Video Editing 1060 or 480?

[Dumptaker]

Now that we got some 1060 numbers to glance at, I was curious what you guys thought would handle editing/rendering better. 1060 or Rx 480? 

 

Using premiere pro. 

 

PS assuming we have a capable CPU and knowing that editing is, in general, more CPU dependent...

[Electronics Wizardy]

1060 is faster. 

[Dumptaker]

 

1 minute ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

1060 is faster. 

I'm sorry, that's way to specific. Could you generalize, maybe?

[desertcomputer]

Depend what video editing software you are using.

[Electronics Wizardy]

8 minutes ago, Dumptaker said:

 

I'm sorry, that's way to specific. Could you generalize, maybe?

Its a faster card, but it costs more. Both will work fine.

[App4that]

Just now, Electronics Wizardy said:

Its a faster card, but it costs more. Both will work fine.

No, it costs ten bucks more in the US. That's nothing.

 

 

 

 

[Dargenfire]

If you're going to be using the Adobe Suite to edit, go with the GTX 1060:

-Better performing on benchmarks.

-Lower power draw

-CUDA acceleration in Adobe programs is better than OpenCl

 

However, it does cost more but that's your wallet not mine.

[mrchow19910319]

26 minutes ago, App4that said:

No, it costs ten bucks more in the US. That's nothing.

Now my 780 looks like a toy 

 

[Dumptaker]

12 minutes ago, Dargenfire said:

If you're going to be using the Adobe Suite to edit, go with the GTX 1060:

-Better performing on benchmarks.

-Lower power draw

-CUDA acceleration in Adobe programs is better than OpenCl

 

However, it does cost more but that's your wallet not mine.

Thank you for the well informed response! I had heard something about CUDA working better than "stream processors". I wonder though, if I picked up an older gen card (i.e. 970) with more CUDA cores than a 1060, would I benefit more? 

 

 

[Dargenfire]

8 minutes ago, Dumptaker said:

Thank you for the well informed response! I had heard something about CUDA working better than "stream processors". I wonder though, if I picked up an older gen card (i.e. 970) with more CUDA cores than a 1060, would I benefit more? 

Performance doesn't just depend on how many CUDA cores you have, but also the clock of your cores, vram etc. (Imagine each core is an employee doing something, and the higher the clock on your graphics card is, the faster each one gets stuff done)

 

Just look at benchmarks:Higher = better performance in everything from games to video editing.

The GTX 1060 handily beats the GTX 970 in benchmarks, and is bound to get better over time with driver updates. Go for the 1060.

[Dumptaker]

 

2 minutes ago, Dargenfire said:

Just look at benchmarks:Higher = better performance in everything from games to video editing.

The GTX 1060 handily beats the GTX 970 in benchmarks, and is bound to get better over time with driver updates. Go for the 1060.

? me thinks you're right. Might have to go that way, pending prices settling. Good call

[ShiftyFella]

Better in gaming not always means better in video editing and other specific application because floating performance is where it matters most and on that front RX480 is better but I would go with good ol' 390x or 970\980 over 1060 because compared to it's older nvidia brothers it's gimped. Adobe's opencl implementation is improved but not as good as cuda, so you should try looking for 980 on sale or something

 

 

 

Raw OpenCL performance 

 

[Dargenfire]

1 minute ago, ShiftyFella said:

Better in gaming not always means better in video editing and other specific application because floating performance is where it matters most and on that front RX480 is better but I would go with good ol' 390x or 970\980 over 1060 because compared to it's older nvidia brothers it's gimped. Adobe's opencl implementation is improved but not as good as cuda, so you should try looking for 980 on sale or something

I never intended to imply that better gaming performance = better video editing performance. What I mean is that, because the 970 and the 1060 are both Nvidia cards that use CUDA, you can use benchmarks to determine the difference in performance between them (or just simply which is better).

 

Also, what makes the 1060 gimped? Yes, it has less CUDA cores, but it is clocked much higher, and has a newer architecture. It performs better than the 970 for both video editing and gaming. That's a fact.

[ShiftyFella]

2 minutes ago, Dargenfire said:

I never intended to imply that better gaming performance = better video editing performance. What I mean is that, because the 970 and the 1060 are both Nvidia cards that use CUDA, you can use benchmarks to determine the difference in performance between them (or just simply which is better).

 

Also, what makes the 1060 gimped? Yes, it has less CUDA cores, but it is clocked much higher, and has a newer architecture. It performs better than the 970 for both video editing and gaming. That's a fact.

If you have those cuda specific benchmarks results, I would like to see those, where it's a fact that 1060's less cuda cores and reduced memory bandwidth with slightly lower fp32 performance compared to 970 is better. Newer architecture does not always means it's better, as butt old gtx 780 to this day is better for rendering then something like 980 because of higher memory bandwidth, better fp64 performance and higher cuda core count. Here is something more relevant to this thread, an actual real word performance testing in premiere https://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/Premiere-Benchmark.htm but I would really like to look at those cuda benchmarks you mentioned

[Dumptaker]

 

HA! should've known. Linus is saying it doesn't really matter unless using lots of effects. I think I'm good either way.

[App4that]

2 minutes ago, Dumptaker said:

 

HA! should've known. Linus is saying it doesn't really matter unless using lots of effects. I think I'm good either way.

Keep in mind Linus also says RAM speed doesn't matter while the entire rest of the industry has proven him wrong. Linus makes fun videos, but his methods suck. I wouldn't go base off anything he says.

[Tom Hanks]

XEON E7 8890V3.

[Procraft]

i got gtx 970 msi 

i got it max 1466 mhz while runnig this you can pass gtx 1060 

 

[Dumptaker]

On July 20, 2016 at 8:20 AM, App4that said:

Keep in mind Linus also says RAM speed doesn't matter while the entire rest of the industry has proven him wrong. Linus makes fun videos, but his methods suck. I wouldn't go base off anything he says.

Hmm... Industry? Like coal miners? and why the shade brother? I dig Linus and I use this forum because of his apparently sucky methods. How bout we just stick to the topic. 

 

If cuda cores do in fact work better with premiere pro, then I will go with 1060. If it doesn't matter, I'll save some money and go for a 480. Done.

[Prysin]

On 20/07/2016 at 2:03 AM, Dumptaker said:

Now that we got some 1060 numbers to glance at, I was curious what you guys thought would handle editing/rendering better. 1060 or Rx 480? 

 

Using premiere pro. 

 

PS assuming we have a capable CPU and knowing that editing is, in general, more CPU dependent...

depends on software.

 

Sony Vegas -> AMD is way faster. Infact a R9 380 will be notably faster then a Titan X even.

Adobe -> doesnt matter

Others -> Nvidia

[App4that]

Just now, Dumptaker said:

Hmm... Industry? Like coal miners? and why the shade brother? I dig Linus and I use this forum because of his apparently sucky methods. How bout we just stick to the topic. 

 

If cuda cores do in fact work better with premiere pro, then I will go with 1060. If it doesn't matter, I'll save some money and go for a 580. Done.

What? If you base your decision off of incorrect information, bringing light to that information is paramount to the topic at hand. I can criticize Linus and still respect him and acknowledge his finer points. He makes entertaining videos. There are channels with better methodology that don't have his flair.

 

As for the 1060 completely depends on your needs. The 1060 is more efficient and will provide gains just about across the board. Or spend a little more on a used 980ti.

[Dumptaker]

http://create.pro/blog/open-cl-vs-cuda-amd-vs-nvidia-better-application-support-gpgpugpu-acceleration-real-world-face/

 

Here is an article that seems to have answered my query. The main suggestion is that if a program, like premiere, supports CUDA, then it's worth getting nvidia even if it also supports openCL - because nvidia and the developers worked to specifically make both the GPU and the program to place nice with each other. Basicly, even though the program will utilize other GPUs, it was tailored to use CUDA. 

[ShiftyFella]

That article is quite old but some points in it are still true, Adobe's mercury engine got much better over last few years and opencl performance been brought upto snuff, thanks Apple for pouring tons of money into development of that. I would say cuda is more reliable, cause sometimes opencl acceleration refuses to work, especially in after effects but when it does, its hard to beat raw compute performance of AMD cards.

This should help to decide and see that even with quite significant difference in performance, it doesn't really matter much at the end unless you're someone like lmg but at that point what are you doing without your own rendering workstation and why your'e using puny $200-ish cards

 

 

[Dumptaker]

22 hours ago, ShiftyFella said:

 

This should help to decide and see that even with quite significant difference in performance, it doesn't really matter much at the end unless you're someone like lmg but at that point what are you doing without your own rendering workstation and why your'e using puny $200-ish cards

 

 

Thanks for the info. Video was helpful- pointed out the deminishing returns on higher end cards (which is why I'm looking in the "puny" card dept). I'm an editor for a living, although most of the time I'm using whatever workstation a company provides (9/10 it's a Mac), but I need something decent at home as well. Been running 1080 editing just fine on a Gtx 560, FX 8350, with 16gb RAM. However, adding effects does drop frames and it's an old card and needs to be put out to pasture. Thanks for the input. 

[demonaii]

i would go with Nvidia because they are shifting their priorities to concentrate more on Tesla and so forth.