nVidiaGTX 570 vs. ATI HD 7850 vs. Intel HD 3000

Anonymous

Solved by

Jun 12, 2012 11:37

Hi Guys,

my gt8800 is definitely dead, and now I'm looking for the best solution for PD 10.

The configuration of my pc is as follows:
cpu I7-2600K
Asus MB-V pro P8Z68 3gen
16 GB of RAM
nVidia GT8800 (r.i.p.)
OCZ Fatal1ty Power Supply - 750 Watt

The use of PD 10 is editing and encoding of video 720p on Bd 25GB or DVD.
Between a nvidia gtx570 graphics card and an ATI HD7850, what do you recommend?
Or continue to use the HD4000 and save my money?

Thanks

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Jun 14. 2012 08:22

Anonymous

Jun 13, 2012 10:30

Any suggestions?

gregston

Newbie Location: Poland Joined: Jul 05, 2011 03:29 Messages: 42 Offline

Jun 13, 2012 13:55

If you are not going to play games but edit video material do not waste your money for too expensive graphic card.
Quick Sync is your solution.

This is my private opinion.

jmone

Senior Contributor Location: Australia Joined: Nov 26, 2010 00:05 Messages: 706 Offline

Jun 13, 2012 22:33

From my testing on 1080/50p AVC material I find not using any GPU accelleration results in the most compliant file though it is slower. I'd suggest you try rendering a project using the Intel GPU, no GPU and see if you are unhappy with either result before plonking down any $'s on a new GPU if it is just for PD.

FYI - I'm pretty sure the i7-2600K uses the HD3000 PD 64 Bit-Win10 64 Bit-32GB RAM-80TB HDD
Sony FX6 - 500Mbps 4k/50p AVC-I HLG
Canon XF400 - 150Mbps 4k/50p AVC
GoPro Hero6 Black
Pana HS700-28Mbps 1080/50p AVC (High@L4.2)
Canon HV20-HDV 25Mbps 16:9 1440x1080/25p MPEG

Anonymous

Jun 14, 2012 08:22

Thanks for the answer

@gregston i'm not a hard gamer, but I waited too long for Diablo III

@jmone I screwed up the graphics card ... (I corrected the title)

Yesterday evening I made a BD and a DVD with about 600 photos with music and transition effects (the duration of the video is 60 minutes).
Authoring bd lasted for 1 hour and 45 minutes, the DVD only 25 minutes ... the cpu reaching up to 99% and the computer was unusable for anything else.
Next time I'll try to overclock the CPU and GPU to see how much the processing time lower

Bye

Edit:anyway... between Nvidia and ATI which brand works best with PD10?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at Jun 14. 2012 08:27

vn800rider

Senior Contributor Location: Darwen, UK Joined: May 15, 2008 04:32 Messages: 1949 Offline

Jun 14, 2012 08:48

Not any exact answer but might be "of interest"??

http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/22732.page

Cheers
Adrian Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated. (see below)
Confucius
AMD Phenom IIX6 1055T, win10, 5 internal drives, 7 usb drives, struggling power supply.

Anonymous

Jun 14, 2012 11:19

Quote: Not any exact answer but might be "of interest"??

http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/22732.page

Cheers
Adrian

Thanks Adrian, I had already read your post

indeed it would seem that the intel gpu with quick Synk are better than nvidia / ati, but... A year has passed and two generations of discrete graphics cards and their drivers were released.

if with your laptop, with the 520M (48 cuda cores), the processing time is double, with a discrete with a number of cuda / steam considerably higher, the process should be faster than with the gpu intel.

None of you have experience with ATI cards?

gregston

Newbie Location: Poland Joined: Jul 05, 2011 03:29 Messages: 42 Offline

Jun 14, 2012 11:46

Quote:

if with your laptop, with the 520M (48 cuda cores), the processing time is double, with a discrete with a number of cuda / steam considerably higher, the process should be faster than with the gpu intel.

First of all quality of material rendered by HD3000 is significantly better than by CUDA.
Second thing: cost of your HD3000 is 0$.