Solved

Asus GTX780 or GTX780TI

Hi everyone!
I'm building a computer for video editing and 3D animation and I'm considering two options- Asus GTX 780 and Asus GTX 780 TI. I would like to know what's the difference between these two and if the difference is worth the price.
15 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about asus gtx780 gtx780ti
  1. For editing, you should be interested in the no. cuda cores.

    780 - 2304, $440 = 19c / cuda core

    780Ti - 2880, $590 = 20.4c/cuda core

    Depends on your budget - how many cuda cores can you afford?
  2. Beyond CUDA cores, which application are you using? Some pro apps work better with pro cards (depends
    on the app, ie. better viewport precision, colour depth, etc.) Free tools should be fine with consumer cards
    though. Between the ones you've mentioned, definitely the 780 Ti. It has a good performance advantage,
    and I don't think the cost saving with the 780 is worthwhile.

    Naturally, the above assumes the app you're using can exploit CUDA. Blender can via the Cycles & Octane
    plugins, AE does aswell (MPE, plus accelerated GUI features).

    Ian.
  3. I use PowerDirector and it uses "Hardware Acceleration" that encompasses both Radeon and nVidia cards. But more cuda cores is better.
  4. mapesdhs said:

    Beyond CUDA cores, which application are you using? Some pro apps work better with pro cards (depends
    on the app, ie. better viewport precision, colour depth, etc.) Free tools should be fine with consumer cards
    though. Between the ones you've mentioned, definitely the 780 Ti. It has a good performance advantage,
    and I don't think the cost saving with the 780 is worthwhile.

    Naturally, the above assumes the app you're using can exploit CUDA. Blender can via the Cycles & Octane
    plugins, AE does aswell (MPE, plus accelerated GUI features).

    Ian.



    I use Premier Pro, After Effects and I Would like to learn Maya. First I wanted to get something from the list of Autodesk recommended hardware but I can hardly afford Quadro k4000, plus I was told that gtx 780ti is better than k4000 for adobe products.
  5. The K4000 costs about the same as a GTX780Ti
  6. i7Baby said:
    The K4000 costs about the same as a GTX780Ti


    Right! But still $750 is more than $650 :)
  7. And so is $650.01. Depends on your budget and need to get the most appropriate card. What are the software system requirements?
  8. i7Baby said:
    And so is $650.01. Depends on your budget and need to get the most appropriate card. What are the software system requirements?



    Adobe Premier Pro CC system requirements
  9. You haven't said what software. I gather CS6? It says "Optional: Adobe-certified GPU card for GPU-accelerated performance"

    Found them?
  10. i7Baby said:
    You haven't said what software. I gather CS6? It says "Optional: Adobe-certified GPU card for GPU-accelerated performance"

    Found them?


    Yep, It's CS6 but I want to switch to CC

    Found :)
  11. If you found them, then are either the 780 or 780ti adobe-certified?
  12. i7Baby said:
    If you found them, then are either the 780 or 780ti adobe-certified?


  13. Best answer
    i7Baby writes:
    > If you found them, then are either the 780 or 780ti adobe-certified?

    Doesn't matter if they're certified, just add them to the ray tracer supported cards file, it'll work fine.
    My file has everything, including 460, 280, you name it, all work ok. Quad-460 is amusing. :)


    DMK13 writes:
    > I use Premier Pro, After Effects and I Would like to learn Maya. ...

    Premiere Pro is a little odd. Adobe keeps bouncing back & forth as to whether to really support CUDA
    or not. AE certainly does in numerous ways, couple of 780 Tis would rock. As for Maya, it's changed
    in recent times, Autodesk have rewritten it to be a lot more friendly to consumer cards (grud knows
    why); used to be that Maya was 10X faster on a pro card, but not anymore, though that could easily
    be down to the bias in the nature of the subtests (pro cards are generally massively faster at things
    like AA lines). Just don't expect perfect viewport or geometry precision from a gamer card; they cut
    corners in order to get the performance (it's why a 7970 scores so well for Viewperf12 even though
    the image precision is not remotely as good as a Quadro in many cases).


    > ... but I can hardly afford Quadro k4000, ...

    Check the used market, I won a used K5000 for only 525 UKP. Actually it was unused,
    just removed from a new system to make room for a K6000. Bagged two 6000s in a
    similar manner, and some 2000s/4000s.


    > ... plus I was told that gtx 780ti is better than k4000 for adobe products.

    Overall, yes, because AE doesn't make use of newer OGL stuff for its GUI, much of which is old code, etc.
    Thus, the OGL support of modern gamer cards is more than enough. It's hard to quantify the viewport
    precision benefit of a pro card in this case, but overall a 780 Ti should be fine, and it'll provide far more
    CUDA power than a Quadro in the same price range.

    I built a compromise system for someone, ie. a used K5000 and two GTX 580s, total CUDA power
    equivalent to 1.5X a Titan Black; far better primary display performance for the user's other pro apps
    which run badly on gamer cards, better viewport precision, etc., but with good CUDA provision for AE.
    The trick is to use version-matched quadro/desktop drivers, then it works fine.

    Ian.
  14. i can tell you there isn't going to be any meaningful performance gain by going with the 780ti over a 780, and even a gtx660 is still going to give you 75% the performance. and depending on the task, even entry level amd options like an hd7770 is not that far behind but 20% the price of a 780ti.

    i personally would look for a good used gtx580 if i wanted the acceleration.
  15. So you've tested this, yes? What are your numbers?

    Sorry but you're wrong, the extra speed is useful, and the 600 series cards are awful
    for CUDA (a 580 is faster than all of them).

    AMD cards do not support CUDA, hence useless for AE.

    I've employed more than a dozen used GTX 580s in AE systems. A 780 Ti will be about the
    same as two 580s. If the budget is available, a new 780 Ti makes far more sense: proper
    warranty, less power usage, less heat (which makes CPU oc'ing easier), better expandability,
    more efficient resource usage within AE with fewer GPUs (the app really does not scale across
    multiple GPUs that well, sometimes causing load thrashing for certain types of render, where
    scenes don't split so well). I've been testing these issues for 2 years now.

    Note that only the 3GB 580s are worth bothering with for AE and have any degree
    of future proofing, but they're harder to find, more expensive, etc. So far I've bought
    nine Palit 3GB cards, couple of Zotacs, and six MSI LXs. The MSI would be the best
    option for a used 580 if one can find them, but they do go for a hefty premium over
    standard 580 3GB cards, and a lot more than a 1.5GB 580 (often 2X more).

    With the approach of Maxwell, the best strategy for tight budgets is to look for
    used 780 Tis. My AE system has four MSI 3GB 580s, its CUDA power is faster than
    two Titan Blacks.

    Ian.
Ask a new question

Read More

Asus Gtx Computers Video Editing Graphics