Bill and Harm's site at http://ppbm5.com/
is the de-facto reference for Premiere Pro hardware comparisons (there are ppbm6 and ppbm7 websites too, the latter being a subscription service, but the bulk of the data is on ppbm5)You'll notice that the top slots are now taken by GTX cards
. Adobe advised use of Quadros purely for reliability, there is no inherent performance
gain over the latest GTX models but you can run a stock Quadro at 100% for 8 hours a day and have a my-job-depends-on-it expectation that the GPU won't die. Hammering a gaming card requires some care and attention around cooling etc., plus there are so many rebadged GT dies on the market (some with less attention to quality control than others) it would be unrealistic for Adobe to have officially 'approved' them all.
Yes, there are some vendors (Autodesk for example) which have Quadro-specific plugins which enhance their software; but Adobe does not.
Now that there's been time to watch how all these cards perform in real-world situations it's clear that there aren't great waves of exploding GTX-flavored silicon, even with the lowest-spec 'gaming' cards and the mobile GPUs. Because of that, with the arrival of CC you can now run the Mercury Playback Engine on any
card with the minimum specs. You'll get a one-time dialog saying the card isn't on the officially-tested list, but you no longer have to hack the software.
Personally, the original question on this thread was about a computer for a club
- and in that case I would go with a GTX card and spend the savings elsewhere. You won't be encoding 4k footage 8 hours a day, and if an MPE export did fail (unlikely) then there's no business penalty in rerunning the job. Maxed-out DRAM, SSDs and a fast RAID controller will give far more performance gain per dollar spent. Even things like a second monitor or a tape backup may be of more practical worth, depending on what the machine is being used for.
I am sure there are plenty of benchmarks out there.