Is video editing CPU or GPU dependent?

Slava

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2002
914
0
18,980
Well, I posted this in Video Editing forum but no one seems to be reading it or posting in it anymore. I suppose we have to get used to everyone hanging out here, in the Graphics Cards forum...

Anyhow, I would like to know whether video editing is more dependent on the CPU or the GPU. Can anyone help with that?

Thanks.

<font color=green>"The creative powers of English morphology are pathetic compared to what we find in other languages." (Steven Pinker, The Language Instinct)</font color=green> 😎
 
The actual video processing is very CPU dependant. While doing the actual editing, good fast RAM will also be very helpful.

GPU has very little or nothing to do with video editing. Today's graphic cards do play an important role with video playback, especially where Image Quality is concerned, I may be mistaken about this, but I think that Pixel Shaders are used to enhance IQ and get rid of the blockiness of streaming video.
 
MOST of the time, it's CPU dependant.

*BUT*

Certain software (like the new Adobe Premiere 6) uses DirectX for realtime effects, so video hardware is also needed for speed.

________________
<b>Radeon <font color=red>9500 PRO</b></font color=red> <i>(hardmodded 9500, o/c 340/310)</i>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>~2600+</b></font color=red> <i>(2400+ @ 2145 Mhz)</i>
<b>3dMark03: <font color=red>4,055</b>
 
Thanks, guys. This is what I thought but someone I spoke to yesterday got me confused 😱) Thanks for the help.

<font color=green>"The creative powers of English morphology are pathetic compared to what we find in other languages." (Steven Pinker, The Language Instinct)</font color=green> 😎
 
I think that Pixel Shaders are used to enhance IQ and get rid of the blockiness of streaming video.
ATI demonstrated this when they released Radeon 9?00, but I don't think many software dev. have yet implemented this.

--
Lookin' to fill that <font color=blue>GOD</font color=blue> shape hole!
 
ATI demonstrated this when they released Radeon 9?00, but I don't think many software dev. have yet implemented this.
Again, I could be mistaken but, Software devs don't have to implement anything, it's done automatically whenever there's a video overlay.
 
Actually it is developer specific, and not automatic, but it works with Real Player, Divx and ATI's own mediaplayer. It already works on Windows Media Player in Beta form, I think they are still waiting on rights management crap IIRC.

The technology is fullstream/video smoothing.

<A HREF="http://www.ati.com/products/brochures/5639fullstreamWP.pdf" target="_new">http://www.ati.com/products/brochures/5639fullstreamWP.pdf</A>

The things is it can cause hiccups, if you run files side by side, you will notice the occasional hitch for very large files, like those on MS' site;

<A HREF="http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/content_provider/film/ContentShowcase.aspx" target="_new">http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/content_provider/film/ContentShowcase.aspx</A>

In fact the fullstream is likely working in places it doesn't have to. I found far smoother implementation running un-optimised media players rather than those running with the fullstream in this case. For normal .net video it's great though. These files though test just about any system.

Of course, it's not really what Slava was talking about, but it is cool.

As for most important for editing, IMO CPU > Memory > VPU/GPU.
Like Cleeve said Adobe will take advanatage of capable cards, but the impact of going from an R7500 to an X800/GF6800 likely isn't as big as going from 512mb to 1.5 gb of memory (even if it's PC2700 CL3 stuff). Unless of course you're editing a 2 second clip :lol: .


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: