GTX 680 to be adobe certified?

I have two GTX 680s, and subscribed to creative cloud to take advatnage of these SLI'd badboys....
No software as far as I know lets me use the cuda cores... Question;
if they will, when?
How do I set it up if it already is supported?
will i see a big difference?
I'm running;
i7 2600k - liquid cooled
16GB RAM
2TB scratch disk in RAID 0
SLI GTX 680 x2
2 27" monitors in 1080P

use the nVidia Hack http://forums.adobe.com/thread/629557 - which is a simple entry in a "supported cards" file
Adobe does not support SLI... and it may, in fact, cause problems
Dual Card SLI http://forums.adobe.com/thread/872941
-problem http://forums.adobe.com/thread/872103

Similar Messages

Adobe CS 5.5 Nvidia GTX 680 Support with Mercury Playback Engine

Ok, so I was all set to buy a new EVGA GTX 580, and now for the same price I can buy the brand new GTX 680.
Is there anyone here that has tried the GTX 680 to see if PP MBE will support the GTX 680? Of course the Adobe website doesnt mention that they explicitly support the GTX 680 but I'm wondering if it works anyway.
And if it isn;t supported now, I hope its safe to assume its coming with CS6. Anyone have any ideas?
Thanks!
Chris

So as i understand this means the card is "unsupported" but that doesnt concern me. To me that basically says Adobe hasnt "certified " the comatibility. So i guess my real question is I'm using rhis in a professional environment , and I'm always most concerned about stability
If the simple hack makes it work thats fine, I guess Im really looking for somone that has made sure the Gtx 680 works without creating problems with Premiere stability
Chris

Adobe's site not showing Nvidia GTX 680 as officially supported

Hi everyone, ( July 9, 2012 )
Planning a new system, and I KNOW that the Nvidia GTX 680 is indeed working with PP CS6 and earlier, but I just checked Adobe's site, and there
is not even a hint of the Nvidia GTX 680 being a supported card.
Adobe link to officially supported cards: http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere/tech-specs.html
Any reason why ? Do they need elaborate testing on it, before they can "officially" add it to the list ?
I just want to make 100% certain the Nvidia 680 is indeed OK to purchase.
Thanks !
now I'll duck some bullets, because this question has prob been asked before.
Dave.

>need elaborate testing
Yes
The official list is ALWAYS behind new cards
http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotraining/2011/02/cuda-mercury-playback-engine-and-adobe- premiere-pro.html
Scroll down to Why are only some video cards supported?

When or is it possible that Media Encoder and Encore will get GTX 680 CUDA support?

...and will it really make a difference?
Ive got the Creative Cloud deal, so my software is up to date (CS6) as of 8/16/12, and after installing my new GTX 680 4GB card and enabling it in Premiere and After Effects, I see a nice performance gain over my older GTX 550 ti 1.5GB.
When I drop a finished H.264 Blu-ray file into a sequence and export it from Premiere into AME, my graphics card shows about 40-60% regular usage throughout the encoding, no matter what format I am exporting to. But if I just drop the same original H.264 file into AME and set it to the exact same encode output preset, then the graphics card is not used at all.
Also, when you run GPUSniffer in the Encore program folder, you can see that it will not accept this card for GPU utilization. Ive looked all around for the Encore list of cards database it is pulling from, and Ive concluded that it must be in a compiled DLL file, so unlike Premiere, you cant modify it to detect the GPU. AME does not have either the list of supported cards or the GPUSniffer program in its program folder, so both of these programs will need the GTX 680 added to its list of supported cards by Adobe directly with an update, like they did with After Effects CS6.
I can only imagine that transcoding in either programs would benefit from CUDA accelleration, like a few other transcoding apps out there already use.
If Adobe is listening, the #1 thing I (all of us?) want in CS6 is for all transcoding products (Premiere direct export & projects, After Effects, Media Encoder direct file import, Encore) to utilize GTX 670 680 and 690 cards for accelleration out of the box. I dont want to use some 3rd party transcoder to get GPU aided transcoding, I want my CS6 Master Collection to be able to do it. Not too much to ask right?

Hi, I have written a 'proof-of-concept' (i.e. unsupported beta) NVidia H264-encoder plugin for Adobe Premeire Pro CS6. If you are interested in trying it, go the following forum-post:http://forums.adobe.com/message/5458381
Couple of notes:
(0) GPU requirement: NVidia "Kepler" GPU or later (desktop GTX650 or higher, laptop GT650M or higher.) The plugin uses the new dedicated hardware-encoder (NVENC) introduced with the 2012 Kepler GPU.
(1) the "ideal" best-case speedup (over Mainconcept H264) is roughly 4-5x on a consumer desktop PC (single-socket PC, Intel i5-3570K). Naturally actual results vary on the source-video/render.
(2) Interlaced video encoding is NOT supported. (I couldn't get this to work; I think it's a GPU-driver issue.)
(3) Only uncompressed PCM-audio is supported (no AAC/AC-3 audio.) Also, multiplexing is limited to MPEG-2 TS. If you want to generate *.MP4 files, you'll need to do your own offline postprocessing outside of Adobe.
(4) In terms of picture-quality (artifacts, compression efficiency), NVidia hardware (GPU) encoding is still inferior to software-only solutions (such as Mainconcept or x264.)
In short, don't expect the NVENC-plugin to replace software-encoding any time soon. It's not a production-quality product. And even if it were, software-encoding still has a place in a real workflow; until consumer hardware-GPU encoding can match the video-quality of the Mainconcept encoder, you'll still be using Mainconcept to do your final production video renders.
cuda is meant for general computing including encoding.
if you performe h246 encoding using cuda on gtx680 it can be done 1 minutes for a video that takes 90 minutes on i7 cpu.
At that speed, the output of the hardware-encoder would be so poor, the video may as well be disposable. NVENC is NOT faster than Intel Quicksync; actually Quicksync can be substantially faster. But NVENC (currently) holds the slight edge in compression-quality.
Off on a tangent, CUDA in MPE acceleration offers both speed-advantage and quality-advantage, because the CUDA video-frame processing is highly parallelizable, and can exploit the GPU's numerous floating-point computational-arrays to speed-up processing and do more complex processing. That's a double-win. So what does this have to do with encoding? Right now, hardware video-encoding (which comes after the video-rendering step) only offers improved speed. My experience with NVENC has shown me it does not improved video-quality. At best, it is comparable to good (and slower) software-encoding when allowed high video-bitrates. At lower video-bitrates (such as Youtube streaming), software-encoding is still A LOT better.

Nvidia GTX 680 or K5000

I am working with After Effects CS6 (after June2013 hopefully CC), Premiere Pro CS6 (after June2013 hopefully CC) and Cinema 4D.
I want a new GPU in my Computer. Witch one supports the above applications the best?
Nvidia GTX 680 or K5000?
I want a fast GPU for fast Viewport in AfterEffects and fast Rendering out of AfterEffects
In The White Paper Specs of AfterEffectsCS6 and PremiereCS6 are both not listet.
Can i use the CUDA SUPPORT with one of this cards?
PLEACE I NEED YOUR HELP ADOBE, PLEACE.
My Computer_
Mac Pro 5.1, Dual 2.4GHZ 6 Core (12Core), 32GB Ram, SSD HD (System and Apps on it), osx lion.
GPU: ATI Radeon 5770 (not good performance with my apps),

you can buy a mac version of the card
http://www.evga.com/articles/00730/
if you buy the PC version you wont have a boot screen if you use it to drive your monitors (may or may not be that big of a deal to you)
680 is supported on windows, i dont recall if its in the 11.02 update on mac but if not then you can add to the supported cards txt file.
not sure why its a 6 minute video as it should take you about a minute to add to yout txt file

After effects and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 2048 MB

I've installed the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 2048 MB on a Mac Pro 3,2 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon running OSX 10.9.4 but it seems AE doesn't take advantage of the new hardware and the CUDA technology. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 1024 MB mounted before, went for the same rendering times. Am I missing any setting in the software or isn't the graphic card the perfect choice for fastening my rendering processes?
Ae obviously recognize the Nvidia and the CUDA settings should be ok....
Any Idea?
Andrea

AE only takes advantage of CUDA for ray traced features, which is being phased out. To get the most out of your render times, invest in processing power and RAM. I upgraded to the Titan Black and noticed hardly any difference in my render times. Check out this response given by AE's Todd Kopriva on Sept 24, 2014 at Creative Cow: CUDA does not accelerate : Adobe After Effects

Photoshop CC not detect nVidia GeForce GTX 680 after driver upgrade (Windows 8 64-bit)

i just upgraded the driver for my nVidia GeForce 680 graphics card from the nVidia website. the specifications are shown below. Photoshop CC now says that it can't detect my graphics card. does anyone know the solution to this problem?
nVidia verstion 327.23 WHQL
release date: Sept 9, 2013
operating system: windows 8 64-bit
will adobe have to issue an update to photoshop CC to fix the problem?

hey chris,
thx for relplying. i appreciat it. here is what happened. i did an update through microsoft and downloaded a driver for nVidia. somehow that download caused PS CC to stop recognizing my GTX 680. i'm not sure why. subsequent to that, i went to nVidia's website and downloaded the current driver. i still found that PS CC didn't "see" my graphics card. that is when i wrote this post. after i posted this i rebooted my computer and found that everything now works fine. PS CC now recognizes my GeForce GTX 680 with no problems.
john

GTX 580 3GB or GTX 680 2GB

Hello all, I have a question.
I recently built a x79 3930k sys, I bought a EVGA gtx 580 3GB for the PP MPE....EVGA has a step-up program for 90 days I can step up to a better card. I just bought the card march 3, so I still have a few months. However, I entered their que for a step-up to the gtx 680 2GB for the up in Cuda Cores... but for I have learned from some videos is Adobe After Effects will use all the VRAM (3GB for my 580) and get some sorta performance increase??? Can anyone explain to me what I would be missing
going down to 2GB from 3GB of vram .. I can also cancel my step-up and still reenter for 2 more months.. to see if EVGA offers the 4GB version by then. At that point I would reenter the step up program and upgrade to the gtx 680 4GB.... as it stands I only pay shipping (8.40) for the jump to the 680 2GB, the 4GB version might cost a bit more ($50-100) what the heck should I do... Though I am not using after effects at the moment I anticipate heavy usage.. I am not worried about applying the hack for the 680...

Difficult question to answer at this moment. It depends on a number of things. What kind of material do you edit? If it includes RED 4K or EPIC 5K, I would definitely wait for the 4 GB version, but if you don't do that regularly or only in small amounts then the 2 GB version may suffice. The GTX 680 has of course the advantage of being PCIe-3.0 which can be put to good use on your 2011 platform and supports three or four monitors, something the 580 can't do. Whether the 680 will be faster than the 580 with 3 GB remains to be seen. The number of CUDA cores has tripled, but the memory bus was reduced from 384 to 256 bits, and it is not yet clear what impact that will have on performance.
A second thing to consider is your intended AE use, which you say will be heavy in the future. Tthe fact that After Effects can use multiple GPUs for CUDA computation (for the ray-traced 3D renderer) makes using some GPU setups sensible that may have been a waste for Premiere Pro.
IMO, you currently have the following options, including the announced but not yet available 4 GB versions of the 680:
1. Stick to the 580, but add a 560 Ti for AE and steering a third monitor.
2. Step up to the 680 2 GB for steering a third monitor, but with the risk of running out of VRAM with RED or EPIC material and thus the reduction to software mode only.
3. Step up to the 680 4 GB for steering a third monitor without the risk of software mode fallback.
4. Take a gamble that the 685/690 with a 384 bit memory bus may be announced in the near future (not likely).
The problem is that TSMC, the supplier of the nVidia 28 nm chips has serious difficulty meeting demands for these chips. See http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20120405PD218.html

Why is the Nvidia GTX 680 CUDA card supported by Premiere Pro CC, and NOT After Effects CC?

Why is the Nvidia GTX 680 CUDA card supported by Premiere Pro CC, and NOT After Effects CC?

Thanks Todd for all the info. It is much appreciated and very helpful. On a different note, could you possibly direct me to the correct forum to fix this bug? I am suddenly recieving a warning on my System SSD referencing Adobe Exchange. Here is a screen grab to best explain:

Gtx 680 vs two gtx 570?

I don't think I have enough inform to make a informed decision...
How helpful can two gpu(s) be for affect effects? Would you link those gpus in sli?
Anybody running two or more gpu's for after effects?
How does the gtx 680 compare to the gtx 570 in terms of affer effects performance?
Sorry if these questions have been answered a thousand times.. I've been having some trouble finding the info...

You're looking for a simple answer that doesn't exist. In both scenarios the potential speed gains will be at best 10-15% compared to a single GTX 570/580 or whatever, which, given the overall slowness of the raytracing stuff is marginal, for all intents and purposes. A 680 may fare a bit better while you work - it is, after all, newer and more optimized - but that advantage may still evaporate when you crank up the quality for final rendering and enable DOF, motion blur and all those costly features. And as I said many times: I wouldn't base any purchasing decisions on CS6' 3D. All comparisons where people brag about rendering 5 seconds of some simple text animation in an hour make me go "So what? I've been doing that the last 10 years in my 3D programs." So in all fairness, as far as I'm concerned, you are looking to solve a very specific need on the wrong end using the wrong means. You can have much more fun using Video CoPilot's Element or a 3D program and neither will impose those outrageous hardware requiremnts to work their magic. If you feel you still need that raytrace stuff, then personally I'd settle for a single GTX570/580 right now. The simple truth is that a half year from now there will be much better Keppler-based cards than a costly GTX 680 and Adobe may even care to support them then, so you'd regret spending a lot of money for nothing. And did I mention that Element will burn like crazy on a GTX 580 in which you could invest the money saved in the process?
Mylenium

GeForce GTX 680 Mac Edition Graphics Card advice wanted 2008 Mac Pro. Eight core desktop.

I have read some threads yet it is not clear to me if it is a good move to upgrade an Mac Pro eight core 3.1- 2008 to use GeForce GTX 680 Mac Edition Graphics Card. I ask as my GeForce 8800 GT 2008 card has given up the ghost, and it has done sterling service R.I.P.. The machine is in the repair shop for a service itself, and this problem. So I thought an upgrade, as I am at it. Daunting choice out there. Um, learning curve and all that!
I mainly do 2D graphics, Canvas, Adobe stuff, yet a little amount of video, which may grow some. No games on this work horse!
So here I am fishing for experienced advice were my own is not, from anyone who has done this. Has it held up, do you get a boot screen, does it run two monsters easily via DVI.
If you have one or something good fitted please share the skinny!
For me it is turning into the year of the video card. My laptop looks like it got the disease first!
Thanks.

#1: AMD 7950 Mac Edition, or not. $425
#2: GTX 680 Mac $625
#3: MacVidCards - various but worth a look
http://www.ebay.com/sch/macvidcards/m.html
#4: GTX 285, no idea how 'safe' as often read someone (not Macvidcards) flashed PC card and sold as "Mac" and they are old, and may not be supported in Mavericks (and that would apply to a 8800 too).
Information purposes only:
http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-Geforce-Gtx285-Graphics-Pci-express/dp/B00G9TQMOE/
Check out Barefeats, again, for ideas if you want 'near best.'
A new gpu is $5000 cheaper than an overhaul and new MP.
A 2008 though will never perform as well as later models. Ideal is 2010 or later.
Even a top of the line iMac with GTX if you are having a lot of trouble and thinking of ditching the 2008.

The GTX 680 is real!

Apparently at CeBIT the GTX 680 has leaked out. Wow it sounds even better than the preceding rumors about the number of cores. It says that it will have 1536 CUDA cores which is three times our current GTX 580. Remember that my testing so far has concluded that for Premiere hardware MPE "cores are king". They will apparently come in two memory configurations 2 MB and 4 MB. The referenced article states that a game that required 3 GTX 580's runs well on a single GTX 680. The line for one of these starts behind me! Limited availability the end of March.

I'm looking forward to this.
Has Adobe officially come out and said that this will be a supported CUDA card ?

GTX 680 Mac for GPU processing only?

Have Radeon card in Mac Pro 5,1 driving 27" display. Want to use a GTX 680 for its GPU processing capability and continue using the Radeon for CPU display. Can I use 680 for GPU only? (No output connection used.)

We just bought a GTX 680 to test on one of our editing suites, as a cheaper and still viable ugrade vs. buying all new MAC Pro's all around.
So far, the installation of the card and setup has been easier than anything I've ever done on the PC end.
MAC have the most beutifull insides of a computer I can ever imagine. Soooo pretty... *geek drool*
But back on track!
We've used the "hack" earlier to get some if the iMACs we have as well to support CUDA in Premiere and AfterEffects, however when applying this same "hack" to the GTX680 on a MAC Pro, I dont get CUDA listed as a rendering option in either PR or AE.
Works fine on our iMACs, but I just cant get this one to work.
(And by "hack" I mean adding the graphics card to the list of supported cards in the CUDA supported GPU list.
More can be found here for those who needs it: http://www.vidmuze.com/how-to-enable-gpu-cuda-in-adobe-cs6-for-mac/ )
Any clues anyone?

Will After Effects CS6 support the new EVGA GeForce GTX 680 for Mac?

With this new graphics card out will Adobe/Mac OS X add support for it in AE CS6 for excellerated graphics and ray traced 3D? Also, will Adobe bring back live 3D from Photoshop to AE?

Sorry, should have been more specific. I was referring to this desktop card the Gforce GTX 680 (mac edition) http://www.evga.com/articles/00730/. I just saw a recent article about its release but not sure how long it has been out and not sure what evga is. I'm in the learning phase of all the ins and outs of graphics card compatibility and the manufactures intent. I'm curious about inserting it into my Mac Pro 2010 and getting improved performance along with accelerating my processing in After Effects CS6 since it has an ATI card with no CUDA architecture. Want to beef my RAM too. So I'm wondering if this card is A. Compatible with my machine/OS and B. If Adobe will add it to its list of supported CUDA cards. Again, not sure if this is an Adobe thing or an OS thing, I heard on some tutorial video that Mac OS is part of the issue. I am aware of the current state of limbo Mac Pro users are in with Apple's hiatus from a major update to this line. But even with a major new release my employer won't be in the market for that kind of investment which sucks because I'd like to move to thunderbolt for my video storage. Personally, I'm investing in a MBP with the 650M card which I've done tests with and it beats my Mac Pro with having CUDA. As for 3D layers from Photoshop to AE it is just kind of makes sense as well as being a price point issue. If you can draw and create 3D objects in PS why not be able to animate them in AE? Just like being able to animate AI and PS layers, it should be one big happy Adobe family, no? Why pay for Cinema 4D if I don't need it for everyday advanced 3D work? I do however love the Element plug-in from Video Co-pilot and it works great so that is my solution for now, then 4D if I get into more advanced custom 3D. But still you should be able to make 3D objects in PS and bring them in to AE, it just makes sense.
Thank you for your time!
Mac Pro mid 2010
2x2.66 6-core Intel Xeon
16GB RAM
ATI Radeon HD 5870 1gig
OSX 10.8.3

$4300 build - i7 3930 / GTX 680 - did I screw it up?

Hello everybody-
I am finally (actually) going to build my first editing PC, and I would like a once-over from the community to see if I've made any glaringly bad choices here. I plan on using this machine to edit mostly DSLR H.264 & AVCHD codecs using CS6 and After Effects, but I would be happy if it could also handle the occasional higher-bandwidth footage, say 2k or 4k resolution files from a RED camera or Alexa?
Also I opted not to attempt a huge monstrous RAID array in this build, at least at first, but I would like the leeway to go down that path in a few years if I need to.
Big questions still in my mind that I would like some input on:
1) Cooling. Can I rely on stock fans that come with my case or should I plan on replacing them with better ones? What's the best way to decide what cooling configuration to use in my box? Should I plan on using things like RAM cooling or dedicated disc cooling?
2) I have a few hundred bucks left in my budget, but if I don't have to spend it I'd rather not. If you had $300 or so left to pump into improvements to this build, how would you spend it?
Huge thanks in advance if you think you can poke any holes in this build before I lay down the cash!!
DRIVE SETUP   -         $1,150
C:/ OS / APPLICATIONS / PAGEFILE
(1) SSD drive on 1 of 2 SATA 6G ports on MOBO Intel RAID controller
$370 - OCZ Technology 480GB Agility 3
D:/ 1ST MEDIA DRIVE
(3) Drives in RAID 0 on 3 of 4 SATA 3G ports on MOBO Intel RAID controller
$240 - Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0G
E:/ 2ND MEDIA DRIVE
(2) Drives in RAID 0 on 2 of 2 SATA 6G ports on MOBO Marvell RAID controller
$160 - Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0G
F:/   CACHE / PREVIEWS / EXPORTS
(1)     10,000 RPM drive on 1 of 2 SATA 6G ports on MOBO Intel RAID controller
$290 - Western Digital VelociRaptor WD1000DHTZ 1TB 10000 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0G
G:/   BLU-RAY R/W
On 1 of 4 SATA 3G ports on MOBO Intel RAID controller
$90 - LG Blu-Ray R/W model # BH14NS40
GUTS   -           $2,055
MOBO
$315 - ASUS Sabertooth X79 LGA 2011
CPU
$570 - Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 3.2GHz
GPU
$470 - EVGA 02G-P4-2680-KR GeForce GTX 680 2GB 256-bit GDDR5
RAM
$700 - G.SKILL Ripjaws Z Series 64GB (8 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133
CASE & POWER          -           $695
CASE
(6) external 3.5” drive bays, good reviews on NewEgg
$190 - AZZA Fusion 3000 (CSAZ-3000)
PSU
$300 - Silverstone Strider 1500W 80 PLUS Silver Certified ATX12V / EPS12V
UPS
$120 - CyberPower Intelligent LCD Series GreenPower UPS CP1350AVRLCD
COOLING
    CPU cooling
$75 - Noctua NH-D14 SE2011
    Thermal compound
$10 - ARCTIC MX2 Thermal Paste -4gram
??RAM cooling??
    ??Case cooling??
BELLS & WHISTLES , I/O         -           $390
MULTIMEDIA CARD READER
$30 - Rosewill RDCR-11003 74-in-1 USB3.0 3.5" Internal Card Reader w/USB Port
IEEE 1394 CARD
$40 - SYBA PCI 32-bit Firewire 1394b Controller Card Model SD-FWB-32B
MOUSE
$0 – Kensington trackball mouse (already have)
KEYBOARD
$0 - Logitech Wireless Keyboard K340 (already have)
MONITORS
$320 - (2) SAMSUNG B350 Series S22B350H 21.5"
SPEAKERS
$0 - Behringer MS16 Powered Studio Desktop Monitors (already have)

Shuffling,
It is not recommended to use the Powercon (or any other square wave generating UPS for that matter) with a Silverstone power supply, or just about any current high end power supply out there today. Unfortunately, the sine-wave models are quite a bit more expensive. Just do a Google search if you want to learn more about why today's high-end power supplies don't like square wave power if you are curious.
Here's what I know about a few of APC's SmartUPS line which does provide true sine-wave output:
- SUA1500 unit is rated at 980 watts and would absolutely be strong enough for your build; even with a 1500 watt rated power supply you will not be exceeding what this unit can provide. I love this model and use it for an overclocked 6-core rig with 10+ drives and the current it provides is more solid than the wall socket in my study at home (has Corsair AX1200 p/s). When a render kicks in, the ups often senses "brownout" (not enough voltage) and starts powering the PC instead of letting the wall socket do it alone.
- SUA2200 units are rated for 1980 watts but they are VERY heavy. I used to have both a APC UPS 2200 and 3000 model and got tired of the man-handling that is required to lift or move the bulk.
- APC SmartUPS units are very expensive new, but very affordable on CraigsList. I picked up two SUA1500 units that looked like new but were 3 to 5 years old and there batteries were completely shot - one was $60, the other $75. eBay has them too, but shipping is pretty high because they are so heavy. New batteries are just under $200.
- I only have SUA units; APC replaced this line with "LCD" SmartUPS models about a year ago. I don't recommend used SmartUPS models that do not have a USB connection for your PC. First of all serial ports are not compatible with most new PCs and more importantly these units could be REALLY old (6-10+ years old).
Regards,
Jim

GTX 680 to be adobe certified?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for