plnanax.blogg.se

1. HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI DRIVERS
2. HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI FULL
3. HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI PRO
4. HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI SOFTWARE
5. HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI PC

If the disk test was shorter, and the other tests (which are not affected by the presence of Matrox, it seems) were longer, a different picture would emerge. The frequently expressed animosity of one of the authors towards all things Matrox lends credence to this theory, in my view. I may be a cynic, but I do just wonder if PPBM is not weighted to show Matrox systems in a poor light. This CTRL + tilde ~ just doesn't do it for me either. And maybe my eyesight has gone too much, but I do need that output of the edited footage to a separate monitor too during the editing process. I don't see much difference in the video, but the audio indeed is more troublesome with the Intensity Pro.

HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI PRO

I have both the Intensity Pro and the MXO2 on my system (they don't fight). One undisputable issue with the MXO2 in CS6 is that the Matrox effects are no longer real-time, while analogous Adobe effects are realtime. In real life, I don't see writing of a DV timeline to hard disk slow down by 300%. I just don't know how seriously one should take the results of the disk test part in PPBM5 or PPBM5.5. This is still true for the PPBM5.5 test run on Adobe Premiere CS6, by the way.

HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI SOFTWARE

When the MXO2 software is installed, the MPEG2-DVD or H.264 test results don't change one bit, but the disk test numbers drop significantly, as if the caching is now totally gone. So there is some significant acceleration for the disk test going on. The authors of the test (if I remember correctly) ascribe this to a difference in cache structure/design in Premiere Pro (I have no clue here!) which was changed by Adobe in going from CS5 to CS 5.5. PPBM 5.5 disk test themselves (nominally the same test), there is also a significant decrease in the disk test results when run on CS5.5 vs. Harm is right that the MXO2 degrades the benchmark performance by 300% or so in the PPBM5.x disk test, which is not seen with the Intensity Pro card. BTW this is comparing the MAX to Adobe's built-in encoding not to x264 - I have not done that comparison. On my laptop or older i7 systems the difference is a lot more. But this is a test using a really fast 6 core processor.

HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI PC

Comapring the speed if you have a nice up to date 2011 pin PC then the Max is not so much faster - an hour took about 50 minutes to encoding using the MAX in our tests, and using just software took about an hour for a one pass VBR (twice as long to do two pass VBR). The Max major advantage is speed so if you don't care about the speed the it is not so important and get an MX02 without the MAX option. Premiere can do a 2 pass VBR encode, and the MAX is limited like all hardware to 1 pass. You also asked about the H264 encoding quality - the quality from the MAX encoding is not better then Premiere in my opinion but also not worse. Does it perform 100% properly in CS6 - none of them do right now because it is very easly days but they work pretty well. They also have the MAX option for fast H264 encoing which is useful if you do not have a very fast modern PC. Matrox have a better capture and rendering codec, nice breakout boxes, some good extra filters and don't cost too much more than Black Magic. With CS6 and Mercury Transmit it is different and now they perform about the same and certainly do not drop the performance by 300%.Ĭomparing Black Magic and Matrox, Black Magic are cheaper and generally have the same i/o although some of their cards (the more expensive ones) can display 1080 50P resolution and above video - the Matrox top resolution is 1080 50/60i (good enough for most people). With CS5 I always found Black Magic completely killed the realtime performance and Matrox performed the same as Premiere without hardware.

HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI DRIVERS

I have always prefered Matrox for a variety of reasons - like any product not perfect and with CS6 just out the door and the drivers just released of course there are problems, but I still prefer having proper monitoring using a Matrox than using Premiere without it. Premiere does a good job at this compared to other products but it is not as good as using a proper video card like a Matrox or Black Magic.

HOW TO INSTALL MATROX MXO2 MINI FULL

I do not find the full screen playback using the ~ key good enough - my footage is interlaced and PAL, and the computer screen never displays this 100% accurate. I am a reseller who also edits, and use Matrox, Black Magic and AJA.