Revert 'OpenCL' back to 'NVIDIA CUDA' Hardware Acceleration

Andrew - Wales, UK

Contributor Location: Wales, UK Joined: Jan 27, 2009 19:16 Messages: 545 Offline

Solved by

Oct 21, 2011 13:37

Hi folks,

As has been discussed, if you open PD10 and go into 'Edit' -> 'Preferences' -> 'Hardware Acceleration', those of us who have NVIDIA cards are now greeted with 'Enable OpenCL....' instead of 'Enable NVIDIA CUDA' as was the case in PD9.

If you wish to test performance with 'NVIDIA CUDA' here's how. You will need to either have PD9 and 10 installed or retrieve a copy of the dll below before installing PD10.

1. Open 'Computer' -> 'C' -> 'Program Files' -> 'Cyberlink'
2. Replace the 'GpuUtility.dll' file in the 'PowerDirector 10' folder with the file of the same name in the 'PowerDirector' folder
3. Restart PD10
4. Goto 'Edit' -> 'Preferences' -> 'Hardware Acceleration'. You should now see 'Enable NVIDIA CUDA...'

I performed a test on a 40 minute production with 1920x1080 50p 28mbps H.264 files in, rendered to the '1920x1080 24mbps H.264 profile in 'Produce'. With 'OpenCL' it took 46 minutes to render, with NVIDIA CUDA 23 minutes.

I've attached a copy of the PD9 'GpuUtility.dll' if you wish to try this.

Cheers,

Andrew

Filename	GpuUtility.dll	Download
Description
Filesize	72 Kbytes
Downloaded:	1825 time(s)

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

Dafydd B

Senior Contributor Joined: Aug 26, 2006 08:20 Messages: 11973 Offline

Oct 21, 2011 13:44

Hi Andrew,

Thank you for posting the information you found and I can confirm your findings.

Brilliant..... the info made me smile when you shared it with me.

Dafydd

Wnuk

Member Location: USA Joined: Oct 13, 2011 12:41 Messages: 141 Offline

Oct 21, 2011 14:38

Thanks for sharing this Andrew. Works great!

Jim

Robert2 S

Senior Contributor Location: Australia Joined: Apr 22, 2009 05:57 Messages: 1461 Offline

Oct 21, 2011 21:13

Thank you so much Andrew, I didn't even know i had lost my Cuda acceleration with PD10.

Simple question that really doesn't need an answer but "WHY does it take a customer to fix PowerDirector instead of Cyberlink?"

My youtube channel====> http://www.youtube.com/user/relate2?feature=mhsn

FredB

Senior Contributor Joined: Sep 15, 2008 21:14 Messages: 1317 Offline

Oct 22, 2011 14:04

Folks;
This solution is not really a FIX. OpenCL is the newer technology and the successor to CUDA. As programs (and Nvidia) implement fixes and functions, it will become more useful.

As SLI support is added for programs like PD10, it will be in OpenCL first, not CUDA.

I don't WANT to go back...not to XP, not to 32BIT and not to CUDA (and not to DOS 5.0)..but this information is nice to see for those who are interested.

Just one editor's OPINION...please be gentle with me!!

EDIT: I recommend that if you choose to do this, you rename the existing file to something like "GpuUtility_ORIG.dll" FIRST...then you can revert if you need to. Just a suggestion!

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at Oct 22. 2011 16:28

Andrew - Wales, UK

Contributor Location: Wales, UK Joined: Jan 27, 2009 19:16 Messages: 545 Offline

Oct 22, 2011 14:14

Fred, I've total respect for your opinion!

Currently though, for me, the CUDA option is rendering to the same standard an awful lot quicker. This I'm sure will change in the future but for now I'm sticking with my workaround.

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

PatC

Senior Member Location: Suffolk UK Joined: Nov 17, 2009 14:00 Messages: 156 Offline

Oct 22, 2011 17:22

Hi

I am running a Nvidia GTX 560 Ti and substituted the older dll for the newer PD10 one.
The text changed as you said it would but in my case the rendering time for a set of 1080P 50fps 16Mbps
video files was identical in both cases with the openCL/CUDA option ticked. (SVRT off) FVRT & HVE active

Just an observation.

PatC

Robert2 S

Senior Contributor Location: Australia Joined: Apr 22, 2009 05:57 Messages: 1461 Offline

Oct 22, 2011 17:47

FVRT HVE ??? Please explain. My youtube channel====> http://www.youtube.com/user/relate2?feature=mhsn

PatC

Senior Member Location: Suffolk UK Joined: Nov 17, 2009 14:00 Messages: 156 Offline

Oct 23, 2011 04:12

SORRY...

I have done so much experimentation and testing of PD9/10 that I had to print a set
of test sheets with setting parameters and results etc. and use abbreviations......

Following Cyberlinks SVRT.

FVRT Fast video rendering technology. On or Off.
HVE Hardware Video Encoder. On or Off.

PatC

Robert2 S

Senior Contributor Location: Australia Joined: Apr 22, 2009 05:57 Messages: 1461 Offline

Oct 23, 2011 04:25

Thanks PatC

My youtube channel====> http://www.youtube.com/user/relate2?feature=mhsn

Dad_of_Twins

Newbie Joined: Oct 23, 2011 20:14 Messages: 1 Offline

Oct 23, 2011 20:29

I would be really curious to know what Nvidia card(s) and driver version each person is using? As well, what settings are being used for rendering. That way we can determine why some are seeing a difference in rendering times, while others are not.

Also, has anyone used a utility to verify both truly are rendering the same quality video? For example, both truly are rendering progressive, vs interlaced?

Wnuk

Member Location: USA Joined: Oct 13, 2011 12:41 Messages: 141 Offline

Oct 23, 2011 20:42

Did a test of a video tonite. Clips are m2ts taken using a Panasonic HDC TM60 camera. Running a GT440 with the 280.26 drivers. Intel 2600 chip and Win 7.

Video has many clips with transitions between each clip. Using text, effects, and particles throughout. 2 songs in .wav format

Rendered using H.264 AVC with fast video render and hardware video encoder checked. Once produced, the video is 817M and 6:58 seconds long.

Render time using Cuda: 8 minutes 58 seconds
Render time using OpenCl: 8 minutes 43 seconds.

Earlier I thought Cuda was faster but that was not the case.

djmorgan

Senior Member Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, Oz. Joined: Mar 09, 2007 07:07 Messages: 233 Offline

Oct 24, 2011 02:41

Quote: Did a test of a video tonite. Clips are m2ts taken using a Panasonic HDC TM60 camera. Running a GT440 with the 280.26 drivers. Intel 2600 chip and Win 7.

Video has many clips with transitions between each clip. Using text, effects, and particles throughout. 2 songs in .wav format

Rendered using H.264 AVC with fast video render and hardware video encoder checked. Once produced, the video is 817M and 6:58 seconds long.

Render time using Cuda: 8 minutes 58 seconds
Render time using OpenCl: 8 minutes 43 seconds.

Earlier I thought Cuda was faster but that was not the case.

Judging by your other thread I'd take your results with a grain of salt until you have a stable program running

David Windows 7 X64 SP1
ASUS P6X58D Premium LGA1366 X58
Intel core I7 950 3.80 GHZ CPU
12Gb Corsair TR3X3G1600C8D Tri channel
Corsair H70 Water cooling
Corsair HX1000W PSU
nVidia GTX 980
Intel 240Gb SSD 520 Series
2 x Seagate 1 Tb

Wnuk

Member Location: USA Joined: Oct 13, 2011 12:41 Messages: 141 Offline

Oct 24, 2011 06:40

David

I hear where you are coming from. The stability issues I was experiencing have faded once I purchased the full version. The only issue I have remaining with PD 10 (and stability) is the RichVideo function that always wants to install at startup.

BTW; Here is the link to the video used as a test. Gives you an idea of all that it contains.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4GChEROINk

Andrew - Wales, UK

Contributor Location: Wales, UK Joined: Jan 27, 2009 19:16 Messages: 545 Offline

Oct 25, 2011 12:08

Hi all,

Thanks for the contributions to this thread. I've installed the new patch and now OpenCL performs as well as CUDA.

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

BarryTheCrab

Senior Contributor Location: USA Joined: Nov 06, 2008 22:18 Messages: 6240 Offline

Oct 25, 2011 12:26

The link to that patch is proving elusive. I seeseveral folks referencing it, but the rest of us are left out. HP Envy Phoenix/4thGen i7-4770(4@3.4GHz~turbo>3.9)
Nvidia GTX 960(4GB)/16GB DDR3/
Canon Vixia HV30/HF-M40/HF-M41/HF-G20/Olympus E-PL5.
Tape capture using 6 VCR, TBC-1000, Elite BVP4+, Sony D8 camcorder with TBC.
https://www.facebook.com/BarryAFTT

Andrew - Wales, UK

Contributor Location: Wales, UK Joined: Jan 27, 2009 19:16 Messages: 545 Offline

Oct 25, 2011 12:37

Hi Barry,

I did mine through PD. Click on the blue arrow at the top right of the screen and select update.

Cheers,

Andrew

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Oct 25. 2011 12:37

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

FredB

Senior Contributor Joined: Sep 15, 2008 21:14 Messages: 1317 Offline

Oct 25, 2011 14:23

All this just seems so weird!! Makes me wonder who is driving the bus at CyberLink. Still no patch on the site!
Link generated for me inside the program appears serial# specific...very weird!!

Wnuk

Member Location: USA Joined: Oct 13, 2011 12:41 Messages: 141 Offline

Oct 25, 2011 14:36

That's just odd. Mine popped right up to update as soon as I opened PD this AM.

Can someone clarify for me: Using the blue arrow, I do not show any romance pack installed. I KNOW i installed #3 as it was part of the link in my confirmation e-mail. Just to be sure, I installed it again but it still doesn't show.

Does anyone else see it there?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Oct 25. 2011 14:37