Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

After Effects card at $150

Tags:
  • Go
  • Graphics Cards
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 15, 2013 12:04:18 PM

Building a sub $1000 rig for my buddy who uses after effects. 3770k based. I am struggling a bit on the graphics card as I need to be right around $150. Suggestions would be appreciated and any additional explanation would be graciously absorbed. Should I just go 3570k and up the graphics card?...

More about : effects card 150

a c 105 U Graphics card
November 15, 2013 12:27:20 PM

yes.

get the i5 with a $250 card like the hd 7950 or gtx 760...
m
0
l
November 15, 2013 12:51:05 PM

Thanks, yeah I had the gtx 760 selected at first (I own 2 myself and love them for gaming and my relatively basic avid Media Composer work) but it was pushing the budget too high. I'm going to make it work with a 760.
Can you please give me your take on this before I move on the 760? ... the point being Fermi vs Kepler for video work...

Madn3ss795 said:
If your PSU can handle a 560ti, go for it. Although eating more power due to older micro-architecture, it's still stronger than a 650ti in gaming ( 560ti is almost equal to a 7850 ) and is much much stronger in editing software, which are optimized for Fermi cards ( including the 560ti ) more than Kepler ones ( 650ti ). Plus, 1 CUDA core on Fermi platform is at least 5 times stronger than 1 CUDA core on Kepler platform.

My buddy will be using CS6. This might come down to the software and how it currently utilizes the video cards so this might be a question for an after effects forum.

Thanks again very much.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 105 U Graphics card
November 15, 2013 1:07:37 PM

your buddy is right. Kepler nvidia gaming cards had a massively reduced cuda and compute functions over the older Fermi. not sure about his numbers (x5 stronger?! seems a bit of an exaggeration... x2 stronger is more in line with what i've seen) but his basic point still stands.

Part of the reason i suggested the 7950 is because if you're not using cuda (since cuda is pretty poor quality i would suggest you not use it)... it will be better in general for this then a kepler card will be.
m
0
l
November 15, 2013 1:15:37 PM

I want to make sure the build beats this one he was looking at, which is just a weird build to me like they are trying to get rid of old hardware.

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/ite...

my build for him is:
Gigabyte GA-B75M-HD3 (cost cutting)
i5 3570k (he won't overclock)
GTX 760
Ballistix Sport 16GB DDR3-1600 CL9 (cheap but good spd/timings) 2 dimms
kingston v300 ssd (best price and I have 2 and love them)
cx500m psu
Plus Windows 7 and mid tower case I'm at $990.48 after two $10 mail in rebates and that's after tax at a brick and mortar.






m
0
l
November 15, 2013 1:26:03 PM

Ah sorry just saw your response. I will look more into the graphics card and consider the 7950. It's funny because I have also read in many places that most of these production softwares want to see NVidia. I thought the Quadro line was actually similar to the GTX line but maybe the Quadro's are Fermi? I'll look into that.
m
0
l
a c 105 U Graphics card
November 15, 2013 2:24:06 PM

ThWind81 said:
Ah sorry just saw your response. I will look more into the graphics card and consider the 7950. It's funny because I have also read in many places that most of these production softwares want to see NVidia. I thought the Quadro line was actually similar to the GTX line but maybe the Quadro's are Fermi? I'll look into that.


mostly because of driver support. AMD/ATI has some poor industrial drivers. The hardware is comperable and at times superior... the drivers are not.

In industrial production, they need rock solid drivers that won't crash. AMD has been pretty poor with that. So generally quatro cards are superior to firepro (even if the hardware is comperable).

Sorta the same situation with the 7950 vs the 760. the hardware in the 7950 is mostly superior for compute functionality (setting aside CUDA), however the nvidia driver support is a bit better with those programs. as a result it really comes down to the programs your friend will use. if they're programs with solid AMD support the 7950 will be superior to the 760... if they are not then the 760 even with it's crippled compute and cuda will probably be a better option. (the easiest way to answer this question is to see if the program supports OpenCL or not... if it does then the 7950 will be a better option, if it does not, then the nvidia will be better)

m
0
l
November 15, 2013 3:51:01 PM

Thank you very much. Good answer. I had read that about the drivers elsewhere probably in conjunction with what you made bold in my quote. I feel like I can make a pretty informed decision at this point. I feel safer actually going with Nvidia even if the performance is a bit crippled because I prefer to provide stability and reliability first. Driver issues suck. I think I will stick with strong graphics card just in case he does 3D and because I think the 3570k will perform fine for him. He is upgrading from a Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4 ghz.
Thanks very much to all!
m
0
l
a c 205 U Graphics card
November 15, 2013 4:12:23 PM

Don't believe any of that driver nonsense. Adobe just added opencl support for most gpu accelerated features in cc. Most other companies have already added opencl support in a once cuda dominated field. Ever since amd took over ati, I haven't had any issues but I can't say the same for my nvidia rigs.
m
0
l
November 16, 2013 8:08:04 AM

Ok thanks for that as well. I think I'm going to stick with the 760, allow him to test it, and if he wants to try something else after a trial period I'll just buy it from him and run an SLI setup myself (I planned on getting another one anyway). I still personally trust the Nvidia a bit more still and just because there is now more support for the AMD cards, there is a longer history with Nvidia and drivers. I need to go ahead and build myself an AMD CPU and GPU build just to test out and gain some comfort with. That way I will be more comfortable recommending that route if it suits someone's needs and budget requirements.
m
0
l
a c 105 U Graphics card
November 16, 2013 10:23:36 AM

k1114 said:
Don't believe any of that driver nonsense. Adobe just added opencl support for most gpu accelerated features in cc. Most other companies have already added opencl support in a once cuda dominated field. Ever since amd took over ati, I haven't had any issues but I can't say the same for my nvidia rigs.


i have an AMD gpu... it's a hd 7770 ghz. For games the drivers are awesome, and i generally agree that there is no real difference between the companies (if anything currently AMD drivers on gaming rigs are currently superior to nvidia drivers, which have been a mess for all their cards ever since the launch of the 7xx series of gpus). Industrial/business software is a different beast, and you can't just ignore the evidence.

AMD just isn't there yet in the business sector; yes in OpenCL compliant programs i'd much rather have a radeon... outside of opencl however nvidia reigns supreme.
m
0
l
a c 205 U Graphics card
November 16, 2013 6:54:23 PM

ingtar33 said:

mostly because of driver support. AMD/ATI has some poor industrial drivers. The hardware is comperable and at times superior... the drivers are not.

In industrial production, they need rock solid drivers that won't crash. AMD has been pretty poor with that. So generally quatro cards are superior to firepro (even if the hardware is comperable).

i have an AMD gpu... it's a hd 7770 ghz. For games the drivers are awesome, and i generally agree that there is no real difference between the companies (if anything currently AMD drivers on gaming rigs are currently superior to nvidia drivers, which have been a mess for all their cards ever since the launch of the 7xx series of gpus). Industrial/business software is a different beast, and you can't just ignore the evidence.

AMD just isn't there yet in the business sector; yes in OpenCL compliant programs i'd much rather have a radeon... outside of opencl however nvidia reigns supreme.


Nvidia would just crash after a short time in max/maya/other ogl and dx environments including games on 310 and 320 had so many issues I downgraded back to 314 after less than a day of use. It was also found to brick gpus but I won't go into that. 320 just had so many issues reported by others, I have to say it takes the cake as the worst driver release in recent times. There's been a decrease in compute performance after 314 on fermi and older cards. I don't even want to talk about what's wrong with maximus. And these issues were all on whql drivers which should not have been full of widespread failure. Vray had some issues with cuda and ocl on amd too but I'll put that under renderer's issues not the gpu's fault. There were also issues with other once cuda only renderers adding ocl support but that again would be the renderer's early version bugs to blame. Since then I haven't had issues. For radeons I've had some random stuttering/slowdowns I could not figure out and many times the optimizations in the firepros pale to same tier quadros. I would say they are behind but they are vastly catching up as they seem to be working a lot closer with adobe with all this ocl support being added and they even dominate in autodesk inventor. I would not say that they are "poor" or "not there" and the key aspect to consider was the software wasn't crashing. I'd still suggest a nvidia gpu for their well balanced support but I am disproving your unfounded amd driver claim.


A bit off topic and I don't mean to bring in semantics but when someone says business sector, they refer to finance or corporate which is the wrong industries and typically brought up for their multi monitor usage. But anyways, I think the word you were looking for is professional which I could understand as synonymous meanings but being clear is key to prevent misinformation.
m
0
l
a c 105 U Graphics card
November 17, 2013 11:38:32 AM

yeah... i think the nvidia driver issues started with 320.18 WHQL (though some people claim the issues started with 314.22; with corrupted graphics in AC3 and BF3)... they've been a general mess ever since. Bad enough for long enough it still blows my mind anyone could claim nvidia gaming drivers are better then AMD drivers. At it's worse AMD drivers never straight out killed gpus or handicapped old cards to force their owners to buy new ones. buggy, yes, AMD drivers were buggy for a long time with the release of GCN cards, and it did take them a solid 12 months to fix... but buggy is a far cry from killing gpus. and nvidia gaming card drivers have been doing that off and on for 8 months now.
m
0
l
a c 205 U Graphics card
November 17, 2013 9:24:36 PM

I'd go as far back as 275 not 320, and you are talking games when I am not.
m
0
l
!