Hello Forum,
this question might seem like it has been asked a thousand times, but please let me explain a bit first:
My name is Michael, I'm a run & gun video journalist. After Premiere crashed one too many times I tried Davinci once more. When I bought the studio version for my C200 there was no multi-cam and no auto-align by sound, but now it seems there are all the features I need for my daily work. Plus it actually feels much nicer and isn't as clunky. So I've been using it a lot lately.
My job actually doesn't involve any noteworthy color grading. I shoot, rough cut, send it to the client. As fast as possible. So I might not be the typical Davinci user, but I like it very much over the alternatives on Windows.
That is why I'm puzzled about which new hardware configuration makes sense. I desperately need a new computer, but as you know GPUs are hard to come by. However, I'm looking at the whole RTX 30 range.
Puget Systems says: "While DaVinci Resolve heavily relies on the performance of your GPU (especially when using OpenFX or noise reduction), the processor (or CPU) is still a critical component [...]". They give different scores to all the cards ranging from 1185 for the 3060 TI to 1427 with the 3090. It seems to be a big difference. People on the forum also never get tired of stating how the GPU is important.
That being said the column "4k h264 to h264" gives all of them a score of 90. All my material is coming and going in 4k h264. It almost seems like those cards all have the same component to do that job. Otherwise, why would the results be the same?
In other threads, I also read that transcoding and generating optimized media is done by the CPU. So is it possible spending more on the higher GPUs is a waste of money in my case?
The features I'm using are:
Importing & Exporting h264 4k
Downscaling to 1080p & 720p
Converting to lower bitrates
Upscaling, Zoom & Rotating
Stabilizing
Generating Optimized Media (That hopefully becomes unnecessary with the new computer?)
2d Lower Thirds, 2d Overlays, 2d Texts, etc.
Multi-Cam & Auto-Align by Audio
Of course, I also have to do some color, but nothing crazy, mostly fixing exposure, white balance, and contrast.
The most important thing to me is a very smooth timeline experience when trimming things. Scrubbing is important. Ideally without losing time to transcoding before.
Will I benefit from a better GPU or almost not at all? Or should I rather invest in a better CPU?
Currently looking at AMD 5900x with any of the new RTX 30 cards. If it's one of the cheaper options I might be able to go for the AMD 5950x.
Lastly which role does the VRAM play in my use case? As I rough cut material my timelines are often 30min to 60min long. Does it matter? Or is that only for "fancy" effects?
Thank you so much for reading that far.
Cheers,
Michael
PS: I also apologize to all the color graders and cinematographers for my crude workflow and low-quality process with lossy files. That is just how it is in my field.
this question might seem like it has been asked a thousand times, but please let me explain a bit first:
My name is Michael, I'm a run & gun video journalist. After Premiere crashed one too many times I tried Davinci once more. When I bought the studio version for my C200 there was no multi-cam and no auto-align by sound, but now it seems there are all the features I need for my daily work. Plus it actually feels much nicer and isn't as clunky. So I've been using it a lot lately.
My job actually doesn't involve any noteworthy color grading. I shoot, rough cut, send it to the client. As fast as possible. So I might not be the typical Davinci user, but I like it very much over the alternatives on Windows.
That is why I'm puzzled about which new hardware configuration makes sense. I desperately need a new computer, but as you know GPUs are hard to come by. However, I'm looking at the whole RTX 30 range.
Puget Systems says: "While DaVinci Resolve heavily relies on the performance of your GPU (especially when using OpenFX or noise reduction), the processor (or CPU) is still a critical component [...]". They give different scores to all the cards ranging from 1185 for the 3060 TI to 1427 with the 3090. It seems to be a big difference. People on the forum also never get tired of stating how the GPU is important.
That being said the column "4k h264 to h264" gives all of them a score of 90. All my material is coming and going in 4k h264. It almost seems like those cards all have the same component to do that job. Otherwise, why would the results be the same?
In other threads, I also read that transcoding and generating optimized media is done by the CPU. So is it possible spending more on the higher GPUs is a waste of money in my case?
The features I'm using are:
Importing & Exporting h264 4k
Downscaling to 1080p & 720p
Converting to lower bitrates
Upscaling, Zoom & Rotating
Stabilizing
Generating Optimized Media (That hopefully becomes unnecessary with the new computer?)
2d Lower Thirds, 2d Overlays, 2d Texts, etc.
Multi-Cam & Auto-Align by Audio
Of course, I also have to do some color, but nothing crazy, mostly fixing exposure, white balance, and contrast.
The most important thing to me is a very smooth timeline experience when trimming things. Scrubbing is important. Ideally without losing time to transcoding before.
Will I benefit from a better GPU or almost not at all? Or should I rather invest in a better CPU?
Currently looking at AMD 5900x with any of the new RTX 30 cards. If it's one of the cheaper options I might be able to go for the AMD 5950x.
Lastly which role does the VRAM play in my use case? As I rough cut material my timelines are often 30min to 60min long. Does it matter? Or is that only for "fancy" effects?
Thank you so much for reading that far.
Cheers,
Michael
PS: I also apologize to all the color graders and cinematographers for my crude workflow and low-quality process with lossy files. That is just how it is in my field.
Thank you for the help!