro 3,1
2 x 3.2 ghz Quad Core Intel Xeon
10.6.8
Nvidia Quadro 4000
24 gigs ram
Kona 3
Maxx Digital / Areca 8tb. raidTom Daigon
Avid DS / PrP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
Mac Pro 3,1
8 core
10.6.8
Nvidia Quadro 4000
24 gigs ram
Maxx Digital / Areca 8tb. raid
Kona 3 -
Tom, I see what you’re getting at. I think a better test is to run Colorista in GPU mode vs CPU mode rather than compare it to a different effect.
It’s an interesting test, but I’m popping in and out of color grading all day anyways; I’ll save this curiosity for the end of the day.
-
You are right Angelo. That would be a better test. I look forward to hearing your results.
Tom Daigon
Avid DS / PrP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
Mac Pro 3,1
8 core
10.6.8
Nvidia Quadro 4000
24 gigs ram
Maxx Digital / Areca 8tb. raid
Kona 3 -
Did a really impromptu test.
4k RED r3d file resized in a 2k comp
228 frames (arbitrary, I know)
Colorista II – Render with GPU: 134 seconds (2min 14sec) – 1.7fps
Colorista II – Render with CPU: 156 seconds (2min 14sec) – 1.46fpsAbout a 16% gain on my system in GPU mode. If the OP had a decent card in their last system, they might not see as much of an increase, but even a 5-10% gain on renders if they use Colorista on every project is a nice immediate difference.
My system:
Intel i7 2600 Sandy Bridge (3.4gHz)
nVidia GeForce GTX 560 (factory overclocked)
32 gigs DD3 1600 RAM -
It looks like the original question is lost in discussion. I have the same problem and had hope for an answer that fits. I moved to
a 12core and I see only about 5% increase. Premiere does not even use all the CPU power and is at 16-20%. The different between the 8 cores and 12core is just the cost and I am yet to see otherwise.Is there a way to optimise the full potential of the Computers power
or is it a waste of money getting 32gb Ram and a 12core only to have the ram at 8gb and Processors at 20%? -
Well your issue isn’t exactly like the OP. The OP sounds like they’re using a mix of Premiere and AE which, for optimal performance needs a cuda enabled card (for premiere and colorista, the effect he uses quite a lot) and RAM and processor for AE.
Where are you benchmarking? Render time purely in Premiere/Media Encoder? There are other bottlenecks to consider including disk speed (are you using an internal, firewire or eSATA drive, and so on).
It’s a question with a different answer for everyone.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up