![]() ![]() The Puget Systems benchmark test for Resolve goes on to state the following: In this video, he created a graph comparing the load balance between the two systems. In the previous showdown, I referenced a video from Zebra Zone. While the CPU is still a critical element of smooth operation (the CPU will always factor into every action in Resolve), the balance favors the GPU. Resolve, on the other hand, bases its performance on the user’s GPU. So, while the GPU is a peripheral in Premiere’s performance, it’s not giving Premiere the much-needed boost it needs on a machine with a low-performing CPU. In almost every case, you will see a higher performance with a single higher-end card than multiple lower-end cards. However, be aware that while having a decent video card is in many ways a requirement for Premiere Pro, a more powerful card may not actually be any faster, depending on the effects you use and what resolution/codec your footage is … While Premiere Pro technically can use multiple cards at once, we have seen extremely minimal performance gains when doing so. While it isn’t used much if you have just a plain clip with no effects, having a video card is more and more important, depending on what GPU-accelerated effects you use in your projects. Well, in the Puget Systems Premiere Pro Benchmark, they say the following: Well, what if you have a moderate CPU and high-end GPU? With PC gaming at an all-time high, many gamers unknowingly sit on a rig that could be used as a powerful editing machine. In the video below, the guys from Cinecom offer several suggestions on how you can optimize Premiere Pro without purchasing an expensive CPU. Although, admittedly, it does turn mushy as soon as I apply any effects. ![]() I have a $500 processor and can still (somewhat) get real-time playback of 4K clips. Of course, this isn’t to say that without a $2,000 processor, Premiere is obsolete. That defeats the point of our prior showdown to save you money. Puget Systems, a website that runs benchmarking tests built on their own systems, lists the Intel Core i9 9980XE as the best CPU for Premiere. You can’t ignore how CPU intensive the software has become. This could be a result of Adobe adding more unnecessary features and processing, ultimately bogging down the software. ![]() You hear people say that with each update, Premiere seems to be worsening. While Adobe has made strides with GPU acceleration (GPU is your graphics card), they remain adamant on CPU usage to process the software. While there could be many reasons why Premiere Pro crashes - or performs sluggishly - in all likelihood, it’s due to a dated or low-performing CPU. If you follow enough filmmaking pages on social media, I’m confident that you’ve seen at least one “meme” poking fun at how much Premiere Pro crashes. Since Resolve and Premiere operate differently, there’s also a case to be made that even with the lower cost, you can get better playback from Resolve. Somewhat meaning that you can at minimum get video playback at a low resolution, but not necessarily playback from the original file. subscription-based, with 4K, 12bit footage, 10Gb per-minute files, an onslaught of built-in effects, and today’s media, you’re going to have to invest in a machine that can somewhat handle these files. Regardless how much money you can save with free software vs. In this round, we’re looking at how the CPU-dependent Premiere squares up against the GPU-leaning Resolve - and the financial ramifications of these two applications for a no-to-low-budget filmmaker. The result was that Resolve would have you walking away with a lot more cash in your pocket - even with the paid studio version - after a year of use. Premiere showdown, we analyzed the cost of the two applications. Today, we’re looking at the financial implications of how the CPU-dependent Premiere competes against the GPU-leaning Resolve.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |