Photoshop CS5 Beta 3D won't work with some Graphic cards

I read an article from Tom's Guide today discussing the upcoming Photoshop CS5 which is now in Beta. One of the new features involves turning 2D photos into 3D. But the beta tester found that not all graphic cards can handle this new feature.

Quote:
"However, the feature requires a fairly powerful graphics card to work. The Nvidia GeForce 8400M GS in our test laptop didn’t qualify and even with the ATI Radeon HD 4600 in our test desktop rendering wasn’t fast. Adobe also suggests working in 64-bit on a PC or Mac."


I have been considering two laptops to purchase - one has the Nvidia GT 330m and the other laptop's GPU is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4650.

It occurred to me that neither of these graphic cards will necessarily be able to use this feature should I choose to upgrade to the new version which is due out this summer. It may impact my decision on what laptop to purchase.

I know this is pure conjecture, but what would you think would be the bare minimum card to use this feature given that the 4600 wasn't fast enough? Does anybody know if Adobe puts out requirements before releasing a beta software? I haven't been able to find this information, as of yet.

Thanks for any feedback you might provide.
15 answers Last reply
More about photoshop beta work graphic cards
  1. Check this link out, as it should give you an idea of what is out there in the mobile graphics card department in terms of hierarchy. They are ranked, so most of the cards in the top 10-15 should be able to handle the new feature in CS5:

    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html
  2. As I understand it Photoshop CS5 requires that the graphics card support shader model 3 as a minimum requirement.
  3. http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/photoshop/systemreqs/

    # Intel® Pentium® 4 or AMD Athlon® 64 processor

    # Microsoft® Windows® XP with Service Pack 3; Windows Vista® Home Premium, Business, Ultimate, or Enterprise with Service Pack 1 (Service Pack 2 recommended); or Windows 7

    # 1GB of RAM

    # 1GB of available hard-disk space for installation; additional free space required during installation (cannot install on removable flash-based storage devices)

    # 1024x768 display (1280x800 recommended) with qualified hardware-accelerated OpenGL graphics card, 16-bit color, and 256MB of VRAM

    # Some GPU-accelerated features require graphics support for Shader Model 3.0 and OpenGL 2.0


    http://www.thinkdigit.com/Features/A-look-at-Photoshop-CS5-DreamWeaver-CS5_4320.html

    Adobe's Creative Suite 5 will also gain the benefit of GPGPU technology, which will allow the application to utilize the computer's graphic card GPU as well for CPU intensive operations. The caveat is, that this will only be available when it's provided through NVIDIA's CUDA solution.

    http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/12/14/adobes-mercury-playback-engine-for-cs5-is-cuda-only!.aspx

    Unlike the OpenGL effects Adobe was using in Creative Suite 4, resulting in sub-optimal acceleration for some GPUs, Premiere Pro CS5 is being built using nVidia CUDA software architecture. Yes, this singlehandedly gives the Adobe CS5 market to nVidia but given the share of nVidia Quadro boards versus ATI FirePro - we can't say we're surprised.

    http://www.videoguys.com/Blog/K/CS5/Adobe+Premiere+Pro+CS5+Mercury+where+have+you+been+all+my+life/0xf637dfcf4c08ce77cf011baf3d321a24.aspx

    For the past three years, Adobe has been secretly working on what it calls the Mercury Playback Engine. The company teamed up with graphics card giant NVIDIA, using that company's multithreaded Cuda graphics architecture that uses the GPU (graphics processing unit), to significantly accelerate both previews and rendering in Premiere Pro. Unfortunately, those who would rather use ATI graphics cards don't get to share in the tremendous benefits of Mercury, but Adobe says that might change sometime in the future.
  4. Thanks so much for this information. This has changed the laptop selection for me. I am glad that I waited to purchase my laptop. I almost bought a laptop that wouldn't have worked since it wasn't a CUDA software card.

    I will keep on researching on notebookcheck.net for an acceptable card and match it up with notebooks that offer the correct video card.

    Thanks again.
  5. You still won't be able to use it, because very few 'CUDA cards' are allowed to run the Mercury playback engine, and NONE of them are on laptops.

    So you STILL can't buy one that will support it (no G200 based mobile solutions, no Fermi based solutions either, and the Quadro 3800M is NOT a Quadro 3800 Workstation equivalent).

    You will be waiting a LONG time for a laptop that will support MPE, and the rest is all OpenGL available to both ATi and nVidia cards, and then you pick your 3rd party plug-in that works best for your situation.

    Nice to actually understand and use the application instead of just cutting and pasting irrelevant articles about it. :lol:
  6. Thanks so much for clearing that up. I have been looking at Quadro M cards and checking for laptop manufacturers that build their computers using them (Lenovo, Dell, and HP are the only ones I have found so far). The configured prices were way beyond my budget, so I was about to give up on it anyway.

    My desktop is 4 years old, but I had it built to my specifications by Envision, and I still love it. I will have to see if I can add an appropriate card to it. Four years is a long time in the computing business, though; so I am not going to get my hopes up.

    It seems strange to me that Adobe would create a platform that would make most of Nvidia's graphic cards irrelevant, when that's who they have alligned themselves with in this new partnership. I guess desktop Quadro cards are what they are marketing.

    Thanks so much for the clarification. I can quit wasting my time now trying to find a laptop that will function with all of the new CS5 features.
  7. Just to update what the GreatGrapeApe said. Here are the video cards that will work with all of the new features:

    Supported NVIDIA graphics cards for GPU acceleration:

    * Quadro CX (Windows)
    * Quadro FX 3800 (Windows)
    * Quadro FX 4800 (Windows and Mac OS)
    * Quadro FX 5800 (Windows)
    * GeForce GTX 285 (Windows and Mac OS)

    And my desktop will not meet the requirements (heavy sigh). I appreciate all the feedback I received. It saved me $1500.
  8. Well it's no stranger than they locked some CS4 benefits to the Quadro and FireGL cards previously. They don't cater to the casual market of the entry-level pro-sumer with a T2i/550D APS-C camera that want's to get the most bang for their buck. They want you to pay the price, and be the Medium format 7D and above type user that will splash for a higher end rig.

    The funny thing is looking at some of the testing where even low level low layer count models are requiring more than 12GB of memory. Far from the most efficient use of resources I've seen, but feature rich enough to make you not care.

    Focus mainly on the functions you need, everything work in CPU mode as well, and often well too, so until their support broadens, I would get the most powerful CPU, and the most memory and the fastest HDDs/SSDs you can get for now. Other than that you want as mentioned PS3.0 (DX9.0C) and OpenGL 2.0 or above support.

    I would recommend something like the mobile versoins of the GTS250 or above and the HD4770 and above. I personally prefer the HD5K series feature wise, but tey don't offer anything extra/less right now for CS5, and really the CPU and RAM will be the most important things for now IMO, and so I would definitely focus on getting a Corei7-QM series CPU (Q820M is my price/performance fav) more than a GPU.
  9. I was a beta tester on Photoshop CS5-two PCs-low and high performance. My experience with low end PC-Nvidia 7800GT-was good. Granted, it was far better with y 280GTX, but that is not a shock. In addition, I am running an SSHD to boot up sware on the high end, and a basic 7200x WD Cavier on low. The older machine with Vista SP2 as an OS performed well.

    Two things to note:
    1) Adobe went a long way to make sure that the majority of good cards released in the past 2+ years can use all functionality with PS, although PS-Ex may vary. Check on specs with Adobe as I am still under NDA for a few weeks.
    2
  10. Yes they all have access to the Mercury Playback Engine, but only the Desktop cards have access to GPU acceleration, and that does make some things faster, but 2 out of 3 acceleration features are done on any supported OpenGL 2.0 hardware.

    And yes the 64bit platform was an early push (long before the CUDA component was tacked-on), and really considering the content you're working with it just makes sense really. And considering how memory hoggish it can be I'd hate to be stuck on 3.4 GB.
  11. The Great Grape is right if you are a creative professional and plan to use PS-EX and other Adobe Creative Suite 3D functionality. Any of Adobes new pro line will slow things down-markedly. The issue of cards is more complicated that what cattypurry has stated. However, you get what ya paid for. Slow machine-less function. My fast sys worked fine with everything. Even the Merc engine and browser lab. Note-I would not want to run this program on my slower machine. The 64 bit matter is clearly part of their game plan and they want to get the market moving in this direction, but it's a major play.

    Adobe is selling Photoshop with the following requirements -not realistic at this level. Suprising.
    Win-Mac
    512 Mb Mem-nuts On the PS website today-different from below
    2 Gig HD space
    CPU-1.6 Gigs-this is unrealistic

    Compair my machines-both ran PS , but the faster was a much better performer. 8 Gigs ram, a high end vid card and a speedy CPU makes it a nice ride.
    1) Fast Machine
    Intel i7-960
    8 Gigs Ram
    Nvidia GTX 285
    Win7-U

    2) Slow Boat
    Intel P D 3.0
    2 Gig-R
    Nvidia 7800GT
    Win Vista Biz
  12. Before you buy a new card, try to go to Edit> preferences> performance and then select Enable Open Gl.


    Because photoshopCS5 works fine with my computer. And I really have an old one .
    It's a Pentium 4, 3.40 GHz
    Ram 3 mb DDR2
    My videocard is an old GeForce 6610 XL, 128 mb,
    marja
  13. Quote:
    ..videocard is an old GeForce 6610 XL, 128 mb


    Sorry Marja, but your are incorrect in your recommendation. Adobe and experince with PSCS5 during beta are on my side. You can drive a Mini in a Formula 1 race, but when most are finishing, you will be on lap 5. And, this Mini has 150,00 miles on it. Threes thing make PS crank. A fast CPU-GPU and loads of RAM. Your CPU is losing clock-speed. The GPU is 50% below minimuns for PS. And, 3 Gigs ram aint much for PSCS5. A filter set-Pixelbender was released last week. Super cool, but your machine would not be able to load, let alone run it.

    Technically, a 6610XL cannot run much more than "Essentials" in PS. Your PC is running out of legs. If serious about PS-get a new sys. Replacing a the vid card will not clear up your problem. The absolute floor is a 256 MB Vid-card and that is a slow performer. In addition, it will put a huge stress load on an old machine. You may be able to run the basic functionality, but you are paying a good deal for software that your machine can't handle. You may not be aware of the capabilities that do not work but you will miss many. I emailed a friend in Adobe's PS Program office today. Can you run the basics? Sure, but you are putting an old PC in a tough spot. During the beta, I ran both PS and PS-EX on three machines. On PC 1, a good deal of functionality either did not appear, or ran and ran and ran and died... Huge difference when I ran it on 2. Discernably so and on 3-off the charts performance.

    If PS matters to you, try a new machine. Otherwise, buy PS Elements or try PS.com- online version of Elements with fewer capibilites, but its free. A bit on the cheap and cheesy side but does the basic job. Consider the below specs-->> condiser buying a new PC. You are past due. :bounce:

    1) Win Vista Biz OS-32 bit
    Intel P D-(3.0 Gigs)
    Nvidia 780-GTX
    4 Gigs Ram

    2) Win7 U OS-64
    Intel i-7 960 OCed (3+Gigs x 8 cores)
    Nvidia GTX 280 x2
    8 Gigs Ram

    3) Win7 U OS-64
    Intel xeon x2
    Nvidia Quatro X2
    12 Gigs ram
    ** New PC??. Vid-cards in the $200 area will do the trick. Get a speedy new i-7 920-960 CPU and add-min of 4 Gigs ram. Try 6
  14. Just FYI, there is a hack out there to enable MPE on some other 'non-supported' CUDA cards, but the GF6 series is definitely NOT among those (lowest is GF8600, but it does little, need at least GF9800), so that GF6 series, as buzzyone mentioned, would only use the same OGL acceleration as the others (ATi, intel, nV & S3).

    The interesting thing is that a really nice CPU is looking to give far better overall benefit to 2 or less simultaneous video layers and only a really big boost in AVCHD.

    But for 4 layers, it makes a huge difference to get even a GTS250, but most worthwhile to get a GTX260 or better (alot of VRAM also helps when choosing a card for this task).
  15. if I understand this correctly my new machine would have to have the following to work well with PSCS5;

    I7-930
    Intel MB X58X0
    150GB HD 10K RPM
    1TG HD
    NVIDIA G-Force 9800w/1GB DDR3 Card
    Window 7 Pro 64 bit

    Is this enough to get things rocking a little?
Ask a new question

Read More

Laptops Photoshop 3D