Asus GTX780 or GTX780TI

DMK13

Reputable
Aug 27, 2014
15
0
4,510
0
Hi everyone!
I'm building a computer for video editing and 3D animation and I'm considering two options- Asus GTX 780 and Asus GTX 780 TI. I would like to know what's the difference between these two and if the difference is worth the price.

 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111
Beyond CUDA cores, which application are you using? Some pro apps work better with pro cards (depends
on the app, ie. better viewport precision, colour depth, etc.) Free tools should be fine with consumer cards
though. Between the ones you've mentioned, definitely the 780 Ti. It has a good performance advantage,
and I don't think the cost saving with the 780 is worthwhile.

Naturally, the above assumes the app you're using can exploit CUDA. Blender can via the Cycles & Octane
plugins, AE does aswell (MPE, plus accelerated GUI features).

Ian.

 

DMK13

Reputable
Aug 27, 2014
15
0
4,510
0


I use Premier Pro, After Effects and I Would like to learn Maya. First I wanted to get something from the list of Autodesk recommended hardware but I can hardly afford Quadro k4000, plus I was told that gtx 780ti is better than k4000 for adobe products.
 

DMK13

Reputable
Aug 27, 2014
15
0
4,510
0


Yep, It's CS6 but I want to switch to CC

Found :)
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111
i7Baby writes:
> If you found them, then are either the 780 or 780ti adobe-certified?

Doesn't matter if they're certified, just add them to the ray tracer supported cards file, it'll work fine.
My file has everything, including 460, 280, you name it, all work ok. Quad-460 is amusing. :)


DMK13 writes:
> I use Premier Pro, After Effects and I Would like to learn Maya. ...

Premiere Pro is a little odd. Adobe keeps bouncing back & forth as to whether to really support CUDA
or not. AE certainly does in numerous ways, couple of 780 Tis would rock. As for Maya, it's changed
in recent times, Autodesk have rewritten it to be a lot more friendly to consumer cards (grud knows
why); used to be that Maya was 10X faster on a pro card, but not anymore, though that could easily
be down to the bias in the nature of the subtests (pro cards are generally massively faster at things
like AA lines). Just don't expect perfect viewport or geometry precision from a gamer card; they cut
corners in order to get the performance (it's why a 7970 scores so well for Viewperf12 even though
the image precision is not remotely as good as a Quadro in many cases).


> ... but I can hardly afford Quadro k4000, ...

Check the used market, I won a used K5000 for only 525 UKP. Actually it was unused,
just removed from a new system to make room for a K6000. Bagged two 6000s in a
similar manner, and some 2000s/4000s.


> ... plus I was told that gtx 780ti is better than k4000 for adobe products.

Overall, yes, because AE doesn't make use of newer OGL stuff for its GUI, much of which is old code, etc.
Thus, the OGL support of modern gamer cards is more than enough. It's hard to quantify the viewport
precision benefit of a pro card in this case, but overall a 780 Ti should be fine, and it'll provide far more
CUDA power than a Quadro in the same price range.

I built a compromise system for someone, ie. a used K5000 and two GTX 580s, total CUDA power
equivalent to 1.5X a Titan Black; far better primary display performance for the user's other pro apps
which run badly on gamer cards, better viewport precision, etc., but with good CUDA provision for AE.
The trick is to use version-matched quadro/desktop drivers, then it works fine.

Ian.

 
i can tell you there isn't going to be any meaningful performance gain by going with the 780ti over a 780, and even a gtx660 is still going to give you 75% the performance. and depending on the task, even entry level amd options like an hd7770 is not that far behind but 20% the price of a 780ti.

i personally would look for a good used gtx580 if i wanted the acceleration.
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111
So you've tested this, yes? What are your numbers?

Sorry but you're wrong, the extra speed is useful, and the 600 series cards are awful
for CUDA (a 580 is faster than all of them).

AMD cards do not support CUDA, hence useless for AE.

I've employed more than a dozen used GTX 580s in AE systems. A 780 Ti will be about the
same as two 580s. If the budget is available, a new 780 Ti makes far more sense: proper
warranty, less power usage, less heat (which makes CPU oc'ing easier), better expandability,
more efficient resource usage within AE with fewer GPUs (the app really does not scale across
multiple GPUs that well, sometimes causing load thrashing for certain types of render, where
scenes don't split so well). I've been testing these issues for 2 years now.

Note that only the 3GB 580s are worth bothering with for AE and have any degree
of future proofing, but they're harder to find, more expensive, etc. So far I've bought
nine Palit 3GB cards, couple of Zotacs, and six MSI LXs. The MSI would be the best
option for a used 580 if one can find them, but they do go for a hefty premium over
standard 580 3GB cards, and a lot more than a 1.5GB 580 (often 2X more).

With the approach of Maxwell, the best strategy for tight budgets is to look for
used 780 Tis. My AE system has four MSI 3GB 580s, its CUDA power is faster than
two Titan Blacks.

Ian.

 

Similar threads


ASK THE COMMUNITY