Okay, so i've been doing getting background info about MPE...
Nvidia states that the GPU is responsible for realtime playback. Rendering is taken over by the Cuda cores on the cards.

Understood.

My question is about actual encoding times on output.
I understand, it's the CPU that is the workhorse when it comes time for encoding..

Okay, so after reading some of the nVidia promos and literature for the Quadro cards, i'm under the impression that the Quadro actually directly improves encoding time...
Is this true??

Is this the reason for difference in price?
Unless you're doing 3d modelling, why would anybody who works with PremierePro need to spend another $1000+ dollars for a card?

you can cross an ocean in a raft or a cruise liner. both get the job done. one's tested for rough waters and gives you stability, the other's unpredictable.

GTX does the job with CS5 - but the 'extra' that Quadro provides might really not affect the type of work you do. But for some pipelines the extra features are critical. Only you can make that decision.

The extra money for Quadro cards is not going to get you better performance. It may give you better stability, and it will give you better support. It could also be beneficial for other apps (AutoCad, 3DsMax, etc.) on your system, but CS5 treats the Quadro the same as the GeForce, performance wise.

Just as i thought....

Unfortunately, the nVidia site runs an encoding comparison with CPU only vs. GPU, and clearly gives the impression that the Quadro card directly speeds up encoding...

This being said, i will need to ask....
Is anybody using hardware cards for encoding speed ups???
Ones that work well with nVidia?

My primary need is for BluRay, and some Vimeo uploads...
CompressHD seems to be the one that stands out most...

Another point for the Quadro cards is that if you wish to use a 10bit monitor, you will be able to do so via the DisplayPort. As far as I know, there is no 10bit option (yet) for the Geforce cards; though it may be just a driver that implements this.