How to make Premiere CS5 work with GTX 295 and possibly all 200 GPUs

John Gerard · November 16th, 2010, 07:48 PM

Hi,

Sorry if this question has been asked before but I need to get back to editing so I don't have time to read anymore of this thread.
Has anyone compared the Gtx 470 graphics card to the Gtx 285 and the Quatro fx 3800. It looks good in the specs. I read a review that the DDR5 memory makes a big difference over DDR3 memory. The 470 has DDR5 memory and 448 CUDA cores. This seems like this might be the card for me. I wondered if it has the limitation that the GTX 285 has with only able to use CUDA on 3 video tracks?

Thanks,

John Gerard

Harm Millaard · November 17th, 2010, 05:05 AM

That limitation has long been lifted. It is no problem with 9 tracks, that I tested on a rather old and mediocre system.

David Knarr · November 17th, 2010, 12:55 PM

John, I have tested both the 470 and the 285, right now you get the same performance in Premiere CS5.

David Knarr · November 17th, 2010, 12:56 PM

Also, I wrote a small program to do the unlock or hack automatically. The program takes less than a 1/4 second to run. You can find the program in my article Adobe Premiere CS5 Video Cards with CUDA Acceleration Mercury Playback Unlock Enable Hack Mod Tip

Please make sure you read and follow the instructions under the Automatic Methhod and make sure your video card is listed.

If your have already unlocked your card and you don't see your card listed in the list of cards that the program will unlock, please email me at studio1mail@aol.com and let me know the entry you used in the cuda_supported_cards.txt file.

I will be happy to add it to the program. The program by the way, it a batch file so feel free to look at it.

John Gerard · November 17th, 2010, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harm Millaard

That limitation has long been lifted. It is no problem with 9 tracks, that I tested on a rather old and mediocre system.

Was that implemented in the latest Cs5 software update?

John Gerard

John Gerard · November 17th, 2010, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Knarr

John, I have tested both the 470 and the 285, right now you get the same performance in Premiere CS5.

I believe I read your review on line searching Google for every bit of information I can get my hands on. Very detailed and informative. But the article did state that DDR5 memory was about 40% faster than DDR3 memory in some of the tests. Am I correct in this?

John Gerard

David Knarr · November 17th, 2010, 03:23 PM

yes you are correct, the DDR5 was around 40% faster than the DDR3 memory.

However, with the 285, it was testing as fast as the 470 with DDR5 memory.

Randall Leong · November 17th, 2010, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Knarr

yes you are correct, the DDR5 was around 40% faster than the DDR3 memory.

However, with the 285, it was testing as fast as the 470 with DDR5 memory.

That is roughly as expected since the GTX 285 has a 512-bit memory bus to its DDR3 memory (versus a 320-bit DDR5 memory bus on the GTX 470).

John Gerard · November 17th, 2010, 11:10 PM

Hi,
After reading a lot of information about this subject. I decided to go with the GTX 470. I talked to the Nvidia quatro tech person over at Nvidia and for my situation he recommended first the quatro fx 4000 over the 3800 if I had the money to burn. He also uses premiere pro CS5. Then he said for a lesser priced card go with the Gtx 480. He new all about editing the INI file to get the card to be recognized. For me I told him I wanted to go with a certified card just to make sure everything is going to work. Then he said the 470 would still work well and I could render most thinks with lots of speed since I told him I am also going to upgrade memory to16GB. The GTX 470 I can get for about $277USD. I would rather spend the extra money on RAM. Right now I have a current project about 1.5 hours in length. I added just to filters. One to increase the brightness and the other to decrease the Saturation. And to remove frame blend for each clip. To render the timeline the computer basically growned to a halt. 100% CPU usage and took about 7-8 hours. I have a dual core xeon 3GHZ CPU 4GB RAM. I got to do better than that. I shouldn't have to render my files any more during editing? I started rendering my time line for the following reason...
I was getting an error where sometimes I would get no audio in some of the clips. This happens sometimes during editing and some time doing export. So I would export a file and find out that part of the AVI file did not have sound. I rendered the timeline and that seemed to fix the problem now I render the timeline before every export. Then just recently I learned that all I have to do is re interpret the problem files. But now I am not sure if I still need to render the timeline before export or not? Not to mention that with these two filters added Premiere is really slow. I usually add filters at the end of my editing just for this reason. For some reason I did not do this this time.
Now I am trying to see which manufacture of card will work the best. Most reliable in CS5. Any suggestions?
The Nvidia guy recommended PNY that he uses. I still have to check that the card will fit in my DELL case.

Thanks,

John Gerard

John Gerard · November 19th, 2010, 11:54 AM

Hi again,

I have a problem where I am exporting a 1.5-2 hour project using VirualDub/ frame server. PP CS3. I usually get 9-17fps that's about 2-4 hours to export to AVI. This is the usual time a project takes on my computer. This current export is running at 3-4fps taking an incredible 12 hours to export. The project does include 2 filters. Brightness/contrast adjustment and a filter just to turn down the color saturation. I think it is the HSL color correction filter. I just checked my computer as it is exporting in virtualDub and I was expecting to see 100% CPU usage but I only see a 50% CPU usage.. I get 100% CPU usage while rendering the timeline. I know that CUDA would pretty much eliminate this step. I just want to try to understand why it is running so slow and how I can speed this process up. I have two Seagate 500GB drives in a RAID 0. I am going to try to use WD Carver Black 640GB HDDs to see if that speeds anything up. I am considering getting a completely new system. So understanding these different issues and what part of the workflow uses what components will really allow me to tweak my new system and make a better purchase. Are there any articles that talk about this topic? I have not checked my HDD space to see if it is just that my HDD is to full. A did clear the media cache recently. My current system as this setup. One system/program drive, one separate media cache/ files drive running off of e-SATA, and 2 500 7200rpm in RAID 0.

John Gerard

Thanks,

John Gerard

Paul R Johnson · November 19th, 2010, 12:34 PM

I did this mod when it was first being talked about, and discovered that at some point, presumably when CS5 must have done an update, the list of video cards got reset - and my added card removed! I've put it back again and all is well... but for how long?

If you've done the mod, it's well worth checking if yours is still actually functioning.

John Gerard · November 22nd, 2010, 12:07 PM

Hi,
I was told to get 12GB of RAM to run cs5. I wondered if 12 is a minimum requirement. I was thinking of getting 16 GB RAM then I realized that would give me 20GB total. My computer has 8 memory slots and I have already 4 1GB chips. I was told that 4 I GIG would be faster than 2 2GB. I just thought I would ask here. I think I will start by getting 2 4GB chips to start and that will give me a total of 12GB ram. I guess I could upgrade later to another 2 4GB of RAM later if I find that my system is still to slow.

Thanks,

John Gerard

Randall Leong · November 23rd, 2010, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Gerard

Hi,
I was told to get 12GB of RAM to run cs5. I wondered if 12 is a minimum requirement. I was thinking of getting 16 GB RAM then I realized that would give me 20GB total. My computer has 8 memory slots and I have already 4 1GB chips. I was told that 4 I GIG would be faster than 2 2GB. I just thought I would ask here. I think I will start by getting 2 4GB chips to start and that will give me a total of 12GB ram. I guess I could upgrade later to another 2 4GB of RAM later if I find that my system is still to slow.

Thanks,

John Gerard

You've heard wrong, as far as four 1GB sticks. It also depends on the age of your system. And older 1GB sticks were also double-ranked - and this might cause slower performance on those systems equipped with memory controllers that work best with only two ranks of memory per channel.

And the only reason why memory modules with less-"dense" ICs are "faster" because fast higher-density IC chips are still relatively pricey even on a per-Gb (Gigabit) basis.

John Gerard · December 2nd, 2010, 05:26 PM

Hi all,
I just installed another 16GB 4 x 4GB chips to my already installed 4 x1GB chips. Windows reports 20GB AND 16GB useable. Does that sound about right? Maybe the 4GB is taken up by the graphics card interfacing with the on board RAM?

Thanks,

John Gerard

Paul Cook · December 2nd, 2010, 06:54 PM

That doesn't sound right at all - the memory you install has nothing to do with your graphics card - it sounds like an incomparability issue between the ram sticks or the motherboard. At a guess Id say you simply cannot run with that configuration of ram as generally all sticks have to be the same type and size.

November 16th, 2010, 07:48 PM	#211
John Gerard Major Player Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Berkeley, CA, USA Posts: 227	Nvidia GTX 470 Hi, Sorry if this question has been asked before but I need to get back to editing so I don't have time to read anymore of this thread. Has anyone compared the Gtx 470 graphics card to the Gtx 285 and the Quatro fx 3800. It looks good in the specs. I read a review that the DDR5 memory makes a big difference over DDR3 memory. The 470 has DDR5 memory and 448 CUDA cores. This seems like this might be the card for me. I wondered if it has the limitation that the GTX 285 has with only able to use CUDA on 3 video tracks? Thanks, John Gerard

November 17th, 2010, 11:10 PM	#219
John Gerard Major Player Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Berkeley, CA, USA Posts: 227	Which graphics card for premiere pro CS5 Hi, After reading a lot of information about this subject. I decided to go with the GTX 470. I talked to the Nvidia quatro tech person over at Nvidia and for my situation he recommended first the quatro fx 4000 over the 3800 if I had the money to burn. He also uses premiere pro CS5. Then he said for a lesser priced card go with the Gtx 480. He new all about editing the INI file to get the card to be recognized. For me I told him I wanted to go with a certified card just to make sure everything is going to work. Then he said the 470 would still work well and I could render most thinks with lots of speed since I told him I am also going to upgrade memory to16GB. The GTX 470 I can get for about $277USD. I would rather spend the extra money on RAM. Right now I have a current project about 1.5 hours in length. I added just to filters. One to increase the brightness and the other to decrease the Saturation. And to remove frame blend for each clip. To render the timeline the computer basically growned to a halt. 100% CPU usage and took about 7-8 hours. I have a dual core xeon 3GHZ CPU 4GB RAM. I got to do better than that. I shouldn't have to render my files any more during editing? I started rendering my time line for the following reason... I was getting an error where sometimes I would get no audio in some of the clips. This happens sometimes during editing and some time doing export. So I would export a file and find out that part of the AVI file did not have sound. I rendered the timeline and that seemed to fix the problem now I render the timeline before every export. Then just recently I learned that all I have to do is re interpret the problem files. But now I am not sure if I still need to render the timeline before export or not? Not to mention that with these two filters added Premiere is really slow. I usually add filters at the end of my editing just for this reason. For some reason I did not do this this time. Now I am trying to see which manufacture of card will work the best. Most reliable in CS5. Any suggestions? The Nvidia guy recommended PNY that he uses. I still have to check that the card will fit in my DELL case. Thanks, John Gerard

November 19th, 2010, 11:54 AM	#220
John Gerard Major Player Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Berkeley, CA, USA Posts: 227	CS3 vs CS5 Hi again, I have a problem where I am exporting a 1.5-2 hour project using VirualDub/ frame server. PP CS3. I usually get 9-17fps that's about 2-4 hours to export to AVI. This is the usual time a project takes on my computer. This current export is running at 3-4fps taking an incredible 12 hours to export. The project does include 2 filters. Brightness/contrast adjustment and a filter just to turn down the color saturation. I think it is the HSL color correction filter. I just checked my computer as it is exporting in virtualDub and I was expecting to see 100% CPU usage but I only see a 50% CPU usage.. I get 100% CPU usage while rendering the timeline. I know that CUDA would pretty much eliminate this step. I just want to try to understand why it is running so slow and how I can speed this process up. I have two Seagate 500GB drives in a RAID 0. I am going to try to use WD Carver Black 640GB HDDs to see if that speeds anything up. I am considering getting a completely new system. So understanding these different issues and what part of the workflow uses what components will really allow me to tweak my new system and make a better purchase. Are there any articles that talk about this topic? I have not checked my HDD space to see if it is just that my HDD is to full. A did clear the media cache recently. My current system as this setup. One system/program drive, one separate media cache/ files drive running off of e-SATA, and 2 500 7200rpm in RAID 0. John Gerard Thanks, John Gerard

November 22nd, 2010, 12:07 PM	#222
John Gerard Major Player Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Berkeley, CA, USA Posts: 227	Which graphics card for cs5 Hi, I was told to get 12GB of RAM to run cs5. I wondered if 12 is a minimum requirement. I was thinking of getting 16 GB RAM then I realized that would give me 20GB total. My computer has 8 memory slots and I have already 4 1GB chips. I was told that 4 I GIG would be faster than 2 2GB. I just thought I would ask here. I think I will start by getting 2 4GB chips to start and that will give me a total of 12GB ram. I guess I could upgrade later to another 2 4GB of RAM later if I find that my system is still to slow. Thanks, John Gerard

December 2nd, 2010, 05:26 PM	#224
John Gerard Major Player Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Berkeley, CA, USA Posts: 227	Best graphics card for CS5 Hi all, I just installed another 16GB 4 x 4GB chips to my already installed 4 x1GB chips. Windows reports 20GB AND 16GB useable. Does that sound about right? Maybe the 4GB is taken up by the graphics card interfacing with the on board RAM? Thanks, John Gerard

November 17th, 2010, 05:05 AM	#212
Harm Millaard Trustee Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands Posts: 1,832	That limitation has long been lifted. It is no problem with 9 tracks, that I tested on a rather old and mediocre system.

November 17th, 2010, 12:55 PM	#213
David Knarr Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Port Orange, FL Posts: 59	John, I have tested both the 470 and the 285, right now you get the same performance in Premiere CS5.

November 17th, 2010, 12:56 PM	#214
David Knarr Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Port Orange, FL Posts: 59	Also, I wrote a small program to do the unlock or hack automatically. The program takes less than a 1/4 second to run. You can find the program in my article Adobe Premiere CS5 Video Cards with CUDA Acceleration Mercury Playback Unlock Enable Hack Mod Tip Please make sure you read and follow the instructions under the Automatic Methhod and make sure your video card is listed. If your have already unlocked your card and you don't see your card listed in the list of cards that the program will unlock, please email me at studio1mail@aol.com and let me know the entry you used in the cuda_supported_cards.txt file. I will be happy to add it to the program. The program by the way, it a batch file so feel free to look at it.

November 17th, 2010, 03:23 PM	#217
David Knarr Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Port Orange, FL Posts: 59	yes you are correct, the DDR5 was around 40% faster than the DDR3 memory. However, with the 285, it was testing as fast as the 470 with DDR5 memory.

November 19th, 2010, 12:34 PM	#221
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,045	I did this mod when it was first being talked about, and discovered that at some point, presumably when CS5 must have done an update, the list of video cards got reset - and my added card removed! I've put it back again and all is well... but for how long? If you've done the mod, it's well worth checking if yours is still actually functioning.

December 2nd, 2010, 06:54 PM	#225
Paul Cook Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 174	That doesn't sound right at all - the memory you install has nothing to do with your graphics card - it sounds like an incomparability issue between the ram sticks or the motherboard. At a guess Id say you simply cannot run with that configuration of ram as generally all sticks have to be the same type and size.