GRAPHIXHIGH :
IF THAT WAS THE CASE THEN MAYBE I SHOULD GET A AMD 8120 OR 8150 AND THAT HAS 8 CORES THEN
Nothing wrong with an FX-Zambezi. They just run hot and are less efficient than the Sandys. There is no real magic in an Ivy at this time of transition over a Sandy, or even AMD in many cases.
Adobe CS6 and Vegas Pro11 are big on OpenCL, compute and GPU acceleration. There are questions concerning CS6 and MPE/CUDA on Windows, especially with OpenCL -- MACs, apparently, have full support.
Bright lines may be reforming between desktop gaming cards and workstation pro cards. The money saved from a 2500k/FX8120 (as opposed to Ivy or a 2600k) can readily be spent more efficiently elsewhere.
Because it simply comes down to whether you are going to purchase a gaming card or a workstation card. That, apparently, is the $$ about which we are talking .
Your performance in CS6 and Vegas is highly dependent upon it, certainly more so than your CPU. GPU editing and encoding can be 2X to 3X, and greater, more efficient than the CPU.
Lookee here . . .
In Vegas, I've seen benchies where it is even more apparent. Any AMD/Intel
with something like the FirePro V5900 2GB will simply curb-stomp the fastest Ivy with a premium gaming card in CS6 and Vegas Pro 11.
edit: Here yah go . . .
From:
Benchmarking Sony Vegas Pro 11 using GPU on FirePro / Quadro
Vegas Pro 11 is designed to take advantage of GPU acceleration for video FX, transitions, compositing, pan/crop, track motion and encoding. The series of test discussed below used an AMD FX 8150 8-core processor, 3.6 GHz, 8GB RAM, running Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit. The benchmarks evaluated preview and rendering with OpenCL GPU acceleration . . . .
GPU compute clearly scales beyond any differences in processor performance.