Funny how they never seem to go down a lot in price? I suppose the value of the Dollar/Pound/Euro effectively goes down over the years so perhaps $2000 is cheaper now that 14 years ago, still you’d think they’d have become much cheaper by now! Optics certainly have (cameras, telescopes, my other hobbies). I guess it’s the cost of chips that currently keeps the price up with a shortage of some key minerals.
Anyway I shall be looking into all this. Thanks again. I also looked up that link Pam posted for the specs required to use Resolve.
Keep in mind (for the future), the Studio version of Resolve that costs a one time charge of $300, takes advantage of the computer’s resources better than the free version, and thereby runs better.
Pam, useful to know, thanks. I guess if my processor and graphics card can handle it, a RAM upgrade and the Studio version may be the better option for now. In time I know I am going to need a new PC/laptop but for now with the other costs this may be a good way to go.
Hmmmm. I was wondering about that. My machine is using the video outputs on the motherboard. I haven’t found where it talks about its memory at all. Need to figure out if I have to buy a video card when I get Resolve.
It looks like the graphics chip on the motherboard doesn’t have much of its own memory, but it has 8GB allocated from shared memory. I suppose that means my 16GB system RAM is only really 8GB after the shared use graphics allocation?, but I don’t really know what I’m talking about here.
It looks like people were able to get version 16 to run with the same graphics chip at least. It seems worth trying before buying the graphics card.
That was incredibly useful. I learned that the Intel on-board graphics memory is dynamically allocated so it can use up to half my RAM for graphics, but doesn’t unless it needs to. I also learned this is automatically managed somehow without user settings. Perfect!
