Quote I bought a new PC with an AMD Ryzen 9 7900x for maximum performance. I didn't buy a graphics card because ColorDirector doesn't use it.
The original 6-year-old Intel i7 PC was loaded at 100% when rendering on all cores. On a new PC with SSD disks and DDR5, I only have about 50-60% rendering load. Temperature CPU is about 75 degrease C.
I would like to use all the power, after all, that's why I bought a new PC. Can you think of any tips on what to do with it?

You might look if you have SMT (AMD's Hyper-Threading) turned on. This can lead to the rendering load observations you state as PD/CD can't effectively use these logical cores. Perhaps your i7 PC had Hyper-Threading off which would show 100% load while Hyper-Threading on would show significantly reduced load.

Jeff

I have hyperthreading enabled on both computers. I can see 2x more cores in TaskManager than I have physical cores. That is, on the old PC I have 6 physical cores and therefore a total of 12. On the new PC I have 12 physical cores and therefore I see 24 cores in taskmanager.
On the new PC it is obvious that the PC is not running at full power. It shows 105W CPU power consumption. If I run the CPU Stress test program, it can actually load the CPU more and more consumption is seen.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Quote I have hyperthreading enabled on both computers. I can see 2x more cores in TaskManager than I have physical cores. That is, on the old PC I have 6 physical cores and therefore a total of 12. On the new PC I have 12 physical cores and therefore I see 24 cores in taskmanager.
On the new PC it is obvious that the PC is not running at full power. It shows 105W CPU power consumption. If I run the CPU Stress test program, it can actually load the CPU more and more consumption is seen.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

You might just verify both your pref > Hardware Acceleration settings and you have the same "Produce" settings, in particular "Hardware video encoder" between the two computers for proper comparison of elapsed times to Produce.

It's not that CD doesn't use the GPU, it can use it for decoding and encoding, it's just that the color corrections are handled by the CPU after decoding and prior to encoding so that is typically the time consuming side of the operation. The GPU doing the decoding can significantly affect device load.

Jeff

Quote

You might just verify both your pref > Hardware Acceleration settings and you have the same "Produce" settings, in particular "Hardware video encoder" between the two computers for proper comparison of elapsed times to Produce.

It's not that CD doesn't use the GPU, it can use it for decoding and encoding, it's just that the color corrections are handled by the CPU after decoding and prior to encoding so that is typically the time consuming side of the operation. The GPU doing the decoding can significantly affect device load.

Jeff

I compared everything and I didn't see a difference. I also tried ColorDirector separately and PowerDirector separately, and during the production event I get to a maximum CPU load of 50-60%. I don't see a narrow place anywhere. I am adding a load in the task manager.

Quote


I compared everything and I didn't see a difference. I also tried ColorDirector separately and PowerDirector separately, and during the production event I get to a maximum CPU load of 50-60%. I don't see a narrow place anywhere. I am adding a load in the task manager.

And now, in 10% ColorDirector encoding, there is no GPU usage. Bud CPU usage is still not full. Why?

I don't understand what you changed between your tm and tm2 pics so can't comment at all.

There is no setting you can adjust to change load for a given set of produce conditions. It is what it is. Likewise, H.264 encoding will have a totally different load than H.265 encoding.

In my view, it's not proper to expect high CPU load when SMT or Hyper-Threading is active as PD/CD doesn’t effectively use those processors. In my experience, if you CPU produce a project with SMT on and off you should see dramatic CPU % load difference, but the elapsed time to do the exact same produce task with the exact same settings will only be a few % different. Not 2X different as the logical processor increase.

Jeff

Quote I don't understand what you changed between your tm and tm2 pics so can't comment at all.

There is no setting you can adjust to change load for a given set of produce conditions. It is what it is. Likewise, H.264 encoding will have a totally different load than H.265 encoding.

In my view, it's not proper to expect high CPU load when SMT or Hyper-Threading is active as PD/CD doesn’t effectively use those processors. In my experience, if you CPU produce a project with SMT on and off you should see dramatic CPU % load difference, but the elapsed time to do the exact same produce task with the exact same settings will only be a few % different. Not 2X different as the logical processor increase.

Jeff

tmp2 is after a few minutes, when the load on the GPU has decreased and the CPU is still not fully utilized. I am based on my assumption that if the CPU load is not at 100%, then something must be waiting somewhere. I.e. is there some component somewhere that is the bottleneck. And tm2 shows that the GPU (integrated in the CPU) is not. If it is not waiting for the hardware, then there must be some problem in the software.
After turning off SMT (hyperthreading on AMD), the CPU load indicator in the task manager rose to 85%, however, the video production time did not change. What's more, CPU wattage hasn't gone up either. At the same time, the CPU stress test utility gets my CPU to 100% and the CPU consumption in watts increases by a few tens of watts.
The time to export my project on the new PC is 48 minutes. On an old PC it is 2 hours 8 minutes. The new PC is therefore 2.66 times faster.
New PC
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+9+7900X&id=5027
Benchmark value 52285
Old PC
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-8700+%40+3.20GHz&id=3099
Benchmark value 12964
I don't know exactly which operations I should take to compare performance, so I take the total value.
The ratio of benchmark values is therefore 4 times. Simply put, the new PC could be 4x faster.
From this and from the reported values of CPU consumption (using the ASUS utility), I believe that there is a problem somewhere in the cyberlink software.
But where?

Quote After turning off SMT (hyperthreading on AMD), the CPU load indicator in the task manager rose to 85%, however, the video production time did not change.

Exactly what I said would occur. CD/PD cannot effectively use those logical processors, as well as many real applications vs bench tests. At 85% you are very near fully loaded on the physical cores. It also depends what tool you are using for load estimates, you cannot attain Turbo speeds when all cores are loaded, a 4.7/5.6GHz, a 16% dock. Be happy with your 2.66x improvement, no CD setting you can change to improve.

Quote But where?

It's been discussed in the forum by a few of us for years, it appears some tasks have significant internal inefficiencies in the code that leads to worse than desired performance. Take the issue up with CL support, they can only address your "where" question. https://www.cyberlink.com/support/index.html

Jeff

Quote The original 6-year-old Intel i7 PC was loaded at 100% when rendering on all cores. On a new PC with SSD disks and DDR5, I only have about 50-60% rendering load. Temperature CPU is about 75 degrease C.

Skeblon - It is interesting that you stated that your old Intel 4 core 8 thread cpu can load at 100% on all cores and no other users here backs you up or acknowledge this. You supplied no supporting facts. See the attached screenshot. That is what I remembered on my Intel cpu, newer or older (100% utilization on all cores and threads. In Preferences checking or unchecking hardware decoding makes very little difference.

Don’t have an AMD cpu to compare. I seem to remember in the PD Forums that AMD cpu users cannot achieve 100% utilization with the type of hyperthreading when using PD. You may want to search the forums to locate them. Jeff has supplied the best answers to many inquiries in this forum.

Quote Skeblon - It is interesting that you stated that your old Intel 4 core 8 thread cpu can load at 100% on all cores and no other users here backs you up or acknowledge this. You supplied no supporting facts. See the attached screenshot. That is what I remembered on my Intel cpu, newer or older (100% utilization on all cores and threads. In Preferences checking or unchecking hardware decoding makes very little difference.

100% load as you show is very typical for H.265 CPU encoding, is that what the example is?

However, you don't get the 2X reduction in elapsed time claiming one has 8 procs at 100%, I believe that's the common thought on the forum. If one turns HT off, you will see you are again 100% on 4 cores in this case but elapsed time will be maybe be only 10-15% better with HT on, not 2X.

HT is nowhere near linear, it's typically better on low core count CPU's as your example, you may even get a 20% boost, and much worse at high core counts more typical in modern high end CPU's. At best, HT in a large core count CPU asymptotes at about a 25% improvement with very few real applications ever achieving that.

For me it's more like if you want to look at real CPU loads, turn HT off, if you only casually care about loads and want a slight boost in performance, turn HT on. I've never seen HT hurt PD performance, however, it's benefits can be very marginal to maybe 10-15% benefit for some tasks and benefit can be CPU core count sensitive.

Jeff

Quote

100% load as you show is very typical for H.265 CPU encoding, is that what the example is?

However, you don't get the 2X reduction in elapsed time claiming one has 8 procs at 100%, I believe that's the common thought on the forum. If one turns HT off, you will see you are again 100% on 4 cores in this case but elapsed time will be maybe be only 10-15% better with HT on, not 2X.

HT is nowhere near linear, it's typically better on low core count CPU's as your example, you may even get a 20% boost, and much worse at high core counts more typical in modern high end CPU's. At best, HT in a large core count CPU asymptotes at about a 25% improvement with very few real applications ever achieving that.

For me it's more like if you want to look at real CPU loads, turn HT off, if you only casually care about loads and want a slight boost in performance, turn HT on. I've never seen HT hurt PD performance, however, it's benefits can be very marginal to maybe 10-15% benefit for some tasks and benefit can be CPU core count sensitive.

Jeff

I use only H.264. Original recorded files are in H.264 and I produce H.264 too.

But as I wrote - If long working computer process doesn't consume 100%, thats means (as I think), that process waiting for something. But waiting for what?

Quote 100% load as you show is very typical for H.265 CPU encoding, is that what the example is?

No. It was the avc mp4 1080/60p (40 Mbps) default profile. I have previously read the reviews and tests on this particular AMD cpu and the 13th gen i9 competitor. This was supposed to run at 95 Celsius all the time unless one changes the settings in the bios. No other Ryzen 9 7900x users have come forward with information about this but it can easily be read on the net on how users disable this speed feature to make the cpu run cooler for their perceived safety for longevity which is not necessary.

Quote No. It was the avc mp4 1080/60p (40 Mbps) default profile. I have previously read the reviews and tests on this particular AMD cpu and the 13th gen i9 competitor. This was supposed to run at 95 Celsius all the time unless one changes the settings in the bios. No other Ryzen 9 7900x users have come forward with information about this but it can easily be read on the net on how users disable this speed feature to make the cpu run cooler for their perceived safety for longevity which is not necessary.

Thanks for the clarification, my H.265 guess was wrong for your case.

I really think that's the effect of your low logical processor count CPU as was suggested. Basically rediscussing this old thread, https://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/20/84247.page#post_box_348429 as well as many other threads on encode performance. I found a 4 core proc box at the warehouse and can replicate the ~95+% load with your avc 1080/60p (40 Mbps) profile with HT on as shown in attached pic. The ratio of HT on or off was in range I had suggested prior, only 13% better elapsed encode time. In both cases, 4 cores or 8 logical processors where nearly at 100% load.

PD's H.264 encoder is just not effective at using current high logical processor counts and PD encoding appears to have kind of plateaued on modern high proc count CPU's. PD really needs some core under the hood modernization but really only gets new templates and fluff every release.

Jeff