Comparing video cards

[zoobie]

I was initially told that 2D cards for video editing were about the same and to upgrade to at least a 9 thousand series Radeon. I just ran a test at pcpitstop.com which shows the following.
Comments, suggestions?
Thanks

[thecoalman]

Nice to see mines at the top of the heap. Top of what heap I have no idea? Do you have a link? I highly suspect that has nothing to do with playing video but they are benchmarking them playing games. The software you use to play the video will have a greater impact than the video card.

[johns0]

Those dont like like game benchmark scores,since when does a 5600 beat a 6800?Looks like a value score which still isnt accurate.Any video card made in the last 3 years will be good enough for 2d video and playing dvds and editing them.

[waheed]

As thecoalman has pointed out, those benchmark results are for games.

Video Editing has nothing to do with Video Cards. Video Editing is mainly determined by the speed of your processor and to a lesser extent, memory.

[zoobie]

From pcpitstop.com:

PC Pitstop's video performance performs a basic test of your system's graphics capabilities and reports the result in millions of pixels displayed per second (MP/s).

This table shows the best average scores we have recorded for a particular video board and driver for systems with a CPU and MHz similar to yours. The first row represents the current score for this system. Remember that PC Pitstop's test measures 2D performance; the speed of a particular board on 3D applications such as games may be very different. Also, video performance and system reliability can vary greatly as a function of the drivers that are being used. A driver that provides the highest score may not provide the best image quality and/or system stability.

[thecoalman]

Those dont like like game benchmark scores,since when does a 5600 beat a 6800?Looks like a value score which still isnt accurate.Any video card made in the last 3 years will be good enough for 2d video and playing dvds and editing them.

Yes I guess they wouldn't be, I just looked at the first few.

@zoobie, that's not a link but a quote. And after reading it I'm mopre confused than ever. Best I can gather that's an overall score for your particualr system. As you can see the 6800 is listed lower than the others....which is complete BS. I'm guessing that your system as you typed it in couldn't take full advantage of the card. but we could on guessing without a link.

[edDV]

What is the "video score"?
It's about acceleration for video games, not anything to do with video editing. Video editing only requires the following.

- 2D menu display at your desired resolution
- Overlay so that live video can be windowed from a frame buffer into the display without need for rendering.

Nice to have features include:

- at least 1920 x 1080 (or 1200) 2D resolution so that 1080i HDTV can be displayed directly.
- dual monitor support to spread menus over two monitors or feeding an HDTV from the second output.
- YUV as well as RGB analog output modes (for driving YUV conponent displays)
- VGA or DVI-I analog output so that "Power Strip" software can create custom scan rates needed by HDTV set "componet analog inputs" to 480p, 540p, 720p or 1080i
- DVI-I digital support of HDTV 480i, 480p, 720p and 1080i

ATI features that I would like to understand more

- VIDEO IMMERSION I HDTV playback acceleration (found on 8xxx, 90xx and 92xx Radeon cards)
- VIDEO IMMERSION II HDTV playback acceleration (found on 8500, 95xx, 96xx and 98xx Radeon cards)

from ATI:

"Video Immersion™ II
ATI’s Video Immersion™ II technology integrates industry-leading digital video features, including advanced adaptive de-interlacing algorithm, temporal filtering, and video gamma enhancement for unprecedented video quality and integrated digital TV decode capability. In addition, there is component output support for HDTVs (High Definition Television) at 480i, 480p, 720p and 1080i."


I can find no other explanation of "Video Immersion II" technology. It seems to allow YUV output and therefore compatibility with the ATI component HDTV adapter. This is mainly used to display your desktop on an HDTV.

I can find no detail on the "advanced adaptive de-interlacing algorithm, temporal filtering, and video gamma enhancement for unprecedented video quality and integrated digital TV decode capability" and how this is being used for anything other than HDTV output of video games. I can find no white paper.

Likewise, NVidia is equally vaugue about their "video" technology, for example the GeForce™ 6800

"PureVideo Technology

* Adaptable programmable video processor
* MPEG video encode and decode
* High-definition MPEG-2 hardware acceleration
* High-quality video scaling and filtering
* DVD and HDTV-ready MPEG-2 decoding up to 1920x1080i resolutions
* Dual integrated 400 MHz RAMDACs for display resolutions up to and including 2048 × 1536 at 85Hz
* Display gamma correction
* Microsoft® Video Mixing Renderer (VMR) supports multiple video windows with full video quality and features in each window"


If anyone has any additional detail on these ATI and NVidia features and how they are used, please come forward.


Ref:

http://www.ati.com/products/home-office.html
http://www.ati.com/products/hdtvadapter/faq.html
http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce6_techspecs.html

[zoobie]

I think I meant videodisplay rather than videoediting in my first post.
Ok...The video score corresponds with the millions of pix displayed per sec...in my case, 109.
I think the results of pcpitstop may be whack due to various misconfig's of other users systems (wrong drivers, etc) which is why they're at the site to begin with.
I don't really think there's a bottleneck in my card...rather, that's just how this card is performing on my problemless box. For all I know, I may have the wrong driver although I've tried 5 with no differences. As mentioned, with newer cards comes fastering displays.
I used to have it out for gamers but now, I'm thankful little bobby is upstairs playing the latest detracting from writing more malware. Otherwise, we'd have 2x the amount.

PS - Theres no link because its a temporary result.

PSS - Verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry interesting...but confusing

[edDV]

Games are a diffferent animal than anything else "video".

3D modes go unused for video capture, edit and display.

[junkmalle]

PCPitstop's video tests don't test any 3D functions of your display card. You can actually see the test as it's running on your computer. It is examining low level functions like rectangular fills, elliptical fills, drawing text, scrolling text, and copying blocks of pixels from one location to another. These are all used in the normal operation of the Windows interface.

Certainly some cards can do these things faster than others. But all cards currently do these things far faster than you need for any normal work in Windows. Do you care if one card can draw 1 million characters to the screen per second and another can draw 2 million? Or if a card can put up 500 dialog boxes a second vs 1000? A few places where the very slowest of cards will show a noticable difference is when "smooth scrolling" (Internet Explorer option) and "show window contents while dragging" is enabled. A very slow card (for example a 7 year old AGP 1x car) will show a little lag.

[lordsmurf]

As others have said, that benchmark is crap, and it has nothing to do with video.

[KenJ57]

From the Adobe Premiere Elements User to User Forums FAQ:

Cards that support Direct3D, Vertex Shader 2.0 and Pixel Shader 2.0 will enable Premiere Elements to use GPU effects and transitions.

In other words, Elements will use the GPU to accellerate effects and transistions during editing. However, trying to decipher all the marketing jargon to try and find the cards that support these standards annoys me, to say the least.

[lordsmurf]

I think most modern cards support that.

[edDV]

From the Adobe Premiere Elements User to User Forums FAQ:

Cards that support Direct3D, Vertex Shader 2.0 and Pixel Shader 2.0 will enable Premiere Elements to use GPU effects and transitions.

In other words, Elements will use the GPU to accellerate effects and transistions during editing. However, trying to decipher all the marketing jargon to try and find the cards that support these standards annoys me, to say the least.

That is true. These are Microsoft DirectX9 standards and are intended to be be used for accelerated display but could be used for effects as well. I haven't heard of this being a major factor yet. DirectShow is heavility used for I/O and streams. Sound is also processed through DirectX.

The main point above was that expensive graphics cards are unlikely to provide any benefit. Not any more so than the lowest card in the line.

[pfh]

To simplify, think of it like this- Your graphics card works on the outgoing display where your video proc. card works on the incoming signal before it gets displayed.

[VERVE]

Sorry was that a list for the best video cards for video editing?!?!

lol..Matrox products arent on the list, and this is how I know this list is worthless. :P

Everyone knows Matrox are unbeatable.

If ur looking for a serious card for editing, check out the P series or the Pahrelia series from matrox..expensive though.

www.matrox.com

although I did compare the ATI 9800 Pro...looks solid to me.

VERVE

[BJ_M]

Sorry was that a list for the best video cards for video editing?!?!

lol..Matrox products arent on the list, and this is how I know this list is worthless. :P

Everyone knows Matrox are unbeatable.

If ur looking for a serious card for editing, check out the P series or the Pahrelia series from matrox..expensive though.

www.matrox.com

although I did compare the ATI 9800 Pro...looks solid to me.

VERVE

matrox cards are very good - i really liked them - up to a point (and used them for many years) ..

Problem is that the Pahrelia is not mpeg/HD accelerated ... you can quickly tell the diff. by playing a HD file on a nvidia or on a matrox ..

They have also fallen behind in severa other things for video editing - like preview and overlay compatability for AVID and Sony systems as an example.

[VERVE]

Good to know BJ,

I use Matrox solely for RTX100 and Premiere...

by the way, I'm upgrading from G550 probably to a P750...although i had a side by side comparison with ATI 9800 PRO, and was amazed that they have the exact same specs except:

Matrox P750 64mb 200$
Radeon 9800 Pro 256mb 200$

weird no? Matrox low on mb yet same price. do u know why?

VERVE

[BJ_M]

value in numbers - matrox is a small canadian company really

ati is a big canadian company - a LOT of companies making ati cards, only one making matrox cards

look at this chart
- out of 62 MILLION graphic devices ... (note creative labs includes Wildcat and 3D labs high end graphics cards)

[BJ_M]

the intel numbers above are so high because so many notebooks use intergrated graphics and intel chipsets

source:

http://www.jonpeddie.com/about/press/MarketWatch_Q105.shtml

[BJ_M]

matrox sells under a million cards a year -

ati sells 70 million

[VERVE]

yeah BJ but quantity does not indicate how proffesional the card is.

Ati comes in lots of already built pc's and laptops here in the region. they r good and cheap relatively...great for office and home use.

matrox is obviously very expensive, yet dedicated for business may it be graphics, video, or medical...

thats why i asked how come the two cards i specified are equal in cost, yet, mb memory differ.

does matrox have something unique for editing..and what is it?

VERVE

[BJ_M]

quantity lowers prices - the question i answered .. the more you build and by more fab plants - the lower the costs overall.

in terms of quality - matrox is very good, but falls behind the big boys by years as they can not afford to be at the bleeding edge ...

does matrox have something uniq. for editing ? = yes and no , they do have preview ability with some apps , but as everyone knows in the video editing business- you can not preview on a pc monitor 100% if you are at all serious ..

ati make cheap and they make expensive - many of ati cards cost more than ANY matrox cards, some cost the same and some are much less. The same goes for nvidia ...

Now days - the image quality between matrox and any better nvidia and/or ati card is nil ..

sad really - as matrox is such a good company - but their bread and butter is from multi display cards more than anything else ..

matrox was a mainstream card, you could buy them at any retailer years ago (remember the rainbow runner?) -- they wisely got out of that market ..

[zoobie]

The card I replaced was an very old Matrox...heh heh.