-
The new wave, OpenCL, NVIDIA, and FCPX
I’ve been doing a bit of reading on what’s in store for the next 6 months, and I’m just now realizing that that ideal FCPX/Resolve system might have some unique requirements. The info as I understand it:
1-FCPX will use OpenCL. Great. Which cards support this? Is it just ATI, or does the Nvidia GTX285 and GT120 I have now support OpenCL as well alongside CUDA?
2-If I’m lucky enough for an NVIDIA GT120 to do some OpenCL work for FCPX, I’d guess it’s a safe bet that FCPX will ignore the 285 I have, as it has no monitors attached.
3-Is there going to be such a thing as a single card that drives Resolve in CUDA, and FCPX in OpenCL, and maybe gains me a slot? I hear mumblings that some of the newest Nvidia CUDA cards can drive Resolve and GUI as a single card and not give up too much to the 285/120 combo, but I haven’t figured out if this is real.
Anybody know more about this stuff? I understand all the old school ideas about how a Resolve machine should be a Resolve machine, kept separate from an FCP machine, etc etc but the market is not movign that way…
Nate Weaver
Director/D.P., Los Angeles
https://www.nateweaver.net -
9 Replies
-
Well, if Wikipedia is to be believed:
“OpenCL provides parallel computing using task-based and data-based parallelism. It has been adopted into graphics card drivers by both AMD/ATI (which made it its sole GPGPU offering branded as Stream SDK) and Nvidia, which offers OpenCL as equal choice to its Compute Unified Device Architecture (CUDA) in its drivers.”
So you’re in luck there. As far as whether it’ll use the 285 with no screens attached – no idea. The way I have my station set up, is my grading monitor is also connected via HDMI as a second monitor, on an HDMI switch. When I’m conforming/editing/finishing, it’s on computer mode, giving me 2 screens. When I switch input back to the decklink, it’s good to go for Resolve. Not sure if this setup will work for everybody, but it’s pretty versatile for non dedicated stations.
-
Get a Quadro 4000 , best of both worlds if you just use Resolve here and there .
A slice of color…
DaVinci 7.1.2 OSX 10.6.7
MacPro 5.1 2x 2,4 24GB
RAID0 8TB eSata 6TB
GTX 285 / GT 120
Extreme 3D+ WAVE -
I use it more than here and there. I still need real time. My understanding Quadro 4000 alone is not as good as 285/120 combo, right?
Nate Weaver
Director/D.P., Los Angeles
https://www.nateweaver.net -
in it’s present iteration, version 8 included, you still need a separate GPU for rendering and for GUI. So, getting a single 4000 card will not help.
Also, the problem with system recognizing just the GPU, that is attached to the monitors is not new. I’m dealing with this all the time, as I’m using my Mac for both Resolve and Smoke. I occasionally have to move my monitor feeds, depending on the use of Smoke or Resolve. Luckily, right now, I mostly use Resolve for rendering DPX to Prores, so I can leave my monitors alone. But, if I decide to use Resolve 8 and Smoke on a full time bases, along with an upcoming FCPx… Well, that’s going to be a problem. It is apparent, that the culprit is Resolve, as it’s the only software, that requires a separate GPU for GUI. So, I’d like to see an ability in Resolve to be able to allocate the specific GPU for a specific task. regardless where monitors attached. -
Just wanted to drop this here:
https://barefeats.com/wst10g11.html
Shows some comparison on Resolve rendering between GPUs, however, they don’t state their full setup (not sure if they’re setting up the tested cards as 2nd GPU alongside another, or running just 1 GPU).
-
seems very non accurate …
GTX 285 is not 50% slower than 4000 ….Maybe they used a 1 GPU only (and not 1 for the gui + 1 for proc power…)
-
I wonder if we could build some sort of “Standard candle”
A flow that is available to test the performance of the card combo used.
I am tempted by replacing my 120/285 combo for a 4000 only due to all sorts of reasons.
I will of course test the 4000/285 solution with Y-cable first.
That would be perfect I think.
But a nice sheet to check out the different combos would be nice, wouldn’t it ?A slice of color…
DaVinci 7.1.2 OSX 10.6.7
MacPro 5.1 2x 2,4 24GB
RAID0 8TB eSata 6TB
GTX 285 / GT 120
Extreme 3D+ WAVE -
The tricky part might be taking storage read/write out of the equation. If it’s all done on the same system, that’s easy, but if you want this test to be performable by everyone I think that might be the biggest X factor.
Would it make sense to use SD or 720p media with read/write from a single drive, and then ramp up blur nodes until it falls under realtime?
-
Seems good idea to have one stream low rez material SD or so.
Also uncompressed SD may be god idea as machine cpu does not matter.
When i think of it then system drive again is not good option as people have different stuff
there and speeds and fulness of a drive is different not to mention drive model speed itself.So generally good idea but there is some questions to be solved if just separate drive must be used.
—
Margus
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up