RX 580 8GB or GTX 1650 Super 4GB

Which of these two cards should I go for?

Hi.

There are two factor that is important for the Graphics card. The first is, that it have enough vRam to hold a single video frame. For 4K is the absolute minimum 6 GB of vRam, but min 8 GB of vRam are recommended.

The other factor is the CUDA/OpenCL performance. Higher CUDA/OpenCL performange gives a faster Resolve. Here are links for both CUDA and OpenCL performance Benchmarks:

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

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

But have you considered a 2nd hand Graphics Card?

Regards Carsten.

When we say 4K - do we mean the source material or the timeline\output? Because I do work with 4K footage, but not looking to export any 4K videos anytime soon.

And yes, these are second hand cards. I couldn't afford a new one.

I'm partial to CUDA. It's the more mature technology.

I'd go for the 1650.

As Carsten mentioned above.

Davinci Resolve loves huge amounts of VRAM, the more the better, the faster the better.
Davinci Resolve is brand and OS agnostic so it works with any brand GPU(NVidia, AMD and Intel) and all mature OS'es (Linux, Windows and MacOS). What is important is the compute power in fp32, the amount of VRAM and the speed of the VRAM.

from videocardz.com:

RX580 8 GB: Computing Power (FP32) 5,788 GFLOPS, Memory Size 8192 MB GDDR5, Memory Bandwidth 256 GB/s.

GTX 1650 4 GB: Computing Power (FP32) 2,661 GFLOPS, Memory Size 4096 MB GDDR5, Memory Bandwidth 128 GB/s

Be warned that not everyone here is as enthusiastic as Carsten and Misha about AMD GPUs, and that the claims in support of these products may be incomplete or one-sided.

For starters, search the forum for AMD driver issues, seek out third-party benchmarks which not be consistent with the results provided by Misha (this one for example,

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/N ... 4058vs3923)

and assure yourself that you don't need CUDA.

Not having experience of either card or any information about your system or the work you intend to do, I couldn't recommend either with much conviction. It goes without saying that 8GB is better than 4GB vram, but the extra 4 won't help you much if the choice you make leads to instability which boosters of one product or another here can't fix for you.

What is important is the compute power in fp32, the amount of VRAM and the speed of the VRAM.

I think that the fp32 was what I was missing. I was comparing flops also, but the fact that there are so many "types" of flops did confuse me.

Be warned that not everyone here is as enthusiastic as Carsten and Misha about AMD GPUs, and that the claims in support of these products may be incomplete or one-sided.

For starters, search the forum for AMD driver issues, seek out third-party benchmarks which not be consistent with the results provided by Misha (this one for example,

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/N ... 4058vs3923)

The thing about benchmarks is that it's very hard to know what's relevant specifically for use with Resolve. They tend to be very gaming focused, and from what I gather - that really says very little about how these cards will compare in resolve. Am I wrong here?

and assure yourself that you don't need CUDA.

How?

Not having experience of either card or any information about your system or the work you intend to do, I couldn't recommend either with much conviction.

My system is not very impressive. I'm looking to upgrade now, and still, will probably only have an i7-4790 and 16GB RAM. The work I intend to do is also not that impressive - 4K source files, 1080p timeline and output, some titles, transitions and basic animation in Fusion, but nothing crazy, some basic color work. Timelines of up to 30 minutes. Single camera.

It goes without saying that 8GB is better than 4GB vram, but the extra 4 won't help you much if the choice you make leads to instability which boosters of one product or another here can't fix for you.

I'm not sure what you mean here. What kind of instability and how do I know if the choice that I make would lead to that?

As mentioned in this thread by Rohit Gupta: You should get identical results on CUDA/OpenCL/Metal.

https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?t=79942&p=442655

There are no issues with the RX580 cards/drivers, it's fourth gen GCN https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_RX_500_series and as stable as a GPU can be.

I'm seeing a lot of complaints about AMD drivers around the internet so that's one factor.

The other factor is whether H264/H265 is important to you. Most of the reports I've seen indicate that NVIDIA does a lot better job of its hardware encoding/decoding of these two formats (providing your card is modern/big enough to support those options.

However, VRAM size is also super-important.

Like yourself, I'm working with 4K source material but producing HD output files. Most of the time the 6GB in my 1060 NVIDIA card is sufficient but sometimes (especially when working with the hi bitrate files my HC-X1500 is able to produce, it does start pushing the boundaries (hard).

If I were you I'd probably save my pennies and try to get (as a minimum) a 1070 or 2070 card (new or used) because that has all the NVIDIA benefits as well as 8GB of VRAM.

However, if you can wait then both AMD and NVIDIA will be delivering some much better (bang for buck) GPU products by the end of the Northern summer (allegedly).

While some newer AMD cards have driver problems, the ones for the RX 580 are mature and stable.

It seems to me (and correct me if I'm wrong) that AMD's possible handicap with hardware encoding/decoding is something I can probably work around by using optimized media, whereas the GTX's lower vRAM can't really be worked around quite so well. Right?

1070/2070 are far outside my price bracket. If and when I actually start making money from this, further upgrades might be an option, but not now. I'm guessing the cards that you mentioned should come out in a few months are even further away from my budget.

hardware encoding/decoding

Hi.

Hardware encoding/decoding is only used in the STUDIO version of Resolve, when you are using Windows.

I expect the prices of 2nd hand Graphics Card to go a little down, when the next generation arrives.
And may be the availability will be better, as more people will want to upgrade.

Regards Carsten.

hardware encoding/decoding

Hi.

Hardware encoding/decoding is only used in the STUDIO version of Resolve, when you are using Windows.

I expect the prices of 2nd hand Graphics Card to go a little down, when the next generation arrives.
And may be the availability will be better, as more people will want to upgrade.

Regards Carsten.

I didn't realize it's only in Studio. So, definitely not relevant at this point in time.

Hardware encoded h.264/265 picture quality is crap in comparison with software encode material.
When you don't have a gun pointing at your head, use software encoding.

When you don't have a gun pointing at your head, use software encoding.

Does a ticking timebomb also count?

With an AMD Threadripper 3960x, with my RX580 I get 27FPS renders at 4K

Not really, if you have enough cores and Handbrake.

Hardware encoded h.264/265 picture quality is crap in comparison with software encode material.
When you don't have a gun pointing at your head, use software encoding.

OK. One less consideration to worry about

A GTX1060 6GB GPU is also a good choice. Performance is comparable with the RX580 but has better H264/265 decoding. I have used both in a Hackintosh setup.

Much more expensive (at least in the Israeli 2nd hand sphere)

Sent from my LG-H870DS using Tapatalk

Much more expensive (at least in the Israeli 2nd hand sphere)

Sent from my LG-H870DS using Tapatalk

Blackmagic eGPU also uses the RX580 as GPU chip https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicegpu/techspecs/W-DRE-10. I don't see BMD crippling their own GPU (even when theirs is meant for Apple computers).

i am a gtx 1650 S owner and i faced with same question myself,
i am not a gamer and my usages is for photography / video editing.
i went for GTX 1650 SUPER for 2 reasons besides the price
1. CUDA - i've seen more and more application use CUDA, Adobe Premier for example has CUDA support, if you are going to do something with machine learning then the CUDA SDK will be useful for you.
2. Power - note the RX580 TDP is much higher than the GTX1650, make sure your power supply meets both the power requirements and has the needed power connector GTX 1650 requires 6 PIN while RX580 requires 8 pin - i'm aware that you can buy an adapter but i don't believe in cheap connectors, spending $5 for a connector which could break your entire system is not a good idea.

overall i'm happy with the results, i am working with my Go Pro's 4K and 1080P source files for 1080p output and i enjoy a good workflow, for some 4k source files i just generate optimized media and that solves it.

eventually it is your call. if you go for the gtx1650 then just make sure it is the SUPER version.

If BorisFX Sapphire filters should appeal to you, they are also CUDA only.

I don't know that I'm actually after any specific effects or anything like that, so it doesn't seem that CUDA has such a huge added value.
But while we're on the topic: what about mining cards? I saw a used p106-100 (basically, a GTX 1060 6GB card, just without the ports) for really cheap, and was thinking of taking that instead.

You'll need to connect the display to the GPU for proper function.

You'll need to connect the display to the GPU for proper function.

Oh. Didn't realize that. I thought it was OK to just let it handle the processing, while the monitor is connected to the motherboard.

I have both technologies. The RX580 pretty good

I did a small test for you. RX580, GTX1080ti and Native

AMD 3960x 128gig of RAM
4K/60 Footage 1:17:50 length
RX580: H.265 46.5 - 47 FPS: time to complete: 1:39.98
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
RX580: H.264 105-106FPS: time to complete: 00:45.61
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
RX580: H.265 180-70fps: time to complete: 00:28.92

4K/60 Footage 1:17:50 length
GTX1080ti: H.265 94.5-54 FPS: time to complete: 00:54.05
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
GTX1080ti: H.264, 253 - 133FPS: time to complete: 00:27.74
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
GTX1080ti: H.265 279-155fps: time to complete: 00:25.92

4K/60 Footage 1:17:50 length 18 cores of 24 being used
NATIVE: H.264, 36 - 21 FPS: time to complete: 02:00.05
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
NATIVE: H.264, 177 - 68FPS: time to complete: 00:37.86

I have both technologies. The RX580 pretty good

I did a small test for you. RX580, GTX1080ti and Native

AMD 3960x 128gig of RAM
4K/60 Footage 1:17:50 length
RX580: H.265 46.5 - 47 FPS: time to complete: 1:39.98
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
RX580: H.264 105-106FPS: time to complete: 00:45.61
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
RX580: H.265 180-70fps: time to complete: 00:28.92

4K/60 Footage 1:17:50 length
GTX1080ti: H.265 94.5-54 FPS: time to complete: 00:54.05
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
GTX1080ti: H.264, 253 - 133FPS: time to complete: 00:27.74
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
GTX1080ti: H.265 279-155fps: time to complete: 00:25.92

4K/60 Footage 1:17:50 length 18 cores of 24 being used
NATIVE: H.264, 36 - 21 FPS: time to complete: 02:00.05
4K/60 Footage rendered at 1080p/60 1:17:50 length
NATIVE: H.264, 177 - 68FPS: time to complete: 00:37.86

Thanks a lot for this!

May I ask? I have searched over the forum and some topics just end without a solution. So I am in a quandary. I am sure this has been asked though I could not find a definitive answer.

I have a HP 8100 SSF (my issue) i7 16GB of Ram with 1T of storage. I would like to start learning Resolve for fun, I can only add a 4GB low profile video card to the system and it is needed.

I have read on the web, I can do this with my current system with the 4GB Card, but I will not be able to render 4k; lower definition should be fine. If this works I will add a Solid State drive.

Will the GTX1650 or Quadro P1000 work? Or am I just wasting money?

Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Andrew

May I ask? I have searched over the forum and some topics just end without a solution. So I am in a quandary. I am sure this has been asked though I could not find a definitive answer.

I have a HP 8100 SSF (my issue) i7 16GB of Ram with 1T of storage. I would like to start learning Resolve for fun, I can only add a 4GB low profile video card to the system and it is needed.

I have read on the web, I can do this with my current system with the 4GB Card, but I will not be able to render 4k; lower definition should be fine. If this works I will add a Solid State drive.

Will the GTX1650 or Quadro P1000 work? Or am I just wasting money?

Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Andrew

I am very far from knowledgeable on this, but I can tell you that I'd used a 2GB GTX 860M and it mostly worked. So, I guess that you can make one of those work. It won't be ideal, but it will work most of the time. Rendering optimized media, fusion and output will be a bitch, though.

Thank you Tal. I appreciate your response.