CUDA or Open CL?

[Roger]

I know that AM does not directly support either, but we all use other apps besides AM.

 

Which do you figure would be more beneficial in the long run, CUDA support or Open CL? It looks like both Davinci Resolve and Fusion support both, as well as Adobe Creative Suite but Open CL seems to have a bit more 3rd party support.

 

I'm looking at a possible video card upgrade and having a hard time deciding between AMD and Nvidia.

[Fuchur]

The problem with CUDA is, that it is NVIDIA only, while OpenCL is available for both.

CUDA is longer on the market, but in the long run I would say, OpenCL is more important just because it is available on both systems.

 

NVIDIA does support OpenCL, but much less effective than CUDA (because they want to promote CUDA).

Like that I prefer OpenCL and like that AMD is the better option there.

 

In the short term CUDA is a little faster for some renderers.

It depends on the software you want to use I would say.

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[Roger]

Basically this is what I use: AM, Davinci Resolve, Fusion, Krita, Adobe CS

 

I think all those support both but Open CL may be the better option for me. Plus the AMD card in my price range has more memory than the Nividia model.

[pixelplucker]

If you do get an AMD card stay away from XFS brand. The company has poor support and below average quality. Big names like MSI, Gigabyte etc are viable options. I have become a Gigabyte fan. Asus is a lousy brand and also has poor support.

[Fuchur]

In general ASUS is a good, more like a premium brand (for mainboards... I would not buy graphic card from them).

I never had a xfs but powercolor, gigabyte and msi. All good. Saphire is a good one to.

 

Pny and xfx have a bit of a cheap reputation.

[pixelplucker]

My last motherboard was Asus, kept turning off usb devices as they where being used. Instead of fixing the bios for it they came out with another board. My brother had 2 other Asus mainboards and within 6 months of each other they all died. My brother inlaw had 3 Asus boards all of which failed in less than a year. Maybe their tablets are ok or accessories made by another manufacturer but I wouldn't buy toilet paper from them in fear of that failing.

 

So far or ease of setup and stability Gigabyte has been good for me so far. I heard others say Saphire is good too.

 

What I really really hate with the desktop cards is they load them with gaming software, it has to be one of the worst ideas yet. Looking to build a workstation again, Nvide and Intel are so expensive now it is tough to make a descent server without going for broke.

[Fuchur]

Interesting and sounds troublesome... I have build many AMD-based machines with Asus-Boards and Gigabyte as well.. all are behaving well for years now. (I'd say around 15-18 systems... not sure...)

But maybe Asus got worse in the last 1 or 2 years or maybe they are not that good with Intel boards or something like that...

 

In the end I'd say go with Saphire or Gigabyte for the graphiccard if you can...

Saphire is often winning the game concerning speed and cooling, but they are not the cheapest neighter.

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[Roger]

The Sapphire R480 looks to be pretty competitive with the Geforce 1060. Only mark against it is it runs at about 150 watts full tilt compared to 75 for the Nvidia card. Going to be hard waiting for Black Friday / Cyber Monday this year.

[pixelplucker]

My last Radeon ran hot and drew a lot of power. The 1060 3gb is a pretty good card, mid range of the new generations and plenty fast. It is probably double the performance of my clunky GTX 950 that I am using now and the price is really good. My 950 has been able to handle just about anything I throw at it so I would say it's a safe buy.

 

Most the high end cards I have had I have stuck with PNY, nice company and no beef if something goes wrong. My theory is all the cards sold by various manufacturers are basically the same so best to go with the company you trust and prefer even if it's a couple of bucks different. Last think you want is to have to BBB them to get them to honor a warranty.

[Fuchur]

The difference in general are different cooling systems with different clockrates and settings on the card...

They are like that not different talking about the chipset used but can behave very differently depending on how aggressive they are overclocked and how well they are cooled down.

 

In general I tend to get a card, which is not overclocked very much... yes that costs me a little performance, but they will very likely last a longer, since they are not working at the limit all the time.

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[strato]

The problem with ATI cards are the drivers. I have a saphire 8100 card on the shelf because I could not find a driver that works with Hash, XSI and Resolve at the same time. Went back to a Nvidia card.