Video Graphics Cards


Nice "water cooler" article

mrveronn's picture

This article is disappointing.  Hardly even up to the quality of a 'water cooler' chat---the type of casual conversation where you don't expect a deep analysis, but at the very least you hope to walk away with a few interesting tidbits of information (or gossip) to follow up on when you get back to your desk.


Do I expect to learn something about 'casual' or "gaming or wider" graphic card use from Videomaker. Hardly. A full third of this article is a bland description of the video card, its components (wow, a heat sink assembly, really?), a need to check that your power supply provides enough power, and to check it has the proper connectors for your monitor. Do your readers a favour and recommend they visit MaximumPC, or Tom's Hardware, or Anandtech websites to learn more about video cards and the lastest features. These are recognized experts that categorize, benchmark and exhaustively test video cards and help people decide if they need the latest generation of video cards, or if they can live with something a bit less cutting edge. So the first two thirds of this article are a waste.


Then the article (water cooler chat) finally turns to "Graphic Design". What? Is that what I'm doing on my computer? I thought I was editing video, not designing a brochure, newsletter or advertisement or building CAD drawings. If I want to know which video cards support the latest hardware acceleration (that is being trumpeted by Sony, Magix, Corel, Adobe, and so on) and how well it works then I could reasonable expect Videomaker to take a lead role on investigating, evaluating and recommending.


Maybe I’m just over-sensitive because I spent the last two weeks exchanging e-mails with technical support to try and understand if I was actually benefiting from CUDA-based hardware acceleration. I use Magix Video Edit Pro X4 and a NVIDIA GTX 470 video card.  My 85 minute soccer videos, shot in AVCHD, and exported to .mp4 were taking about 15 hours to export, using a two pass export process, and the MainConcept H.264/AVC codec.  Looking into the advanced settings I saw that hardware acceleration options (CUDA and OpenCL, why does the article only refer to OpenCL hardware acceleration??) were ‘grayed’ out and  so it became apparent that I wasn’t getting the benefit of my GPU.  My request for assistance to Magix resulted in a string of exchanged messages, but no success. Eventually, I was referred to MainConcept and so I’m drafting a message now to send to them.


So when I read this ‘casual’ article that brushes over the topic of hardware acceleration, a topic that should be of interest to every editor working with high definition footage, and then tosses in the Nvidia Quadro 4000 (like name dropping this $1,000 card at the water cooler), without trying to actually educate readers. My GTX has 448 CUDA cores, compared to the “Professional” Quadro 4000 with 256 CUDA cores. Why didn’t your editor research this and make a recommendation on which card would do better with hardware acceleration...?? What is the target market for the Quadro it CAD designers or Video editors...??? Why did your editor mention this card in particular?? Yes, the Quadro cards seem to offer real advantages to users of Adobe CS6, Premiere Pro, After Effects, and Avid Composer...supporting SDI output and 3D ray-tracing advantages...but does this card offer ANY advantages to Sony Movie Studio users, Avid Studio, Magix Movie Edit Pro MX or Video Pro X4 or X5, or any of the other ‘consumer’ or ‘prosumer’ versions of the software packages out there...???  These are the questions that your magazine needs to address. Who else out there is looking out for the VIDEO-EDITORS...??? 

And is there any advantage to the CUDA acceleration of NVIDIA cards compared to the OpenCL acceleration of the AMD cards...???? Gosh, who else out there is going to address these questions.  Videomaker, for shame, move away from the water cooler and invite us into the laboratory for a serious conversation.

Video Cards and Water Coolers

halfisher's picture

I love reading Videomaker but I think I have to agree with mrveronn's comments about this article. I can't be the hardware experts of the entire PC industry (if you were, you'd be MaximumPC and not Videomaker). It might also help us diaper-wearing newbie prosumers more if you gave some pricing of the better cards just so we can mortgage our home when we want a faster card :>)

Graphics Card

John Newby's picture

For me as a beginner this article was pretty good explaning why to look for something that fits your needs.  However, I'd love to see some type of comparison chart listing the models suggested and some others that compares features.  Then an explanation of features to understand their benefits. 



I find that there seems to be a gap of assumed knowledge when it comes to computer use in many articles, often there is an assumption you know all about a lot of stuff that is truly advanced.  Here the article is well situated for the beginner and intermediate.


As for those that got upset it's not advanced enough Videomaker might consider labling the article as beginner / intermediate / advanced. B/I/A   Here this could be labled for beginner to intemediate {For B/I}. 


That way the advanced people with there advanced knowledge can skip reading it and putting down everyone including the writer for not satisfying their Forbidden Planet Morbius like intelect and experience.  

Video Card for Video Editing

Thanks for the article, there's little doubt that nvidia and adobe changed the gameplan massively with cuda enabled cards. I think the hardware acceleration really speeds up the encoding on my wedding videos. I just wish they were not so expensive!

"To exceed customer expectations whilst capturing their unique story"