Resolve Configuration guides

Ok.. I've installed Davinci Resolve 9 on my iMac (2010 model) I was able to open the program right after installation and play around with some h.264 video I had on my computer.. I shot 2.5K raw video on my BMCC today (for the first time) and when I imported the clips.. resolve told me my GPU was out of memory.. So I closed the program and when I tried to restart Resolve it won't open stating my CUDA driver wasn't loading.. I checked the system preferences and the correct Cuda driver is installed 5.0.36..
I tried to restart my computer.. and uninstall and re-install resolve.. still no luck..

What gives? I just want to be able to edit the video I shot on my brand new BMCC!

Have you upgraded to 9.1.1?

Does the information in this thread help? viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2620

Thank you for asking Christine.. I did download the newer version of Resolve and need to do more testing.. I don't think the problem is with resolve.. but with my underpowered iMac.. Luckily after a lot of research and testing.. I was able to figure out how to convert synchronized cinemaDNG files into high quality .jpegs.. then finally into ProResHQ video files.. much like folks are using lightroom to process the raw files.

I'm really digging the BMCC!! I think I'll be shooting mostly in ProResHQ for no-fuss editing.. but for the occasional music video or commercial.. I know I can shoot raw when I want to.

One more question.. (sorry for being a noob)

I have an iMac 10.1 with a intel core2duo 3.06ghz.. w 4gb of RAM
the video card is a Nvidia GeForce 9400 with 256mb ram

I ordered 16gb of RAM to max it out.. but I don't think I can do anything about the video card.
(If anyone knows if I can swap out the video card for one that's Resolve friendly.. please let me know)

Is there any hope to get Resolve to run on this machine?

What's happening now is when I try to open resolve.. the app initiates.. then I sign on and an error window pops up stating that the Cuda driver isn't loading.. I checked in the preferences and the correct driver is there.. but it's not loading..

[Dwaine Maggart]

Only 2011 and later iMacs are supported, as per the Mac Resolve Config guide.

Thanks for your response Dwaine.. I appreciate it!

Looks like I'll be using PhotoShop to work with the cinemaDNG files from my BMCC until I get a newer MAC

Hi there

I am planning a shoot in Portugal in May with the BMCC and I want to know if anyone has any experience running Resolve 9.1.1 on a MacBook Pro with Retina, 2.7 Ghz i7, 16Gb RAM and the Internal 768Gb SSD.
I will also bring the UltraStudio 3D and a 8Tb Thunderbolt G-RAID. I will be shooting 2.5K CinemaDNG RAW.

First question: will I able to get realtime playback of the RAW files in Resolve 9.1.1?

Second question: Is that currently the best mobile platform/set-up to run Resolve 9.1.1.?
Or is there something better?

Any advice or thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

David Hollander
Marfa, TX

First question: will I able to get realtime playback of the RAW files in Resolve 9.1.1?

Second question: Is that currently the best mobile platform/set-up to run Resolve 9.1.1.?
Or is there something better?

First answer: No.
second answer: Tough to say with certainty, as I only know what I know, and not what I don't know. But I can't think of a better config covered in the resolve config guide that is fully portable. That said new iMac with a gtx680mx should do quite a bit better than the retina, though not a portable system. And once you drop the portable requirement you get into full fledged systems, in which case you should be able to have something that could play rt.

The Linux guide says to use the DeckLink HD Extreme 3D card. The BM site, however, says nothing about the card working on Linux. Not sure it matters since BH says the card has now been discontinued.

So, what's the deal? Is there a card available that runs on Linux and can support Resolve?

Would prefer Windows frankly, but we're looking at Linux because we want to use Revival as well. While it shows in some areas that Revival is on Windows it states on the product page that it is only for Linux. Can someone also shed light on that? Is there a config guide for Revival somewhere?

During the installation of Resolve 9.1.3. my iMac shuts down at the last 10th of the installation process.

Here is what I did:
I had Resolve 8 on the iMac and just "over installed" it (I did not remove Resolve 8 and the database) and at the beginning it worked but when I clicked into the database area, the software suddenly crashed.
Then I unistalled Resolve with the Black Magic tool.
Then I tried to re-install Resolve 9, but now it always crashes during the install process.
I tried nVidia cuda 5.0.37 & 5.0.45. With both it is crashing.
(I actually don't know, why nVidia cuda is on my iMac as I have a AMD grafic card... see below)

I have two Thunderbolt Harddrives (connected as a daisy chain) plugged into the single Thunderbolt port of the iMac. Those harddrives have not been connected when I used Resolve 8. Could this be a reason?

This is my iMac:
2,5 GHz Intel Core i5 (21.5", mid 2011)
12 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
AMD Radeon HD 6750M 512 MB
OS X 10.8.3 (12D78)

Can somebody help me here?
Thank you very much.

Stefan

Hello all,

A few questions regarding creating a Resolve 1 GPU system.

I'm in the process of buying a Dell Precision M4600 with i7 processor, 16GB RAM, a 500GB SSD hard drive, IPS 1920x1080 screen, and a 2GB NVIDIA Quadro 2000M graphics card.

Will that setup be sufficient to run Davinci Resolve Lite (no stereo rendering at this point). I plan on buying a Dell 27" IPS monitor, as well, but wanted to make sure Davinci will even run on this system.

The guide mentions:

Graphics Processor for GUI:
NVIDIA Quadro 600 (for 2D only), or
NVIDIA Quadro 4000

Graphics Processor for CUDA GPU:
NVIDIA Quadro 4000, or
NVIDIA Quadro 5000, or
NVIDIA Quadro 6000, or
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 3072 MB, or
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 4096 MB

Is the Quadro 2000M more powerful than the Quadro 600?

Thanks,
Zach

[Peter Chamberlain]

I doubt the Dell config you list will be suitable. You need at least one fast GPU and the 2000m is only suitable for GUI not image processing.
Peter

Peter,

Thanks for your quick reply.

When you say GUI processing vs image processing, what do you mean?

The Quadro 2000M (with 192 cudas) isn't fast enough for 3D rendering and handling HD film footage?

Very surprisingly, I installed and booted up Resolve 9 on my mid 2010 15" MBP and it somehow runs (albeit very slow, but it does in fact run). Playback is very slow (often 1/2-1/4 of the frame rate I shot, but I can do my grading, scrub through, and render out just fine.
I was able to grade a PRHQ file straight out of the BMCC. Have yet to try RAW but I'm feeling optimistic.
Aside from it being a big laggy, it never crashed on me and I never got any error messages. YAY!

Specs:
Macbook Pro 15-inch, mid 2010
Processor: 2.66 GHz Intel Core i7
Memory: 8 GB 1067 MHz DDR3
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M 512 MB
Software: OS X 10.8.3

Sean,

That's good news, indeed. IIRC, the mid-2010 MBP's were i7 duo cores, but not yet quad cores -- correct? From what I've read, Resolve works better on the Mac, which likely helped you.

Here are the specs on my machine:

Dell Precision M4600
Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit
i7-2860QM (2.5GHz, 3.6GHz Turbo, 8MB Cache) (basically an i7-2960XM)
15.6" 1080p, RGBLED-backlit, IPS PremierColor, 100% Adobe RGB Color Gamut, Anti-Glare screen
16GB DDR3 SDRAM 1600MHz
512GB Solid State Drive
2GB GDDR3 NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

The machine is mostly for CGI work in Maya and Houdini, and editing/graphics work in Adobe CS6, which it's spec'd for. I have enough CUDA cores to access Adobe's Mercury Playback Engine and Quadro cards work great for CAD/3D.

I'm hoping this setup is enough to learn Resolve on, so I can make the jump to a rig with a Quardo K5000 or higher setup in the next 18 months.

I recently read an article about the "relativity" of an "adequate system."

For a seasoned pro, my system definitely would not be up to snuff for high-end work on Resolve. But for someone new to Resolve, just wanting to learn color grading for a class, it might be a different story.

I'm hoping the speed of the processor, amount of RAM, solid state drive, and GPU RAM are able to get me through for now.

I'll let you know how things work after I install Resolve Lite this weekend.

Thanks again,
Zach

Very surprisingly, I installed and booted up Resolve 9 on my mid 2010 15" MBP and it somehow runs (albeit very slow, but it does in fact run). Playback is very slow (often 1/2-1/4 of the frame rate I shot, but I can do my grading, scrub through, and render out just fine.
I was able to grade a PRHQ file straight out of the BMCC. Have yet to try RAW but I'm feeling optimistic.
Aside from it being a big laggy, it never crashed on me and I never got any error messages. YAY!

Specs:
Macbook Pro 15-inch, mid 2010
Processor: 2.66 GHz Intel Core i7
Memory: 8 GB 1067 MHz DDR3
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M 512 MB
Software: OS X 10.8.3

That's good news, indeed. IIRC, the mid-2010 MBP's were i7 duo cores, but not yet quad cores -- correct? From what I've read, Resolve works better on the Mac, which likely helped you.

I believe you are correct.

Also, an update to my previous post: Loaded and graded all my BMCC raw files just fine as well. Even slower than PRHQ, but was still able to grade and output just fine. A 10 second clip took about 50 seconds to render out.

When you say GUI processing vs image processing, what do you mean?
The Quadro 2000M (with 192 cudas) isn't fast enough for 3D rendering and handling HD film footage?

There are really up to three datastreams. The Graphical User Interface is your work surface, which shows previews and approximations of the various operations you are requesting of the software.

Image processing, where the image manipulation is actually applied to your clips, occurs on the GPUs that are normally stacked to provide as much CUDA acceleration as humanly possible. In one-card systems, this load has to be shared, and obviously results in some compromises. 192 CUDAs seems insignificant in comparison to the thousands that the latest GTX cards provide.

You can also see the advantage of off-loading the calibrated display output (the third stream) to a Video I/O device (Blackmagic Decklink Extreme, etc.), where the appropriate output colorspace adjustments are accurately calculated.

jPo

Your advise is greatly appreciated!

I am going to make the leap to the BMPC4K with Resolve 10. I have been on the wait list since NAB. Hopefully, I'll have a camera before December. I have a new 2013 iMac with the following hardware.

3.4 Ghz Intel Core i7 (10.8.4)
32 GB 1600 Mhz DDR3 Ram
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2048 MB
Promise R6 12 TB Thunderbolt external drives
Various 3-4TB G-drives for storage

Am I going to run into any problems color grading BMPC4K footage and viewing clips in real time while color grading? I plan on editing in FCPX and round tripping from FCPX into Resolve 10 and then back to FCPX in ProRes 1080x816 for web or 2.5 or 4k for larger cinema projects.

Your thoughts about feasibility and any tips regarding workflow would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you,

Scott

Hi,

will the configuration guide be updated when resolve 10 is released? And will there be a chapter about recommended refrence monitors? That would be much appreciated!

Andreas

My setup is Mac Pro (mid 2010 version)
12 core 2,66 intel Xeon
48GB 1333MHz RAM
ATI radeo 5870
RED Rocket with 3 Nvidia GTX 570
All the latest versions of CUDA, Resolve, Red software/firmware
500GB SSD (500mb r/w)

I usually play 4K native RED files perfectly, but this time the BMC raw files can't play more than 4-8fps.
I'm in Europe, so our standard at work is 25fps (1080p, 2k, 4k, 5k)

It's also worth noting that the mac has just had a clean install due to server upgrades.

What can be the issue here?

The Mac Resolve link doesn't seem to work? Can this be resolved? It's obviously a huge factor for those of us considering buying a BMCC who own a Mac, and I can't find a list of recommended specs anywhere else on the web. Thanks!

[Dwaine Maggart]

Seems to be working here. Below is a direct link:

http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/media/4 ... -10-10.pdf

Again, an updated guide should be released in the near future covering recently released hardware.

Seems to be working here. Below is a direct link:

http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/media/4 ... -10-10.pdf

Again, an updated guide should be released in the near future covering recently released hardware.

Thanks very much - the link seems to work for me now too but definitely didn't before, very strange.

Just a quickie: is it really necessary to get the ultrastudio 3d to ingest 2.5k footage (I'm especially thinking in RAW) into an early 2011 Macbook Pro? Are there other options that might be slower but which would still work, for those of us on a tight budget? Thanks.

[Dwaine Maggart]

I don't understand your 2.5K footage question. Why do you want to ingest it? If it exists in data files that Resolve can work with, you would put it on storage connected to Resolve. If you are specifically talking about BMCC raw 2.5K footage captured on an SSD, then you need some way to mount the SSD on your system. Normally a drive dock of some sort that's compatible with your system.

I don't understand your 2.5K footage question. Why do you want to ingest it? If it exists in data files that Resolve can work with, you would put it on storage connected to Resolve. If you are specifically talking about BMCC raw 2.5K footage captured on an SSD, then you need some way to mount the SSD on your system. Normally a drive dock of some sort that's compatible with your system.

Sorry I'm probably using the wrong language - I obviously misunderstood its usage on your website.

I want the footage on my MacBook Pro so I can edit it in FCPX and then output it in full 2.5k. I'm not familiar with a "drive dock" but I'll research further. Thanks.

[Dwaine Maggart]

I'm not a FCP expert, but my understanding is that it (nor any of the other common NLE's) does not work with the BMCC CinemaDNG files. That's why people transcode the footage to something their NLE can work with, like ProRes.

A drive dock is just a device that the SSD can plug into, and then the device has an I/O mechanism, like USB, Firewire, E-SATA or Thunderbolt, to connect the drive to the Mac.

Hi Dwayne,
So is there any kind of chart that says what CUDA card can give real time playback @ what resolution? And is there really a big jump in playback speeds between say a gt640 2gb ddr5 nvidia card and a gtx 680 4gb ddr5. I know it doesn't make much of a difference in Adobe Premiere. Does resolve actually scale it's performance with the number of CUDA cores? or is playback pretty cpu dependent?

[Dwaine Maggart]

There is no chart. If you search this forum and the Creative Cow DaVinci Resolve forum and perhaps other Resolve related forums, you will find user posted results from using the user created benchmark project called Standard Candle 9. These test results can show you relative GPU performance for GPU intensive Resolve processing tasks among various GPU cards.

How big a jump in playback performance there might be between GPU cards would depend on what you are playing back. If they were files that Resolve uses GPU processing to decode/debayer/de-whatever, possibly. If they are files that don't involve GPU processing, then no.

There is not always a direct CUDA core relationship between cards, because there can be other differences that impact performance, such as memory speed, board architecture, etc. But in the same card series, performance will be pretty consistent with number of cores, other things being equal.

There is no chart. If you search this forum and the Creative Cow DaVinci Resolve forum and perhaps other Resolve related forums, you will find user posted results from using the user created benchmark project called Standard Candle 9. These test results can show you relative GPU performance for GPU intensive Resolve processing tasks among various GPU cards.

How big a jump in playback performance there might be between GPU cards would depend on what you are playing back. If they were files that Resolve uses GPU processing to decode/debayer/de-whatever, possibly. If they are files that don't involve GPU processing, then no.

There is not always a direct CUDA core relationship between cards, because there can be other differences that impact performance, such as memory speed, board architecture, etc. But in the same card series, performance will be pretty consistent with number of cores, other things being equal.

So you could SLI two 660 ti cards and get better performance than a single 780. More everything, but the memory bandwidth is half (192 vs 384). However, since you have two cards, each with their own PCI address, I'm pretty sure that equals out the difference. (don't quote me on it)

Two 660 ti are $380 Cdn...the 780 is $700+ Cdn.

More cards means more power and more heat, but if you can handle that, you can get some great performance right now!

[Peter Chamberlain]

No. Please refer to the config guides. SLI is not discussed for good reason. Resolves GPUs are not managed by SLI.
Peter