What's the best option for 12K editing & grading on Resolve?

If I was you, I'd post on the Resolve Forum, but FWIW - I Can't comment on the CPU (I'm Intel), but the rest seems to check the box's as:
- 4090
- 64gb RAM
- nvme (but you are going to run out off space on this pretty quick). I'd add a 2nd large nvme for editing, then you would move your project off to longer term , bigger and cheaper storage.

You are also going to want to think about the type & number of monitors / displays. If you plan to also HDR grade you will need something like the Ultrastudio 4K to put out an HDR preview to one of your HDR Monitors.
 
Resolve seems to run best on M silicon Macs.

Sure they make windows versions too. But all the best performance is on Apple silicon because they seem to be more focussed on that being the platform they optimise most.
 
Really depends on what type of Intel system you want to put Resolve on. Puget Systems have for years built some of the best performing Intel Desktops and Laptops for Resolve. Their March 29, 2024, comparison between a highly spec'd Apple M3 Max MacBook Pro 16″ and a Puget Mobile 17″ i9 laptop makes for interesting reading. There are about 45 benchmark tests covering numerous NLEs and other software apps. The below frame grab is the Resolve one. The higher the numbers the beter the performance.

Quote:

"The strongest workflows for our Puget Mobile 17″ mobile workstation tend to be (but not always) those that effectively use the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile GPU. This includes DaVinci Resolve, where GPU Effects (40% faster than the MacBook Pro), processing RAW codecs (17% faster), and the various AI features that have recently been introduced (twice as fast) are much faster on our PC laptop. Premiere Pro was also faster in specific workflows, including GPU-accelerated RAW codecs (1.2-1.75x as fast) and GPU-accelerated effects (40% faster).

GPU-based rendering with Blender and Redshift was an even bigger win for the PC side, to the tune of 75% to 100% faster on the PC laptop."

Chris Young

https://rb.gy/5cloo5
 

Attachments

  • Peuget - Apple M3.JPG
    Peuget - Apple M3.JPG
    68.4 KB · Views: 8
It is more involved, and probably has as much to do with which version has received the more recent updates from BMD. Resolve Studio 19 brought performance updates to the pc system. The M3 is certainly impressive, especially considering low power consumption and baseline Resolve performance, however it doesn't do as well as 3090/4090 when complicating factors are at play, noise reduction, fusion effects, Ofx. As for PC CPU and ram, Resolve doesn't use more than 32 GB, it leverages the GPU extensively. The bottom line, is it's not hard to come up with a satisfactory performing system for 12K in either ecosystem. If you are doing true HDR10+, Dolby Vision, you should be using a proper 10 bit 422/444 HDR compliant monitor and Decklink card, not trying to do it on a laptop screen.

12K BRAW is also not the burden it seems. The file sizes are about the same as Prores, but the debayer is partial in-camera for two reasons, 1.) that hardware to do it is already "in the BM camera," and 2.) it relieves load from the pc/mac system, making 12K BRAW as easy to manage as 4K, and easier than 4K HEVC.
 
Last edited:
On kind-of-a related note, I got a Lenovo Legion 5 (i9) gaming laptop with a 4060 and it's a beast...I can only imagine how nice the 4090 is.

But all I use it for is Steam.
 
cyvideo said:
Really depends on what type of Intel system you want to put Resolve on. Puget Systems have for years built some of the best performing Intel Desktops and Laptops for Resolve. Their March 29, 2024, comparison between a highly spec'd Apple M3 Max MacBook Pro 16″ and a Puget Mobile 17″ i9 laptop makes for interesting reading. There are about 45 benchmark tests covering numerous NLEs and other software apps. The below frame grab is the Resolve one. The higher the numbers the beter the performance.

Quote:

"The strongest workflows for our Puget Mobile 17″ mobile workstation tend to be (but not always) those that effectively use the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile GPU. This includes DaVinci Resolve, where GPU Effects (40% faster than the MacBook Pro), processing RAW codecs (17% faster), and the various AI features that have recently been introduced (twice as fast) are much faster on our PC laptop. Premiere Pro was also faster in specific workflows, including GPU-accelerated RAW codecs (1.2-1.75x as fast) and GPU-accelerated effects (40% faster).

GPU-based rendering with Blender and Redshift was an even bigger win for the PC side, to the tune of 75% to 100% faster on the PC laptop."

Chris Young

https://rb.gy/5cloo5
Click to expand...

In any case, I meant a PC editing & grading computer... Laptop would be even better. Will that machine with RTX 4090 mobile be enough?

Or worthless for 12k sources even with proxies?

What about the difference to RTX 4090 going with the desktop route for this purpose?

Can we avoid proxies going to edit and grade straight from a 12k timeline?
 
I shoot 12K BRAW at 60 FPS. First of all, The 4090 in a tower pc case takes up 3 slots and needs 1000W power supply. In a laptop, some differences exist. The 4060 that Norbro mentions is nearly as powerful as the 4090, the chief difference is that it has less memory. My tower pc has the RTX3090 NVIDIA. It has 24GB and Resolve uses it all. No laptop or external monitor has a 12K display. Mine is 8K. The display adapter only needs to scale to the monitor. In other words, Resolve reads a 12K file but scales it to the monitor. You can set the scaling you want, e.g. an 8K monitor can display 1080p/120 fps in realtime. The pc may be able to display 8K up to 60FPS in realtime, or may not be able to process a 12K file and scale it to 1080p/120FPS in realtime, just depending on other circumstances. This is without proxies, this is working from the 12K native BRAW file.

For color grading, and in particular fine tuning NR, it's helpful to see the file in the highest supported resolution of the monitor, 8K. For tuning temporal or spatial NR, realtime playback is not necessary. On the other hand, for multicam editing where you have 4 open windows for 4 cams, you want realtime playback, you lower the video resolution. You also have, full debayer, 1/2 and 1/4 debayer options available to BRAW to meet the requirement for the playback speed you need for what you are doing.

With the RTX3090, intel CPU and 32 GB ram, for a single 12K file I can achieve 8K 60 FPS playback. As the timeline fills with other clips and color nodes, the playback speed will reduce, so use your options, 1/2 debayer, 4K playback. The BMD Decklink card shoulders some of the load as well. 4K 422 from the Decklink has the same chroma resolution as 8K 420 from the RTX3090.

The Decklink supports Light Illusion and CALMAN calibrations as a pattern generator. That gives you end-to-end calibration of pc system/display adapter/monitor. One monitor for the interface, one exclusive for display output. Color grading on a laptop display is a fool's errand. For editing it's fine.

In conclusion, 12K BRAW presents no particular problems. The partial debayer in-camera can be thought of as hedge against RED's patents, or a technique that leverages camera hardware to alleviate that burden from pc and laptop systems. 12K is not much different than working with 4K.
The Apple M series processors address video ram globally, just like the CPU. It's a beautiful thing because all of the unused 64GB is available to Resolve for video, and of course low power consumption. So for a laptop, M3 would probably be my first choice. But for more complex projects, multicam, complex nodes, NR, transitions, fusion and Ofx effects, a full tower pc system with Decklink card, is the right system for me. Consider the example of two 12K clips on a timeline joined with a cross-dissolve, that you're going to render to an 8K 60/fps file. Both the last frame of the first clip and the first frame of the second clip have to be fully contained within addressable memory in order to process a cross dissolve. And if both clips contain NR, that's an example of a video ram intensive proposition, because the dissolve persists for a sequence of frames, each new frame having a full recalculation of two others as the dissolve progresses. It's not the difficulty of the calculation, it's the amount of addressable memory to contain each data point of (2) 12K and (1) 8K frames. That's the load.
 
Last edited:
I made a mistake there, Chris was being nice to me, and not calling me out for it. 4K 444, (not 422) has the same chroma resolution as 8K 420. Oops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top