Blackmagic Forum

Hello everyone,
Total newbie here, so please be gentle

I am a little confused about which GPUs to upgrade to.

Will a low end GPU like the GTX 960 which is now available in a 4 GB version work OK with Resolve lite (free version)?
Or do I "have" to get a much more expensive card like a GTX 980 with same 4 GB?

I know, I know, the bandwidth is higher, the clock speed is higher etc but ...my take on this is:
1. If it is really all about the amount of RAM (GBs) Resolve needs, why can't I go with a cheaper card with the same 4 GB RAM as the much more expensive card?
2. I do not mind waiting a little bit for Resolve to do its final render, etc, but I surely do not want it to error out, saying your GPU's memory is full.


My main use case: editing 1080p footage from a Canon 6D.
I do want to try editing 4k footage from my Lumia 1520 Cellphone (must be crappy)

Just another hobbyist...
-Rajeev

Currently on a GTX 460, circa 2010

4GB of VRAM is generally enough for Resolve.

It matters what type of footage you are working with. For example, 6k R3D would require a lot more GPU horsepower than 1080p ProRes. I would guess a GTX960 would be fine for your needs, but I don't have any first-hand experience with it. I am running a GTX970 and am decently happy editing 4KHD R3D in a 1080 timeline with realtime playback via HD-SDI.

ok so in short, what I was trying to say in my earlier post which blew up was:

I hope someone here is using the GTX 960 4GB

970 I would like to stay away from because of the 3.5 GB fiasco and subsequent litigation against Nvidia (could post URLs but not allowed)

Seems like 960 also has the same RAM issue like 970
(could post URLs but not allowed)

I may want to look at AMD's R9 290 because for the same cash (around $250) I can get real 4 GB RAM + much more bandwidth (128 bit vs 512 bit)

Rajeev Mehra wrote:ok so in short, what I was trying to say in my earlier post which blew up was:

I hope someone here is using the GTX 960 4GB

970 I would like to stay away from because of the 3.5 GB fiasco and subsequent litigation against Nvidia (could post URLs but not allowed)

Seems like 960 also has the same RAM issue like 970
(could post URLs but not allowed)

I may want to look at AMD's R9 290 because for the same cash (around $250) I can get real 4 GB RAM + much more bandwidth (128 bit vs 512 bit)

960 cuda power wouldn't let you use all of its 4gb vram in most cases. 2gb is enough for 1080p work with this card. Best choice in your case is find 770 or 780 at good price.
AMD is not recommened.

Thanks Alexander,
but why are you recommending the last generation of Nvidia cards, the GTX 7xx?
Why not get 970?

Alexander Rodikov wrote:960 cuda power wouldn't let you use all of its 4gb vram in most cases. 2gb is enough for 1080p work with this card. Best choice in your case is find 770 or 780 at good price.
AMD is not recommened.

Running GTX 770 4GB with RED Dragon at 6K, Timeline 1080, quality res 1/4. Also, I'm running ARRI Alexa XT ProRes 4444. Timeline is 1080. No issue.

We run the R9 290 and the Titan cards, have had no issues with Resolve and the R9 290 and it is very quick.
I believe there is an 8GB R9 card available as well.

Rajeev Mehra wrote:Thanks Alexander,
but why are you recommending the last generation of Nvidia cards, the GTX 7xx?
Why not get 970?

Price

As Alexander said, last generation NVidia cards can be had for 50% of their prices. I got a GTX 770 2GB for 135 GBP. Price when new was 275+.

In addition,*some 700 series cards* have higher memory bandwidth and CUDA cores relatively speaking when compared to 900 series. The 900 series is meant to be a lot more efficient in these two respects (just like modern cars are more fuel efficient compared to their previous models) so can do more with less - in gaming as the benchmarks have shown.

However comparative benchmarks for video editing/rendering are sparse (for example 770 vs 970 DaVinci benchmark) and not sure if DaVinci utilises the newer NVidia technologies. I wouldn't think so. (delta colour compression for example). Video rendering is a different ball game from game rendering.

ok thanks for the tip.
However, just by going with Amazon's used prices...

770 4GB is around $250
970 4GB is around $270

So last gen's 770 is not that much cheaper...I would gladly pay $20 for current generation GPU.

Yes, ebay may be another story.

Alexander Rodikov wrote:

Rajeev Mehra wrote:Thanks Alexander,
but why are you recommending the last generation of Nvidia cards, the GTX 7xx?
Why not get 970?

Price

Hi Paul,
Thanks for chiming in here. I have read your threads about similar questions you had in the past and I appreciate your opinion here.

However, I am not sure about the higher cuda cores and mem bandwidth.

Bandwidth:
Both 770 and 970 are listed as having 224 GB/s mem. bandwidth and 256 bit memory interface width.

CUDA cores:
770 has 1536
970 has 1664


Looking at their specs side by side, they are almost identical, with some specs better in the 970 like CUDA cores and max display resolution (not that important).

I am trying to upload a image with comparison of the specs. Lets see if I have permissions...

Paul Sangha wrote:As Alexander said, last generation NVidia cards can be had for 30-50% of their prices. I got a GTX 770 2GB for 135 GBP. Price when new was 275+.

In addition, they have higher memory bandwidth and CUDA cores relatively speaking when compared to 900 series. The 900 series is meant to be a lot more efficient in these two respects (just like modern cars are more fuel efficient compared to their previous models) so can do more with less - in gaming as the benchmarks have shown.

However comparative benchmarks for video editing/rendering are sparse (for example 770 vs 970 DaVinci benchmark) and not sure if DaVinci utilises the newer NVidia technologies. I wouldn't think so. (delta colour compression for example). Video rendering is a different ball game from game rendering.

Hi Rajeev - Yes I should have been more clear - higher bandwidth and CUDA was in reference to your choice - GTX 960 (and consequently its previous version - the GTX 760)

GTX 760
1152 CUDA Cores
192 GB/sec memorty Bandwidth

GTX 960
1024 CUDA Cores
112 GB/sec memorty Bandwidth

With the above specs, 960 equals or betters 760 in gaming. I cant say about Resolve.

Also - yes ebay is a better bet for used prices. I use www(dot)bidvoy(dot)net to check current average used price on ebay. Bidvoy website looks at all auctions and gives you an average price. Rest assured Resolve can work nicely on entry level GPUs without any problems (so long as you don't go heavy on the grading like the professionals do on here who work in television/advertising/film). Plenty of people on here that work with Red Raw footage on HD timeline resolution with a GTX 760 without problems. Google 'optimizing resolve for playback' and you should be good to go with a 760/960 on an HD timeline resolution (source footage can be higher res but that's fine).

ok thanks Paul.

You are into photography also, right?
How does your 770 work with apps like Lightroom?

I am a heavy Lightroom 6 user and with my current setup (Win10+GTX 460) I cannot run develop module which running LR on two monitors (F11). LR crashes. LR on single monitor,,,,rock stable

Rajeev, did you decide on a purchase yet?

I got a 970 and it goes out of memory when doing uhd AND TNR @2frames and good settings.
However, it DOES deliver at UHD.

BTW rendering to cache also produces errors.

No CG,
I have not decided yet. Still very confused and your post makes me even more confused!

After reading your post.......I am sitting here thinking.....you know what........if Resolve wants such an expensive card that I cannot afford it .......but Sony Vegas Pro works fine with my dinosaur card......why bother to use Resolve?

PS: no offense meant......I just do not have the deep pockets to justify hundreds of dollars on a GPU. Not a gamer either, so even less incentive to buy an expensive GPU. Just a hobbyist here, trying to use free Resolve.

C.G. Fell wrote:Rajeev, did you decide on a purchase yet?

I got a 970 and it goes out of memory when doing uhd AND TNR @2frames and good settings.
However, it DOES deliver at UHD.

BTW rendering to cache also produces errors.

Rajeev, I forgot to mention IN 4K I was measuring.
In HD you are fine with a 970.
If you're not working a lot of temporal noise reduction, and mainly go for grading etc,
I recommend to take a look at the new gtx950, it is inexpensive and has 2gb or RAM.

In some preliminary testing I found that if you start using temporal (paid version of resolve)
and spatial NR, along with motionblur, even in HD, you can use more than 3gb of memory.
Depending on your budget a 970 is the right choice, or waiting for the 4gb flavour of the 950,
which is rumoured to also be released as 950ti.

Sony Vegas is not free AFAIK, therefore comparing the two apps may not be fair entirely.
If you're using Resolve primarily as an editing tool, even a lower end gpu will do the trick.
Colour nodes etc are not nearly as taxing as motion blur and NR (noise reduction).
Since processing performance is top priority for adobe atm, rather than features, we'll likely
see all developer focus on that, which also means using resources more efficiently.

Also, with the advent of HBM memory. GPU in 2016 will see a double in their VRAM. So if you're
not pressed to buy right now, wait a little after xmas. But then again, it's always too late or too
soon to buy hardware. After the game is before the game. As a rule of thumb, the second best
cpu, gpu, etc is usually only half price, but performs close to the top product.

I am also looking for an inexpensive video card to use with DaVinci Resolve 12

I built a decent system 5 years ago (never intended to be a gaming rig btw), it has a have a EVGA NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX+ as well as the following:

i7 - Intel Core i7-2600K Sandy Bridge Quad-Core 3.4GHz (3.8GHz Turbo Boost) LGA 1155 95W
16GB RAM - G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800)
850W PS - CORSAIR HX Series HX850 850W ATX12V 2.3 / EPS12V 2.91 SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS GOLD Certified Modular

I am using Davinci Resolve (free) to edit and apply LUTs to .mov 1080p footage from my DJI Phantom 3 Advanced Drone and make short clips.

Looking to do a budget minded upgrade to my video card, I would like to spend under $150 if possible.
For what I want to do would a 2GB card suffice? If so out of these which would you recommend?
These are all 2GB cards, if I need to go for 4GB please let me know.


EVGA GeForce GTX 750Ti with G-SYNC Support 2GB GDDR5 128bit, Dual-Link, DVI-I, HDMI, DP Graphics Card (02G-P4-3751-KR) @ Amazon for 125.44

EVGA GeForce GTX 950 DirectX 12 02G-P4-1950-KR 2GB 128-Bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 SLI Support Video Card @ Newegg for 139.99

Gigabyte GeForce GTX 950 2GB 128 Bit GDDR5 PCiE Video Graphics Cards GV-N950OC-2GD @ Amazon for 149.99

MSI GeForce GTX 950 DirectX 12 GTX 950 GAMING 2G 2GB 128-Bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support ATX GAMING Video Card @ Newegg for 149.99

Or is there another better recommended card that I should go with below or at this price point?

Thanks!

Alexander Rodikov wrote:AMD is not recommened.

Why? We have been using AMD Radeon R9 390 with 8GB with DR 12.1 and it's very capable even doing 4K UHD and no issues. Price is decent too. If you are referring to AMD R7 or R8 with Resolve pre version 12, maybe it had some issues but I don't know - we're not using older DR versions or older AMD gpus. However, in DR 12.x, AMD is in the BM recommendation list and as I have said, works great!

Well, even the new MacPro with two D700 is recommended by BM, but that's a different subject.

OTOH, recent versions of DR work much better with OpenGL and consequently, with AMD cards.