#I5 6600K QUICKSYNC FULL#
#I5 6600K QUICKSYNC ZIP#
#I5 6600K QUICKSYNC FREE#
#I5 6600K QUICKSYNC WINDOWS#

If you have one weak link in the chain will you get a very slow system. What you will need is a well balanced system where all the parts in a chain fit together. You ask: 'I have a fast CPU which compensates, up to a degree, my slow GPU?'

#I5 6600K QUICKSYNC FULL#

Normally I don't recommend a Ryzen 7 8 cores 16 threads CPU's as the motherboards only have one slot for a full speed PCIe 3.0 x4 SSD. Specially for 4K.įor Intel CPU's have I seen YouTube videos with 6 core i7-8700K overclocked to 4.9 GHz to be able to run Resolve in 4K.įor AMD do I normally recommend minimum 12 cores 24 threads Threadripper CPU's 1920X for 4K. Resolve require stronger hardware than you expect. If you some time look at the guide will you see that only the top HEDT line of CPU's are recommended together with motherboards with many PCIe lanes. Grabough wrote: on the other hand, I have a fast CPU which compensates, up to a degree, my slow GPU?įirst I will like to tell you that none of your CPU's is recommended in the DaVinci Resolve 15 configuration guide.

#I5 6600K QUICKSYNC ZIP#

Who would be willing to participate in the test? I can post a link to a ZIP with the project and the video file. Sure, it is only export (because the times are easy to measure), but I think it reflects realtime performance when working on the timeline. Maybe somebody clever here can explain what is going on? Do I need to buy a Titan V to see significant acceleration?

The Ryzen only works to about 55-60% of its max when exporting. A 1080 CPU with double or thrice the amount of cuda cores (and RAM) compared to my CPU only makes rendering 15% or so faster. But quadrupling the cores only made a minor difference. I deactivated cores on the i5 CPU and using half of the cores almost doubles the export-time. I under and overclocked the GPU as much as I could (a delta of about 20%) to see what effect that has and, essentially, it doesn't change anything. I put the total amount of GHz in brackets, and yes, I know that it is not how it works, but it can be helpful understanding things. Here are the results of tests I did with the help of a few friends: More details and comparison in my first reply just below.

#I5 6600K QUICKSYNC WINDOWS#

The relevant rest of the system is: GTX960 4GB (doesn't fill up), 16GB RAM, Windows 10, SSDs. So, my question is: Is this normal? Is the CPU only implicated a minimal amount and the GPU does all the work? What is the CPU used for then? I am better off returning the CPU and mainboard, and investing double into a beefy graphics card? The utilization of the GPU seems to be 100%. I also noticed that the Ryzen CPU only has a utilization of 55-60% during rendering (I don't remember the utilization for the i5). An increase of about 'only' 30%, despite having 4x more threads.Īnd compared to the overclocked 'old' CPU, the new CPU was only 15% faster.Ĭompared to my cousin's i7 6700K with GTX1080, my new CPU is slower…. With the new system, it rendered in 55 seconds. With my old CPU (3.5GHz), the timeline rendered in 80 seconds. I was expecting a significant boost in exporting/rendering times (easy to measure).

#I5 6600K QUICKSYNC FREE#

This is using the free version (with watermark when using lens distortion).

In addition, I applied lens distortion and slight rotation of the image, and a couple of fades. I applied relatively simple grading, similar to what I would usually do. I devised a simple 'benchmark', consisting of a 30 second timeline with a 4K H.265 clip, exported to H.264 using the Youtube 4K preset (for share/simplicity reasons). I recently bough a new CPU (Ryzen 1700X: 8 cores, 16 threads, 3.4GHz, boosting to 3.8GHz).īeforehand, I had an i5 6600K (4 cores, 4 threads, 3.5GHz, overclocked to 4.7GHz).

I5 6600k quicksync