Quadro P2000 vs GeForce GTX 1070 for Video Editing/Rendering/Graphic Design Workstation

[b105f00d]

So... NVIDIA's recently released Quadro series cards seem to be pretty ferocious... If you're spending the $$$ on the P4000 or above... Now I'm determining the best most cost effective card for a rendering workstation and I've got some decisions to make...

 

Use Case Scenario:

• After Effects CC 2017 (2D & 3D Animation)
• Premiere CC 2017
• Photoshop CC 2017
• Intel i7-6800K Processor
• X99A-II Motherboard
• 32GB DDR4 Memory

A Little Useless Background:

In the past I've always purchased GeForce cards for our workstations due to financial reasons. 780 Ti, 1070 SSC, and a recently problematic 1060 card which is what spurred this discussion to begin with. We've had some issues with this particular workstation when it was in use by another employee prior which caused a strange "Ghosting" effect of particular layers etc in After Effects and Adobe Media Encoder. You could save the file and open it on a different machine and the problem is gone. I had installed a completely different SSD and different Windows OS and the issue has persisted across users. From what I've read online it seems to be a Graphics Card compatibility issue due to the driver etc. So off to replace the card and transplant it into a machine that is not utilized for After Effects. Problem Solved. Or is it?...

 

The Question:

For Around $450 I can get a Quadro P2000. Or for $329-$420 I can get a GTX 1070. So now I am at a cross-roads... I've got about $400+ ish to spend on a new workstation card for a fellow employee who does a bit of a mix between Premiere, After Effects, and Photoshop on a daily basis.

 

Puget System's website offers some great pre-builds which I've used in the past as a baseline for my own Rendering Workstation machines... And they don't even offer the P2000 as an option... Starts out with a 1070, or $400 extra for a P4000. There really isn't much information offered on the web in the form of reviews or comparisons between this new Quadro series versus the GeForce lineup in 2017. I've seen a lot of comparisons or even LTT episodes on the higher end cards... But what about this low to mid budget range... Is it worth it? Or will I be more satisfied with the 1070? Or does it even matter? This  machine is used for ZERO gaming. Only Adobe Suite software.

 

NVIDIA Boasts its IMPROVED performance with its 2017 Quadro series... Does it make the team with the P2000?

[b105f00d]

I mean... When it boils down to it I'm pretty much answering my own question by saying that AE CC 2017 really only uses GPU for Ray-Traced 3D rendering and Open GL support using CUDA Cores. So choosing the card with more pipelines and CUDA cores would be the most beneficial decision. So to that note, 1070 would be the ideal choice in my own personal opinion on the matter.

 

But I still want to hear what other people have to say about the matter and see if maybe I can learn something I wasn't aware of before.

[Icefly]

The KFA Cards are really cheap as far as i know. The 1070 goes for just 400 i think.

But the 1070 is a full gaming card for me.

I don't know anything about Quadro. 

[bimmerman]

I'm not familiar with video editing workflow and programs so much as CAD work. For my needs a low-tier Quadro or Firepro has always been more than enough, and always has performed better than a gaming card in the same situations. I have not needed CUDA acceleration.

 

General questions that may help your research:

 

Does your software take advantage of CUDA or OpenCL for GPU acceleration? If OpenCL is supported or preferred over CUDA, it might be worth looking into AMD's Firepro offerings.

 

If you're having driver issues, do the Quadros have driver profiles or support for After Effects or Photoshop? Driver stability has always been a Quadro/Firepro selling point, and would likely be worth it (to me) over the higher horsepower of the gaming card.

[b105f00d]

7 minutes ago, b105f00d said:

When it boils down to it I'm pretty much answering my own question by saying that AE CC 2017 really only uses GPU for Ray-Traced 3D rendering and Open GL support using CUDA Cores. So choosing the card with more pipelines and CUDA cores would be the most beneficial decision. So to that note, 1070 would be the ideal choice in my own personal opinion on the matter.

In certain situations, CUDA is implemented. For the most part, the job entails 2D effects and rendering, but when whenever we do get into projects that require 3D this is the workstation that will be doing it. So I do not want it to crap out and freeze up every other frame due to inadequate hardware acceleration capacity. I would like this machine to perform as good as it can in all situations regardless of how often we use them. Time is money. 

 

I'm not trying to spend $800 just yet on a P4000 or similar card, but I want to do the best I can for the $400-ish budget I am currently working with. 

 

Here is a really good article explaining the After Effects capabilities and hardware accelerated features: https://blogs.adobe.com/creativecloud/gpu-cuda-opengl-features-in-after-effects-cs6/?segment=dva

 

Here are some benchmarking results of Adobe CS6 CUDA with Ray Trace tests... http://www.loopoutcontinue.com/cuda/

 

Edited May 17, 2017 by b105f00d

[b105f00d]

Really... The question should be... BEST VIDEO EDITING (ADOBE CC) GRAPHICS CARD FOR ABOUT $400...

 

I am open to an older architecture as long as it outperforms in rendering and previewing/hardware acceleration for the Adobe Suite platform in this particular price range.

 

On the other side of things... NVIDIA GTX Titan Black or Titan X are options as well... Maybe. Since they will generally be refurbished or used I may have a difficult time convincing our operations manager to spend the dough. Though as long as the argument is sound I could have a chance.

[AkiraDaarkst]

45 minutes ago, b105f00d said:

So... NVIDIA's recently released Quadro series cards seem to be pretty ferocious... If you're spending the $$$ on the P4000 or above... Now I'm determining the best most cost effective card for a rendering workstation and I've got some decisions to make...

 

Use Case Scenario:

• After Effects CC 2017 (2D & 3D Animation)
• Premiere CC 2017
• Photoshop CC 2017
• Intel i7-6800K Processor
• X99A-II Motherboard
• 32GB DDR4 Memory

A Little Useless Background:

In the past I've always purchased GeForce cards for our workstations due to financial reasons. 780 Ti, 1070 SSC, and a recently problematic 1060 card which is what spurred this discussion to begin with. We've had some issues with this particular workstation when it was in use by another employee prior which caused a strange "Ghosting" effect of particular layers etc in After Effects and Adobe Media Encoder. You could save the file and open it on a different machine and the problem is gone. I had installed a completely different SSD and different Windows OS and the issue has persisted across users. From what I've read online it seems to be a Graphics Card compatibility issue due to the driver etc. So off to replace the card and transplant it into a machine that is not utilized for After Effects. Problem Solved. Or is it?...

 

The Question:

For Around $450 I can get a Quadro P2000. Or for $329-$420 I can get a GTX 1070. So now I am at a cross-roads... I've got about $400+ ish to spend on a new workstation card for a fellow employee who does a bit of a mix between Premiere, After Effects, and Photoshop on a daily basis.

 

Puget System's website offers some great pre-builds which I've used in the past as a baseline for my own Rendering Workstation machines... And they don't even offer the P2000 as an option... Starts out with a 1070, or $400 extra for a P4000. There really isn't much information offered on the web in the form of reviews or comparisons between this new Quadro series versus the GeForce lineup in 2017. I've seen a lot of comparisons or even LTT episodes on the higher end cards... But what about this low to mid budget range... Is it worth it? Or will I be more satisfied with the 1070? Or does it even matter? This  machine is used for ZERO gaming. Only Adobe Suite software.

 

NVIDIA Boasts its IMPROVED performance with its 2017 Quadro series... Does it make the team with the P2000?

 

33 minutes ago, b105f00d said:

In certain situations, CUDA is implemented. For the most part, the job entails 2D effects and rendering, but when whenever we do get into projects that require 3D this is the workstation that will be doing it. So I do not want it to crap out and freeze up every other frame due to inadequate hardware acceleration capacity. I would like this machine to perform as good as it can in all situations regardless of how often we use them. Time is money. 

 

I'm not trying to spend $800 just yet on a P4000 or similar card, but I want to do the best I can for the $400-ish budget I am currently working with. 

 

Here is a really good article explaining the After Effects capabilities and hardware accelerated features: https://blogs.adobe.com/creativecloud/gpu-cuda-opengl-features-in-after-effects-cs6/?segment=dva

 

Here are some benchmarking results of Adobe CS6 CUDA with Ray Trace tests... http://www.loopoutcontinue.com/cuda/

 

 

22 minutes ago, b105f00d said:

Really... The question should be... BEST VIDEO EDITING (ADOBE CC) GRAPHICS CARD FOR ABOUT $400...

 

I am open to an older architecture as long as it outperforms in rendering and previewing/hardware acceleration for the Adobe Suite platform in this particular price range.

 

On the other side of things... NVIDIA GTX Titan Black or Titan X are options as well... Maybe. Since they will generally be refurbished or used I may have a difficult time convincing our operations manager to spend the dough. Though as long as the argument is sound I could have a chance.

Do you understand when and where the CPU and GPU are used in video editing, especially with programs like Premiere and After Effects?  Do you have a 10-bit monitor?

 

During editing, the GPU is used for rendering the preview.  When rendering, the GPU is used when GPU acceleration supported effects have been applied to the video.  In other cases, the CPU is utilized more.

 

Puget Systems have a number of articles where they discuss the pros and cons of using either workstation or consumer gaming GPUs for video editing.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/recommended/Recommended-Systems-for-Adobe-Premiere-Pro-143

[b105f00d]

Nope, we do not use 10-bit monitors... Edit: We all utilize 1 Q2963PQ AOC Ultra-Wide IPS Display and above that 1 wall mounted 32" TV and a side-mounted vertically oriented monitor for Adobe Software Panels/Effects etc. I know I know... the 32" Television is a terrible display for graphics and video work. I hate them. But it wasn't my choice. (Color calibration is a binnnatch and reds/pinks always oversaturate and flicker looking like a psychedelic music video but its a secondary display for watching YouTube etc.)

 

But Yes, I'm pretty sure that I am aware of how the CPU and GPU are used.

 

In most cases the CPU is going to be the primarily utilized component during the editing process from previewing to rendering. UNLESS... you're utilizing certain features that allow for hardware accelerated support or 3D performance improvements. Graphics Rendering does not equal Graphics Card.

 

With OpenGL support enabled, hardware acceleration is indeed able to use the GPU to improve the performance generally of the application for 2D or 3D use cases. OpenGL allows hardware acceleration support to improve things like Fast Draft and Ray Traced Rendering utilizing the GPU as well. Along with something I had never heard of until recently... and not sure what it is... BlitPipe? Not sure what that is.

 

Ray Tracing on the other hand is a CUDA Core dependent 3D renderer that relies solely on compatible NVIDIA GPUs to function, if used correctly can greatly improve performance for 3D use cases. The CUDA cores are directly related to improving the performance of the 3D Ray Traced Renderer if this feature is activated to harness that ability and is a compatible chip with Adobe's list of hardware IDs.

 

At the end of the day, the GPU and CPU is more of a balancing act during Adobe/Video Editing. You NEED a powerful CPU for speed and performance. The GPU then compliments that power by increasing overall efficiency and utilizing accelerated features that allow the CPU to focus on the task at hand offloading certain tasks to the GPU itself & freeing up CPU potential.

 

Two things in my opinion that are underestimated are ensuring the use of SSD's for Disk Caching and RAM. The more RAM you have allocated to AE the less the CPU has to rely on local storage caching and can keep more frames in the memory buffers allowing smoother playback.

 

In the past I've made the mistake of spending too much money on a GPU for my Video Editing/Rendering workstation and later regretted it realizing that the CPU is where I should have been focusing my money. In this case, the machine is already built and fully functional. I am simply replacing the graphics card due to an unexplainable issue that has been recorded throughout time and most popularly attributed to be a direct cause of GPU/Driver/Software compatibility.

 

Back to topic here... I'm just surprised that nobody has any real feedback on the current Quadro Architecture and its comparison to the GeForce GTX 1070 for Graphic and Video Editing/Rendering work. That's all I'm concerned with. Performance per dollar. And if it will actually matter on a card like this. Low/Entry level industry specific GPUs. I don't care about gaming. Just a compelling argument. 

[b105f00d]

I guess I will just conclude this thread after making some realizations regarding the actual performance of the Quadro cards and why they are more expensive. ECC and more memory are the only real benefits for someone doing standard video editing and rendering which won't boost performance during either of the two processes.

 

GeForce GTX 1070 it is...

 

Unless I go with a GTX Titan X Maxwell refurbished or used, but compared to the 1070 it looks under specced minus the RAM of 12 GB which I can't really see being a benefit with standard editing on After Effects or Premiere.  Not to mention the new GTX architecture on the 1070s are supposed to be optimized for Adobe to work more efficiently anyways.

 

[Ripio Suelto]

Quadro  drivers are optimized for management in viewports tons of polygon. For render (AE, Premiere or 3D softw like C4D, Blender, Maya, etc) GTXs have much higher price performance ratio.