Andrew, the attached chart summarizes my thought referenced earlier and is pretty self-explanatory. I tried to replicate your source and target formats in the conversion, 1920x1080 50p 28Mbs m2ts to MP4 1920x1080 25p 16Mbps, however I only used 10min duration for simplicity. I also have pure transcoding, no timeline edits. The realtime ratio below is just the (timeline duration)/(encode time) ratio, so a factor 2.0 would imply one can encode a timeline 2 times faster than the timeline duration.

Encoder	Decoder	Encode Time (s)	Realtime Ratio
CPU	CPU	252	2.38
CPU	GPU	147	4.08
GPU	GPU	95	6.31
Andrew GPU	Andrew GPU		3.13

As can be seen, unloading the CPU from decoding task when one desires to use CPU encoding can be very beneficial. It allows the CPU encode task to be nearly 2 times faster. The benefit depends on CPU and GPU capability, quality of timeline content, and target format so results will vary for each user substantially. The issue of some formats not supporting timeline GPU decoding highlighted here http://forum.cyberlink.com//forum/posts/list/25/45503.page#236759 has been PARTIALLY corrected and extended in PD15.

From your posted CPU loads, I'd assume you may have Hyper-threading activated which will create a artificially low perceived load on the CPU during encoding but still a good relative assessment. Overall Hyper-threading does improve overall encode performance some so having it activated is not a bad thing.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Very interesting indeed. My test footage had one text overlay at the start and one fade at the end. Removing those decreased the render time with GPU/GPU to 9min 53sec which takes the realtime ratio up to 4. My test footage also had 20 clips in.

Thanks for such clear and well explained data Jeff. It'd be interesting to see other peoples' results with different source footage and GPUs etc.

Andrew Alienware Aurora ALX R4 - Intel i7-4820 4.2 GHz - 32GB DDR3 RAM - Crucial 512GB SSD - 1TB Seagate HDD - 3TB WD Green HDD - 4TB WD Green HDD - MSI NVIDIA GTX 1070 8GB

Sony HDR-PJ810 and HDR-PJ530

Quote: I've tested render speeds with my GTX1070 GPU and, on my PC, render speeds are 5% faster with just 'Enable hardware decoding' checked as opposed to both 'Enable OpenCL...' and "Enable hardware...' ticked.

I should add that this is when converting a 40 minute 1920x1080 m2ts 28mbps 50p project to MP4 1920x1080 25p 16mbps file in 'Produce' with the 'Fast Rendering Technology: Hardware Video Encoder' ticked. It's 12min 47sec with just "Enable Hardware..' ticked and 14min 40sec with both ticked. Not a huge difference.

It may be very different with different source material on a different PC with a different GPU etc.

Andrew

Andrew (and Jeff), I am seeing the exact same thing when I monitor Video Engine Load which, to me, is pretty confusing. How does it make sense that encoding runs faster when you do NOT check Enable OpenCL?

With these new GPU beasts (I just purchased the GTX1060 based on what I have been reading in these forums - thanks!), I suspect a lot more people are going to want to maximize the usage of those beasts. Maybe Cyberlink needs to rethink how they communicate what is actually happening when you check or don't check certain boxes.

Hi Rick,

Jeff is far wiser than me on the technical aspects. What I would say is, until I did my tests, I was under the impression that both boxes ticked was giving me the best speed.

I suspect it has a lot to do with what you are rendering to start with, what enhancements you have made, and what your output is.

Cheers,

Andrew Alienware Aurora ALX R4 - Intel i7-4820 4.2 GHz - 32GB DDR3 RAM - Crucial 512GB SSD - 1TB Seagate HDD - 3TB WD Green HDD - 4TB WD Green HDD - MSI NVIDIA GTX 1070 8GB

Sony HDR-PJ810 and HDR-PJ530

I have a Nvidia GTX560 display card, I cannot see CUDA acceleration, only OpenCL in hardware acceleration. Please let me know how to enable CUDA for my PD15. Thanks.

Per Jeff, above:

"That is the correct operational mode, your CUDA note PC is not correct. If you reinstall Nvidia drivers on the CUDA note PC it will then offer the correct OpenCL note." Regards,
Dan
Power Director 21-Ultimate
v 21.0.3111.0
XPS-8940, Win-10 64-bit,
Intel Core i9-10900 processor
(10 core, 20M Cache),
32GB DDR4 RAM, 2TB M.2 PCIe NVME SSD, 2TB 7200 RPM SATA HDD,
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 8GB GDDR6

Jpong2226 – It seem that you have an earlier Fermi and not the Kepler architecture cards discussed here. It may be possible for you to enable cuda if you install 5 year old nvidia graphics drivers which may also enable hardware encoding for your card.

You probably need to start a new topic post to get help and information.

Quote: Jpong2226 – It seem that you have an earlier Fermi and not the Kepler architecture cards discussed here. It may be possible for you to enable cuda if you install 5 year old nvidia graphics drivers which may also enable hardware encoding for your card.

I don't believe so, one will get OpenCL Fx acceleration anytime the GPU supports OpenCL capability. If you want true CUDA Fx acceleration vs OpenCL accelerated support in PD, one needs a GPU that does not support OpenCL, say a Nvidia 9800 GT for a desktop. OpenCL or CUDA acceleration for Fx totatly different than hardware encoding.

Jeff

Quote: I have a Nvidia GTX560 display card, I cannot see CUDA acceleration, only OpenCL in hardware acceleration. Please let me know how to enable CUDA for my PD15. Thanks.

That's correct.

HOWEVER, since you card is a Fermi generation card, it doesn't have the hardware needed for hardware accelerated NVENC encoding of the final product.

In the past I have written a post exactly for those generation GPU's - how to reactivate the CUDA encoding for them. This is different from the OpenCL/CUDA option in the main menu (that one applies only to FX's), and it is visible only at the "produce" stage. Don't know if will still work in PD15.

http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/0/42357.page#218324

FYI, I tried testing with "enable OpenCL technology..." checked and unchecked, and saw no difference whatsoever with producing 1920x1080 60i 24Mbps M2TS source -> 1920x1080 30p 8.7Mbps (Fast Vid Render/HW Vid Encoder checked on Produce page). I'm using a Nvidia GTX1060 6MB card. In both cases the CPU load was identical, around 19%, and the GPU was at 97% "Video Engine Load". GPU load was 5%. No effects, single clip, 1Hr12Min, produce time 7 minutes (loving my new GTX1060!).

I did close and reopen Powerdirector in-between runs, btw.

-Martin

That's normal - because you didn't use any (HW accelerated) effects.
That's the only case where that "OpenCL" tick mark does a difference.
What you have tested is the encoding ASIC in your video card. Totally separate from the GPU cores.

I get a bit lost in the GPU world but here is an interesting video on "GPU vs CPU Video Rendering and Video Editing"

AMD vs Nvidia for Video Rendering

Al Power Director 13&14 Ultimate, Photo Director 6, Audio Dir, Pwr2Go 10
Win 10 64, Intel MB DH87MC, Intel i5-4670 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 16Gb DDR3 1600, 128Gb SSD, 2x1Tb WDBlue 7200rpmSATA6, Intel 4600 GPU, Gigabyte G1 GTX960 4GB, LG BluRay Writer