Skip to main content

Adobe CS5: 64-bit, CUDA-Accelerated, And Threaded Performance

Premiere Pro CS5 (AME Export)

Keep your eye on the numbers. Our worst AME export time in Premiere Pro CS4 was 26:03 (2 cores, no HT). The best was 8:59 (12 threads, with HT). The counterpart numbers with CS5 were 17:34 (2 cores, no HT, no CUDA) and 4:15 (12 threads, with HT, with CUDA). Obviously, this is an improvement, but we feel a bit let down, as if saying, “Well, our monthly trade deficit with China is only $35 billion instead of $45 billion.” That’s an improvement, yes, but not really the stunning win we all hoped for. The shift from 32-bit to 64-bit and all the additional memory that came with it plus the occasionally epic benefits of the Mercury Playback Engine only managed to deliver a roughly 2x benefit here.

A 2x improvement is far from the 10x gain we saw in the render test, but keep this in perspective. If you were a contractor making $300+ an hour for video production, would you pay $1,500 to cut your export time in half? In a heartbeat, right? Even at 5:27, the quad-core configuration with HT and CUDA shows a substantial improvement over our CS4 test. And to be fair, as noted earlier, we used frame doubling in our Premiere Pro test, which is why the results here are less impressive. That frame doubling work is being done in the CPU. A GPU-based acceleration would have yielded considerably faster exporting.

The upshot here is that you want at least quad-core with Hyper-Threading and you want CUDA, which means you also want CS5.

The refrain on the CPU utilization score is that if you want to look at anything more than a maxed out system doing nothing but exporting in CS5, you’d better have at least a 12-thread CPU in action. Every other configuration spent most of its time in the upper 90s.

  • reprotected
    Fermi exceeds at something finally!
    Reply
  • MAGPC
    What if I am an ATI user?.
    And Iam an ATI user !!!.
    Reply
  • IzzyCraft
    magpcWhat if I am an ATI user?.And Iam an ATI user !!!.You still get gpu acceleration just not as much =p and it would be a ATI listed on their site just like nvidia it's a limited pool.
    Reply
  • bunnyblaster
    Please increase the size of the legend. It is easy to figure out in this review since it's only two colors, however, if it is more than 2, it is hard to figure out which bar is referring to which score.

    Please consider changing the page drop-down menu to the old school drop-down menus like the other tech blogs like Anandtech and Arstech, etc.

    The interface is a little clumsy and seems to be poorly timed when I try to scroll down the drop-down menu. It often closes when I am trying to scroll to another page. Sometimes, when the page loads, it is hidden by a pop-up word ad.

    However, the article content was strong.
    Reply
  • dEAne
    I have an ATI card and still I have no problem using photoshop CS4 and premiere CS4. The thing with CS5 is that if you can't wait at all, but it is not that really long.
    Reply
  • adiomari
    why cuda and not open-cl?!!
    Reply
  • shaun_shaun
    amazing performance increase !!!!!
    Reply
  • Scott2010au
    Surely they mean the 2GB memory limit (for Win32 processes)?

    Which is one reason why the Apple Mac version is so popular (Unix/BSD can handle more per process).
    Reply
  • Why CUDA? Simply 'cause it's a mature technology.
    Reply
  • amdfangirl
    adiomariwhy cuda and not open-cl?!!
    CUDA preceded Open-Cl. Dev cycles are long and tedious. If you're going to implement something, it'll take time to show up. I honestly hope more developers decide to code for Open Cl.
    Reply