Is Windows, Linux or Hackintosh fastest on same Hardware?

Hi.

I want to build a new desktop to run the Studio version of DaVinci Resolve some time in 2018.
I will look at Intel 8700K, the next Ryzen coming out 19 April or the next gen Thredripper coming 2nd half of 2018. I expect that I will select a next gen nVidea Graphics card with the new faster GDDR6 vRam.

But I wonder if there is any major speed differences between Resolve on Windows, Linux or Hackintosh?
What I am asking is, if there is any speed difference between the Operating Systems itemself, File systems or may be Drivers?

Regards Carsten.

Linux appears to be faster than Hackintosh in our early testing. NTFS and EXT4 run faster than HFS+, and Linux has better read/write speed on all file systems. (APFS is likely better than HFS+, have not checked.)

Would recommend a GeForce GTX for your graphics. This is because Nvidia cards are tested with Resolve by BMD and they generally provide the best performance and compatibility. Quadro is a bit over the top; while it handles 64-bit floating point better, Resolve uses 32-bit and the comparable GTX tends to be better at that.

Have not tested on Windows, but the initial impression is Linux > MacOS. Surprised?

I wouldn't care about some percent faster system.
You should care about stability.
This is what matters most.

All 3 systems will be fast enough with the right hardware. If you can build, maintain and administrate each OS, then choose whatever you like.

I have a X99 based Hackintosh and it's pretty stable and fast. To be honest, I don't care about speed as long as I can work.

Hi.

It looks that the GeForce GTX is the way to go.

But there is still something I don't understand. Is the hardware decoding/encoding done in the nVideas Graphics Card or in the Intel CPU?
And is the codecs and number of bits the same for hardware decoding/encoding in Resolve Studio for Windows, Linux or Hackintosh?

Regards Carsten.

But there is still something I don't understand. Is the hardware decoding/encoding done in the nVideas Graphics Card or in the Intel CPU?

I'll try and give you a short answer.

The CPU decodes and encodes your video clips. The GPU works the grades, timeline effects, et al. Resolve emphasizes the GPU for obvious reasons.

Given Resolve is scalable, your own needs dictate a lot. An older CPU can handle proxies ("optimized media") efficiently, while your resolution needs are obviously a factor with the GPU.

You don't need the latest everything to run Resolve. Speaking of which, you'll want to read this test.

And is the codecs and number of bits the same for hardware decoding/encoding in Resolve Studio for Windows, Linux or Hackintosh?

Number of bits is the same on all ports, I wager.

Codecs the same, nope. Here's a list of supported codecs for 12.5. BMD have since implemented on HEVC (h265) support in v14. Also, Nvidia GPUs can now decode h264/hevc on all platforms (Mac Lite, Studio for Win/Linux).

The Linux stand-alone is the pickiest, but even that is manageable. Two ports of Resolve can co-exist on the same workstation and share databases / projects / proxies. This helps with MIDI support (only BMD panels on Linux) and import/export, but also stipulates dualboot. Up to you. Our workflow uses certain features that are out of bounds for the Linux stand-alone, which is why we utilize the Mac port on the side.

Hackintosh is a good all-around solution. You get most of what Resolve has to offer in terms of codecs and other things. As said, your CPU/GPU come largely down to what sort of projects you intend on doing.

Resolve is scalable and flexible. Determine what you need from the video resolution, codecs and your user experience and go with that. You have a lot of options to build the affordable workstation for the job you need.

A Threadripper 16x/ GTX1080Ti combo would make a powerfil, yet affordable solution.

But don't forget other possible bottlenecks.
Start with a good mainboard and enough PCIe lanes, 64GB Ram, dedicated media RAID, ultrafast scratch disk and possibly a dedicated render disk.
You'll further want a Decklink, RAID card, maybe a Thunderbolt card... and still save physical space, power and lanes for a 2nd GPU.

Hi.

First thanks for your Links. The list of supported codecs for 12.5 was new to me.

I have in many years worked with UNIX and Windows and after researching you first answers deceided that I properly not will use dual boot.
But a pure Windows 10 Pro installation.

Erik Wittbusch write: 'A Threadripper 16x/ GTX1080Ti combo would make a powerfil, yet affordable solution.'
I agree, but then I will like it with the 2nd gen Threadripper arriving 2H 2018 and the rumored next gen nVidea Graphics card.

But do I need 11 GB or 8 GB vRam?

I read in this forum: 'Ram in one GPU is only used in that GPU. Processors in one GPU are only used in that GPU.'
And 'Multiple GPUs only seems to give an advantage if they are identical.'

I have a Resolve Dongle, but wonder why so many recommend 1080 Ti against Dual 1070 (Ti).
Here is their CUDA Benchmark:

GEFORCE GTX 1080 Ti Founders Edition $ 699 250 W Cuda Benchmark 236183
GEFORCE GTX 1070 Ti Founders Edition $ 449 180 W Cuda Benchmark 195766
GEFORCE GTX 1070 Founders Edition $ 399 150 W Cuda Benchmark 181118

https://browser.geekbench.com/cuda-benchmarks

As I see the above, could I last year buy a DUAL GTX 1070 for just 100$ more than one GTX 1080 Ti.
Please tell me what it is that I don't understand?

Erik, Nice list you maked to me. I will look at it.

Regards Carsten.

I wouldn't care about some percent faster system.
You should care about stability.
This is what matters most.

All 3 systems will be fast enough with the right hardware. If you can build, maintain and administrate each OS, then choose whatever you like.

I have a X99 based Hackintosh and it's pretty stable and fast. To be honest, I don't care about speed as long as I can work.

+ 5,000,000

But there is still something I don't understand. Is the hardware decoding/encoding done in the nVideas Graphics Card or in the Intel CPU?

I'll try and give you a short answer.

The CPU decodes and encodes your video clips. The GPU works the grades, timeline effects, et al. Resolve emphasizes the GPU for obvious reasons.
[quote="Sulo Kokki"]

This is not completely true, Resolve 14 will use the Nvidia graphics cards and the api associated with it to decode some h.264 and h.265 files.

Hi.

I found a description of the APIs here:

https://developer.nvidia.com/nvidia-video-codec-sdk

Regards Carsten.

Hi.

I found a description of the APIs here:

https://developer.nvidia.com/nvidia-video-codec-sdk

Regards Carsten.

That's correct.

Hi.

When looking more at the above nVidea Link. I wonder if the Resolve Mac version has any similar hardware decode/encode?
And is Resolve Linux version using it to?

How to read the Color YUV Encoding. Is 4:4:4 and 4:2:0 encoded in Hardware and the 4:2:2 in slower software?

Regards Carsten.

This is not completely true, Resolve 14 will use the Nvidia graphics cards and the api associated with it to decode some h.264 and h.265 files.

You are right, I mentioned that in the earlier post

And is Resolve Linux version using it to?

BMD have since implemented on HEVC (h265) support in v14. Also, Nvidia GPUs can now decode h264/hevc on all platforms (Mac Lite, Studio for Win/Linux).

I think you can make a good argument that the reason why the serious post shops are using Linux for Resolve and their related programs, just due to stability. But the reality in post is that it often takes lots of different operating systems to get post work done -- Mac for Pro Tools, Windows for Avid, Linux for Resolve. The key is figuring out a way to network everything together so the storage works reliably.

But I also think any modern operating system for Resolve is going to be fairly stable provided you throw enough hardware at it and stick with the configurations specified by Blackmagic.