Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Comparing Resolve performance with GTX 285, 470, 480 and Quadra 6000

jake blackstone

jake blackstone

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
3,984
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Los Angeles
Website
jake-blackstone.com
I just had a visit from Dave Pirinelli from MacvidCards.
Disclosure:
I have no affiliation with David or MacVidCards, other than I use his GTX 285 with stock MacPro 4.1, octo 2.26 Ghz and Resolve, that I had purchased almost 2 years ago.
He offered to bring various Mac video cards to test with Resolve.
So we had tested:
1. GTX 285 with 1 GB of RAM
2. GTX 470
3. GTX 480
4. Quadra 6000.

All cards ran fine with Resolve. Only GTX 480 required an external power supply. They all showed up correctly in the system profiler, with exception of Quadra 6000 showing 2GB of RAM, instead of 6GB.
GTX 470 and 480 were properly recognized by Resolve. Resolve complained about Quadra 6000, but it still ran fine, as far as I can tell.
I used the Noise Reduction to simulate a heavy GPU load. I used settings of 2 and 3 on the NR to see the playback speed. Lower number requires more number crunching GPU power.
So, here are the findings:
1. GTX 285 NR=2 9 fps NR=3 16fps
2. GTX 470 NR=2 12.5fps NR=3 21fps
3. Quadra 6000 NR=2 12fps NR=3 20fps
4. GTX 480 NR=2 16 fps NR=3 Real time

For my money. GTX 470 is the best value with Resolve. As you can see, this card actually exceeded the performance of Quadra 6000. The overall champ was GTX 480. This is the only card, that was capable of real time performance with the NR. Not too bad, but the external power supply is a bit of a bummer. Not a problem, though with the external enclosure.
Hope this info helps...
 
Jake,

Thanks for the info.

Would you see much benefit to having two GTX480s? I have been thinking about trying 2 480s, but it seems Resolve uses my CPUs more than my GPUs. Maybe it is just the things I have been doing (mostly dailies with light grade) and if I did more complicated grades I would notice the GPU being used more?


Dusty
 
Dustin Cross said:
Jake,

Thanks for the info.

Would you see much benefit to having two GTX480s? I have been thinking about trying 2 480s, but it seems Resolve uses my CPUs more than my GPUs. Maybe it is just the things I have been doing (mostly dailies with light grade) and if I did more complicated grades I would notice the GPU being used more?


Dusty
Click to expand...
For dailies you don't need even a one GTX 480. GTX 285 is just fine for that type of work. In your case all the heavy lifting- debayer is done either by CPU or RR.
 
Dustin Cross said:
Jake,

Actually most of my dailies lately are Alexa, but simple one node grade doesn't seem to use GPU much at all.

What type of work in Resolve would take advantage of two 480s?


Dusty
Click to expand...

Lots and lots of of nodes, high res, like 4k, stereo, real time NR, HDRx
 
I assume a GTX 580 would still work in realtime...anybody have compatibility issues with a 580?
 
Thanks Jake for this.
 
Well,

I bought a 470 from them, upgrading from the 285. NEVER have gotten Jake's frame rates, never. :-(

I am using it for Resolve, so the GT 120 is still being used for UI. I am having questions, posted them after I followed their website instructions as to how to update the Device ID on the "AppleGraphicsPowerManagement.kext" (wich by the way, it shows two different ones on my system profile, one for each "slot" it covers, and there is no instructions as to how to handle this), but it seems that there is no way to get support to confirm if the appropriate steps were followed.

BTW, the instructions are not that user-friendly, and can be even contradicting. Do "x" to maximize its performance, but later on, if it mentions that if used for Resolve do not change it. So, does it mean that if used for Resolve we will never exploit its maximum performance?

Can someone be so kind and point me to the right place to get the answers I need. I feel that I have a piece of equipment that has the potential to generate for me $1M, but I am getting 50 cents...
 
Luis Otero said:
Well,

I bought a 470 from them, upgrading from the 285. NEVER have gotten Jake's frame rates, never. :-(

I am using it for Resolve, so the GT 120 is still being used for UI. I am having questions, posted them after I followed their website instructions as to how to update the Device ID on the "AppleGraphicsPowerManagement.kext" (wich by the way, it shows two different ones on my system profile, one for each "slot" it covers, and there is no instructions as to how to handle this), but it seems that there is no way to get support to confirm if the appropriate steps were followed.

BTW, the instructions are not that user-friendly, and can be even contradicting. Do "x" to maximize its performance, but later on, if it mentions that if used for Resolve do not change it. So, does it mean that if used for Resolve we will never exploit its maximum performance?

Can someone be so kind and point me to the right place to get the answers I need. I feel that I have a piece of equipment that has the potential to generate for me $1M, but I am getting 50 cents...
Click to expand...

Please take this with the grain of salt, but when David showed up with all of those cards, he did modified kext file (only one file kext file, not two) to work with 470 and 480 cards. Unfortunately, I do not remember how he had modified it to make Resolve to work properly. Once we were done, we just replaced kext file with the original unmodified copy and the system worked fine after that with my 295 card. I'd suggest contacting David directly.
 
jake blackstone said:
I'd suggest contacting David directly.
Click to expand...


That is exactly what I have tried, but there is no response at all to the forums posting re: this issue. I do not have any other way to reach him...
 
Thanks, Jake. Already sent an e-mail to him. Waiting for his response... I want to experience what you also got.
 
Are you using it with the GT 120 in Resolve as the UI card? That is my configuration. During reading the instructions, I know that deleting it is one of the option. However, the next paragraph says " if you want the BEST results" from the card, then modify the file. My thought here is that deleting it is a second best option, but does not maximize its full capabilities. And for me, deleting it, did not render any different frame rate than the 285. Maybe 0.5 to 1.5 frames extras, but never what Jake reported.

My machine is a mid 2011, 12 core hyperthreaded, with 24GB of RAM, so it is a good configuration to notice any significant improvements. However, sadly that has not been the case :-(
 
yeah I'm using a GT120 as the GUI and the GTX470 as the GPU.

Do you have the latest Resolve build as well as the latest NVIDIA Driver? I just deleted it and am getting significant speed over my previous gtx285 setup. Copy the kext file and save it somewhere else and delete the "real" kext and see if you get a boost.
 
Yes, my computer is up to date 100%. Already did the "delete method", and I am not getting the reported frame rates.
 
What made the tric was to initiate the process as BMD requires: first place the 120 in slot 1, and after one booting cycle, move it to 3 or 4, and place the new card in slot 1.

PS: just received the 480. Will install and test it tomorrow.
 
I was on the phone with BMD Tech support earlier and they mentioned avoiding the latest CUDA driver as it can disable access to multiple GPUs. 4.1.29 is fine but hold off on 4.2.5 for now. I have two Quadro 4000's in the expansion chassis and wanted to make sure Resolve was utilizing everything I was throwing at it. With the latest CUDA driver, Resolve isn't able to access multiple cards.... they tell me.

Just a head's up.

CB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top