GPU Cards for PS6 & LR

Tested video cards for Photoshop CS6
"Adobe tested the following video cards before the release of Photoshop CS6 . This document lists the video card by series. While the minimum amount of VRAM supported on video cards for Photoshop CS6 is 256MB, some features require 512MB of VRAM to be enabled."
nVidia GeForce 8000, 9000, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500 series
nVidia Quadro 400, 600, 2000, 4000 (Mac & Win), CX, 5000, 6000
AMD/ATI Radeon 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, 7000 series
AMD/ATI FirePro 3800, 4800, 5800, 7800, 8800, 9800, 3900, 4900, 5900, 7900
Intel Intel HD Graphics, Intel HD Graphics P3000, Intel HD Graphics P4000
Which is preferred nVidia or ATI???
2000-PB Quadro 2000 what others would be a better option keeping similar price points???
Also the GeForce series listed are old now compared to the new 600-series. Not sure how much diff it would make for adobe CSS if, for example, you got a GTX670 vs the quadro 2000 vs a GTX570, for example.

I am sure they will all run as they are in the Adobe Tested list… I don't know which I prefer as I can't get any relevant PS6 data to compare.
Does anyone know where we can get a comparison of the performance of these cards for PS6? Contacted adobe and they say they don't have the data..........Didn't they test the cards?
I don't see how providing official bench marks, data tables or just grouping the cards into entry level, amateur, home office, pro, and high end commercial. Is biased if it is raw performance data.
They range in price from a few hundred dollars to over $10,000. There must be a level that will suit most professional small business photographers vs high end advertising professionals.
Which Geforce is comparable to what Qudro or why are they different pros n cons. etc etc
I am considering the nVidia Quadro 2000 which has 1Gb on board.
Wondering which cards are comparable price vs performance wise? Or what benefits this or others have to each other.
I have learn't heaps through research and forums. I have updated my spec but the one grey area is still this GPU.
I don't want to spend $5-600 on a Quadro2000 if it could have been done with a gamer card for half the price. Nor do I want to spend that money and find the Quadro2000 is an expensive paper weight I need a Quadro4000.
In other words money is very tight and I don't want to blow it on excessive or under performing gear.
I don't know how these cards perform to even choose between the similar items per brand. Obviously some will give you "better band for buck" depending on what work your doing.
Me I will be working on large raw files and doing Digital compositions with many layers etc. But I am a one man business trying to get started after working at commercial studios.

Similar Messages

GPU Recommendations for PS6?

Hi,
I'm in the process of looking at building a new PC. I'm a web designer and most of my day is spent in Photoshop, majority of it is for website design so I rarely use huge canvases or photos etc. Looking for recommendations for a graphics card that will be fine for PS6 and run smoothly, I'm just not sure how much I'll need to spend to do this and I don't want overspend on a card when it's spec is way OTT for use for in Photoshop. I don't play any games or anything so that doesn't need to be considered when choosing one.
Thanks,
Chris

Usually a card in the $60-100 range will work. Get the 1g VRAM option.
Here is a link to benchmark tests. Anything near 1000 is all you need for PS. A lesser card will work if you are not into huge demands for editing.
The key to having it work well is the drivers. So advise staying with ATI and Nvidia as they seem to be the main players in keeping them up to date.
PS does not use CUDA.

GPU Card for Photoshop CC

I am about to buy a new computer to use with Photoshop CC and find that the GPU card (NVIDA G 635) is not listed among those that are compatible. Will that card still provide the acceleration that I need?

Here is a link for cards. Try to get a card that has a rating above 700? Anything around 1000 is good. If you go to high you may not get too much increased performance, but you will see a hit to your pocketbook.
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/
Hope this helps.

Premiere CS5 - Graphics cards for GPU acceleration

Hello everyone
In the system requirements under "Supported NVIDIA graphics cards for GPU acceleration" are the following graphics cards listed:
     GeForce GTX285
     GeForce GTX470
why are only these two GeForce Cards supported?
Why are the other NVIDIA cards like
     GTX460
     GTX480
     GTX560
     GTX570
     GTX580
not listed?
What about support of SLI configuration?
What is better, a 2 x GTX470 configuration or a single GTX580 ?
Thanks for your responses in advance.
Regards
Urs

The guys at Studio One did some tests and wrote this interesting article:
http://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5.htm
It seems that the RAM speed (DDR5 v/s DDR3) is more relevant than any other factor...
The GTX 470 has more cuda cores than a lot of the more expensive cards... go figure?!

GPU Acceleration Cards For Premiere Pro CS5

Hello:
I am ready to invest in a GPU accelerated graphics card that will speed up playback and use the Mercury Playback Engine in GPU mode.
From what I could find on the Adobe site, these are the cards that are supported for Premiere Pro CS5
Supported NVIDIA video cards for GPU acceleration (CS5):
GeForce GTX 285 (Windows and Mac OS)
GeForce GTX 470 (Windows)
Quadro 4000 (Windows and Mac OS)
Quadro 5000 (Windows)
Quadro 5000M (Windows)
Quadro FX 3800 (Windows)
Quadro FX 4800 (Windows and Mac OS)
Quadro FX 5800 (Windows)
Quadro CX
Can anyone give me a recommendation from your own experience? Is the list of cards above still valid?
Thanks,
Rich Locus

So... before I go out and spend $650 on a GeForce GTX 680, it is this simple to make it work in CS5?
Yes.
(1) Make sure the card has at least 1GB of VRAM (which the GTX 680 has).
(2) Edit the cuda_supported_cards.txt to add one line: GeForce GTX 680 (starting in column 1)
(3) Install the card?
Do step 3 before step 2.
Also, you can simply delete the cuda_supported_cards.txt file
and achieve the same result.
Will Premiere Pro recognize that I have the card and immediately take advantage of the GPU capabilities, or do I have to change options?
You will need to specify:
"MPE GPU Acceleration" in your Project Settings:
If you do not have a supported card (or have not applied the hack),
this option will be greyed out.

I am trying to find out the proper graphic card for mac.

I am trying to find out the proper graphic card for imac. The graphic card which is mentioned in the web sit, that Graphic Card is not available in the open market. In open market NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M is available and this card is not mentioned in web site. So please help to select a proper suitable GPU.

Are they supportable for After Effects ray-traced 3d renderer.
I am confused because adobe recommended on the following graphic card.
Mac OS
GeForce GTX 285
GeForce GTX 675MX
GeForce GTX 680
GeForce GTX 680MX
GeForce GT 650M
Quadro CX
Quadro FX 4800
Quadro 4000
Quadro K5000

GPU notes for Lightroom CC (2015)

Hi everyone,
I wanted to share some additional information regarding GPU support in Lr CC.
Lr can now use graphics processors (GPUs) to accelerate interactive image editing in Develop. A big reason that we started here is the recent development and increased availability of high-res displays, such as 4K and 5K monitors. To give you some numbers: a standard HD screen is 2 megapixels (MP), a MacBook Retina Pro 15" is 5 MP, a 4K display is 8 MP, and a 5K display is a whopping 15 MP. This means on a 4K display we need to render and display 4 times as many pixels as on a standard HD display. Using the GPU can provide a significant speedup (10x or more) on high-res displays. The bigger the screen, the bigger the win.
For example, on my test system with a 4K display, adjusting the White Balance and Exposure sliders in Lightroom 5.7 (without GPU support) is about 5 frames/second -- manageable, but choppy and hard to control. The same sliders in Lightroom 6.0 now run smoothly at 60 FPS.
So why doesn't everything feel faster?
Well, GPUs can be enormously helpful in speeding up many tasks. But they're complex and involve some tradeoffs, which I'd like to take a moment to explain.
First, rewriting software to take full advantage of GPUs is a lot of work and takes time. Especially for software like Lightroom, which offers a rich feature set developed over many years and release versions. So the first tradeoff is that, for this particular version of Lightroom, we weren't able to take advantage of the GPU to speed up everything. Given our limited time, we needed to pick and choose specific areas of Lightroom to optimize. The area that I started with was interactive image editing in Develop, and even then, I didn't manage to speed up everything yet (more on this later).
Second, GPUs are marvelous at high-speed computation, but there's some overhead. For example, it takes time to get data from the main processor (CPU) over to the GPU. In the case of high-res images and big screens, that can take a LOT of time. This means that some operations may actually take longer when using the GPU, such as the time to load the full-resolution image, and the time to switch from one image to another.
Third, GPUs aren't best for everything. For example, decompressing sequential bits of data from a file -- like most raw files, for instance -- sees little to no benefit from a GPU implementation.
Fourth, Lightroom has a sophisticated raw processing pipeline (such as tone mapping HDR images with Highlights and Shadows), and running this efficiently on a GPU requires a fairly powerful GPU. Cards that may work with in the Photoshop app itself may not necessarily work with Lightroom. While cards that are 4 to 5 years old may technically work, they may provide little to no benefit over the regular CPU when processing images in Lr, and in some cases may be slower. Higher-end GPUs from the last 2 to 3 years should work better.
So let's clear up what's currently GPU accelerated in Lr CC and what's not:
First of all, Develop is the only module that currently has GPU acceleration whatsoever. This means that other functions and modules, such as Library, Export, and Quick Develop, do not use the GPU (performance should be the same for those functions regardless of whether you have GPU enabled or disabled in the prefs).
Within Develop, most image editing controls have full GPU acceleration, including the basic and tone panel, panning and zooming, crop and straighten, lens corrections, gradients, and radial filter. Some controls, such as local brush adjustments and spot clone/heal, do not -- at least, not yet.
While the above description may be disappointing to some of you, let's be clear: This is the beginning of the GPU story for Lightroom, not the end. The vision here is to expand our use of the GPU and other technologies over time to improve performance. I know that many photographers have been asking us for improved performance for a long time, and we're trying to respond to that. Please understand this is a big step in that direction, but it's just the first step. The rest of it will take some time.
Summary:
1. GPU support is currently available in Develop only.
2. Most (but not all) Develop controls benefit from GPU acceleration.
3. Using the GPU involves some overhead (there's no free lunch). This may make some operations take longer, such as image-to-image switching or zooming to 1:1. Newer GPUs and computer systems minimize this overhead.
4. The GPU performance improvement in Develop is more noticeable on higher-resolution displays such as 4K. The bigger the display, the bigger the win.
5. Prefer newer GPUs (faster models within the last 3 years). Lightroom may technically work on older GPUs (4 to 5 years old) but likely will not benefit much. At least 1 GB of GPU memory. 2 GB is better.
6. We're currently investigating using GPUs and other technologies to improve performance in Develop and other areas of the app going forward.
The above notes also apply to Camera Raw 9.0 for Photoshop/Bridge CC.
Eric Chan
Camera Raw Engineer

I posted the following information on the Luminous Landscape forum (GPU used in Develop but not Library?) in response to comments you made there.
I am very puzzled by the extremely blurry image in the second screen capture when the GPU is enabled.
OS X (10.9.5)
Hardware configuration:
   MacPro (late 2013)
   AMD FirePro D300 2048 MB
   Apple Cinema Display 1920 x 1200
   16 GB RAM
   1 TB SSD
Test file: Nikon D800 NEF, 50 MB
(0) open the Develop module
(1) select a different NEF file and zoom to 1:1
(2) clear the ACR cache
(3) select the test file
(4) take 3 screenshots to illustrate the 3 display states (the first one is hard to capture)
(5) select another image
(6) same 3 states are present
(7) return to the test file and the same 3 display states are present
   Why isn’t the ACR cache coming into play in step 7?
If I repeat this process with the GPU disabled the image is displayed without the intermediate states.
I have attached the 3 screenshots mentioned in step (4).

Inexpensive Dual-DVI video card for Cubase 6.5 & Adobe Premiere CS6, on Win7x64

I need a card for both and I can't find one that is "approved" for both. Is anyone using these two programs together? I'm currently using a pair of ATI FireGL V3350 cards that, so far, play video fine in Premiere (haven't done any editing or AE yet) but not in Cubase 6. I'm not a pro so a high end card would be lost on me. An inexpensive card that can handle standard editing in Premiere with some AE, no advanced 3-D (titles only?), and will also play video in Cubase 6.5 is what I'm looking for.
Thanks in advance

hello, @ MD: this should be fun: i use Reason7
in the general forum there is a thread about mulitple monitors
some of the PPRO users here might get a kick out of this as well and/or have comments/advice
here is most of it:
CELTICDALE:
Hi! I`ve been using 3 screens for 7-8 years on 4 different systems.
This solution works on any system I can think of, laptop or desktop.
Matrox TripleHead2Go (Digital Edition) (TH2Go)
It works by splitting the signal from 1 DVI or VGA port to 3 screens.
I just bougt a GTX690 which have 3 DVI ports, but I only use 1 with
the TH2Go because it works perfect without any hassle. The beauty
of it, compared to what others are suggesting, is that you can use
this whith whatever system you have, and you don`t have to by a new
solution (graphics card) if you upgrade. It`s external, so you can
easily move it to another computer. There are no fans and it gets
power from a USB port and use almost no power compared to an extra
gfx card. I also still have to free ports from my GTX690, allowing
me to add 2 more screens if I want.
If you hook it up to a laptop, you can use the laptop screen + up to 3
extra screens. I can run this on an 8 year old laptop I have, with no problems..
People who are suggesting that DVI is getting phased out, are wrong.
The worlds newest and fastest single GPU highend card comes with
2 DVI ports (GTX780, and is released tomorrow)
When I travel, it fits easily inside my laptop bag. Only thing I need
extra is the cables and adapters to hook up to different types of ports.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815106011
http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/pr...connect_video/
The only way to go in my opinion...
Good luck!
PS. There are different models, with HDMI also, but I reccommend the
model I linked to, as you can just go with adapter if you want to
connect to HDMI and don`t need to send sound to the screen. In the
rare cases I connect sound to the screen, I just use a minijack cable.
But of cource, you know best what you need..
hope this helps in some way, cheers, j

Graphics Card for Xserv G5

Please help!
Apple can't.....
We have a G5 Xserv, that we desparately need a Graphics Card for. Apple say they can't supply it (their most useful suggestion was to buy one of the new core-duo machines as they ship with a graphics card as standard!).
Xserv G5
2GHz PowerPC G5
2GB DDR400 ECC SDRAM - 2x1GB
1000GB ADM (2x500GB Serial ATA)
I believe we need a PCI-X card?
Any ideas where I can get one or what the alternatives are? It can be a very basic card - nothing hardcore required in terms of graphics performance. If it could only draw the desktop in black and white, it would do!
Thoughts?
Xserv G5/2Ghz G5 Mac OS X (10.4.8)

The Radeon 7000 PCI card is based on the same GPU that Apple once shipped as the BTO Xserve video option - ATI RV100 - so it is worth a try.
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/DeveloperNotes/Servers/XserveG5/2Architecture/chapter_3_section7.html
Any basic ATI should be supported by the OS because ATI was Apple's default video provider for much of this time period.
Note that using a PCI video card will limit the speed of any PCI-X cards you also have installed, but that shouldn't effect your actual performance probably.
=Tod
G5/2.0x2, Dual XServes x2, XRAID, beige G3 501Mhz

Better video cards for the new 8-core Mac Pro...?

I don't know a ton about video cards. I did some research and the internet says that the Nvidia GeForce GTX 295 video card is the best card out right now. Will it work in the 8-core macpro? If not, or if it's not the best, what is the best video card that will work in the 8-core macpro?
P.S.
Does anyone know how to tell exactly whether a video card is better from another? I mean I can guess a video card at 1792MB is going to be better then one at 512MB, but I've also heard that, for example, the ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB is better then the NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB, and apple charges more for it so it probably is better, but all that tells me is the name of the cards, and that they are both at 512MB, so from that without any other information I would assume they're exactly the same just made by different companies, but there must be some other details that would explain why it's better right? Thanks in advance

Well I found out the Quadro FX 4800 works on it, that looks pretty good.
It's a good card, but it has a different application focus.
What applications do you use?
Answering that helps determine what the best card is.
The 5800 is better though, will it work?
Better, how?
The spec's read better?
How about real world performance?
Benchmarks?
They are very similar in shape and such.
Shape has little to do with anything.
The ROM is the key.
If the card is not produced as "OS X compatible", it does not have Mac ROM and cannot be used.
If there is a Mac edition that is similar (same GPU series, similar architecture) the ROM may be flashed to Mac ROM.
Especially in Geforce cards, the ability to edit ROMs and even write portions of the ROM is necessary to be able to flash a card.
Even then, no guarantees.
Often a port on a flashed card won't work after flashing.
Seems the 5800 has a 10 bit display port, so if the card were flashable, the display port wouldn't work.
The ROM chip size of a card is also of concern.
Many cards require either a new, larger ROM chip to accept the Mac ROM (soldering), or, require a hacked, "reduced" ROM to be written to allow flash.
Invariably, there will be some feature loss with a reduced ROM, but a good hacker usually gets rid of superfluous stuff.
Cards with more VRAM than the Mac counterpart will often times lose the extra VRAM- it won't be read by OS X.
Then there is the EFI question, which often creates a final stumbling block for converting a card.
There are many pioneers who flash cards.
If a card is flashable, it has already been done.
The Quadro 4500, 4800, and 5600 have all been worked out.
As of yet, the 5800 hasn't been sussed out for flash (as far as I can find).
Flashing the card is easy.
Finding a physically compatible card and a compatible ROM are the hard parts.
The two best retail cards for the Mac Pro are the Geforce GTX 285 and the Radeon HD 4870.

GPU heatsink for 8710w with FX 3600

Hi
My laptop p/n is KE191EA#AK8
I'm looking for a GPU heatsink for my laptop, the old one has 1 broken heatpipe and it gets quite hot.
HP Tech support personnel keep repeating the same message over and over again.
"The correct part number is 450594-001"
This part is the incorrect one, there is no doubt about it. I ordered the **bleep** part and it is not the same as the original. There are two key differences. The first one is that there is only a single heatpipe, my machine runs too hot with the current one heatpipe configuration. The second difference is that the plate that is pushed against the chips is different, and it won't cover all of the chips.
Replacing the part with that one could cause permanent damage to my computer, so I'm not going to even try using it.
(Sorry if I'm a bit frustrated, but I've been over this matter 5 times now..)
What is the correct part, anyone please!?
My laptop has the FX 3600 GPU if that makes any difference.

How do you plan on using a PCIe card with a laptop? Via a Thunderbolt PCIe adapter? I can't help with that. In fact, I didn't think those adapters were even out yet.
I do have a Mac Pro and I use the NVDIA Quadro 4000 For Mac. This works great for Premiere Pro. As good as the 4800 and for less money. Check out this comparison.
http://barefeats.com/wst10g11.html

Anyone know if After Effects supports the Navida GTX750 graphics card for ray-tracing?

Anyone know if After Effects supports the Navida GTX750 graphics card for ray-tracing?

All GPUs supported for GPU acceleration of the ray-traced 3D renderer are listed in the system requirements:
System requirements | After Effects

Will 3rd party graphics card for MacPro1.1?

Hello, all! ^^
I'm looking for a replacement graphics card for my MacPro 1.1 and now narrowing down to:
NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT or 8800 GT now.
I'm looking at used ones now and wondering if 3rd party cards with those chipset above will work or,
if it has to be exactly Nvidia Geforce cards.
Can anyone help, please?
Thanks! ^^

Upgrade OS X to Snow Leopard and replace the GPU with Apple's ATI 5770.
Upgrading to Snow Leopard
You can purchase Snow Leopard through the Apple Store: Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard - Apple Store (U.S.). The price is $19.99 plus tax. You will be sent physical media by mail after placing your order.
After you install Snow Leopard you will have to download and install the Mac OS X 10.6.8 Update Combo v1.1 to update Snow Leopard to 10.6.8 and give you access to the App Store. Access to the App Store enables you to download Mountain Lion if your computer meets the requirements.
     Snow Leopard General Requirements
       1. Mac computer with an Intel processor
       2. 1GB of memory
       3. 5GB of available disk space
       4. DVD drive for installation
       5. Some features require a compatible Internet service provider;
           fees may apply.
       6. Some features require Apple’s iCloud services; fees and
           terms apply.
Upgrading to Lion
If your computer does not meet the requirements to install Mountain Lion, it may still meet the requirements to install Lion.
You can purchase Lion by contacting Customer Service: Contacting Apple for support and service - this includes international calling numbers. The cost is $19.99 (as it was before) plus tax. It's a download. You will get an email containing a redemption code that you then use at the Mac App Store to download Lion. Save a copy of that installer to your Downloads folder because the installer deletes itself at the end of the installation.
     Lion System Requirements
       1. Mac computer with an Intel Core 2 Duo, Core i3, Core i5, Core i7,
           or Xeon processor
       2. 2GB of memory
       3. OS X v10.6.6 or later (v10.6.8 recommended)
       4. 7GB of available space
       5. Some features require an Apple ID; terms apply.

Which ATI GPU cards offer higher color Gamut?

I have decided to put an DDR5 ATI card in my new Win7-64 build for editing photographs, compositing, etc. As I have used nVidia up to now I am unfamiliar with the ATI lines.
I have looked at both discussions here and the ATI site, but it isn't clear which cards will best drive my ASUS higher-gamut monitor. I have to build a new system right now. (Willl not overclock a i7-3770 or use two GPU cards linked with Crossfire. No plans for any gaming.) I would also like to keep this part of the build at a couple hundred or less. I saw that FirePro boards range a lot higher than Radeon, which I realize is gaming-oriented.
I hope to get DVI and Displayport as outputs. I use two 24" monitors, and the older unit can accept only DVI (or VGA, which I would avoid.)
Any thoughts about the current ATI line for higher gamut?
Thanks, in advance.
jonathan7007

Thank you Chris. You offer a lot of help here. this was a quick response.
So I should ask the question a different way. Are the FirePro cards' set up, chipsets etc., more helpful to everyday Photoshop work than Radeon cards with the same amount of memory?
No 3D or video work for me. Just photo editing. Use of layers.
There are $375 FirePro cards i could stretch to buy... but what do these boards/chipsets offer for the extra scratch? ATI' site is vague quantifying this.
jonathan7007

What Exactly are the Benefits of More GPU RAM for PP, AE, PS ?

What benefit is there to having, say 4gb GPU RAM over 2gb ?
I have read numerous conflicting, and perhaps misguided, claims regarding when/why one would rather have a graphics card with more than 2gb RAM.
Does this impact effects render, multiple monitor resolution, CUDA, Mercury Playback Engine performance, other areas, etc. and how?
Thanks for your response.
A Ajar

2GB of video ram is more than enough for the Hardware MPE engine and 1080 media with effects. Essentially the greater the ram space on the video card the greater ram caching available for the Cuda acceleration to buffer data ready for GPU processing. The Application memory management ie caching profiles though effect this based on each codec and resolution ie data per frame. However along with this you have to have enough system ram to create the buffers used to cache the data down to the GPU ram since that data shadows down for GPU processing and then back again for final encoding. This means that not configuring enough system ram will limit the amount of GPU ram used. Hence why you want atleast 16GB of ram for HD and the hardware MPE engine. 3GB+ ram spaces on video cards are for 2K to 4K + frame sizes ie R3D and Raw/CinemaDng. This is because the data per frame multiplies significantly when at 4K resolution. This require far greater ram space which is why you look for the 3GB+ ram space cards for those workflows. The Effect data will also increase because there is far mroe resolution data to alter. This is on top of the drawing out data which is what you see on the screen. That is when the differences for the cards show.
Eric
ADK

GPU Cards for PS6 & LR

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for