Announcement: Our new CyberLink Feedback Forum has arrived! Please transfer to our new forum to provide your feedback or to start a new discussion. The content on this CyberLink Community forum is now read only, but will continue to be available as a user resource. Thanks!
CyberLink Community Forum
where the experts meet | Advanced Search >
Forum Index » PowerDirector (previous versions)
  • Recent Topics
  • |
  • Register
  • |
  • Login
Hardware video encoder & Accelerated Parallel Processing & OpenCL for Optimal Video Effect Speed
Notka
Newbie Location: Romania Joined: Dec 23, 2011 03:46 Messages: 6 Offline
[Post New] Dec 23, 2011 05:20
Hello,

I am trying to speed the production process in PD10, taking in account the following features:
- OpenCL to harness GPU power for greatly improved video effect speed;
- Hardware video encoder enabled.

I mention that I use a system with AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ and a GPU AMD Radeon 6850 (1G DDR5), so my computer supports hardware acceleration, since I have graphics card that supports AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing.

I am not able to see any improvement in the production speed. If I use the onboad graphic card or use the dedicated GPU card (AMD Radeon 6850) there is no difference, even that in the second case I see the "Hardware video encoder"enabled.

I processed a 3:50 minutes video, with 720p HD movies, some pictures, using transitions and some Pip objects in 4:30 minutes. The CPU Usage is 90% - 100% and the GPU usages varies between 0% - 10%, but most of the time is 0%.
In case I enable preview during production, I can see a 53% usage of GPU and 90% - 100% CPU usage.

So, in my case conclusions are:
- GPU doesn't accelerate the production process. I got the same time if I produce with a poor onboard GPU (ATI 3200) or if I produce with a middle range GPU AMD Radeon 6850;
- GPU does help, only if I "enable preview during production", but this thing doesn't decrease the producing time. Only helps to be able to preview the movie during the production.
- I suppose that only a better CPU, will increase the processing speed.
- It is possible that in some certain conditions (many transitions, and Pip obsjects), to see a resonable difference. If there are only a few Pip objects and few transitions, there are no difference with special GPU or without.
Special GPU means all these new sophisticated technology implemented in the latest GPU's:
- OpenGL® 4.1;
- AMD App Acceleration
- Avivo™ HD
- a.s.o.


TomRoger [Avatar]
Newbie Location: Norway Joined: Dec 18, 2010 18:55 Messages: 16 Offline
[Post New] Dec 23, 2011 09:18
Hey, I can not tell the difference with different GPU. upgraded to the Nvidia GTX460 earlier, had Nvidia GTS250 before, but the same time and load on the CPU, I7 950, no more use of memory either, I have 12GB RAM, 64 bit Win7, and have never seen memory usage more than 3.9 gb total .
Merry Christmas ... My Camera:
Sony CX570E
PC:
ASUS P6X58D-E
I7 950
12 GB Ram
Nvidia GTX460
Win 8 Pro 64 bit
Corsair SSD Force Series 3, 240GB 2.5 "System"
Western Digital Caviar® Black 1TB "Storage"
2 X Western Digital Elements 1TB "Backup"
Carl312
Senior Contributor Location: Texas, USA Joined: Mar 16, 2010 20:11 Messages: 9090 Offline
[Post New] Dec 23, 2011 10:08
You can see the GPU usage in the Catalyst software:

See attached image.

[Thumb - Catalyst Performance tab.jpg]
 Filename
Catalyst Performance tab.jpg
[Disk]
 Description
GPU activity
 Filesize
75 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
375 time(s)
Carl312: Windows 10 64-bit 8 GB RAM,AMD Phenom II X4 965 3.4 GHz,ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB,240GB SSD,two 1TB HDs.

Notka
Newbie Location: Romania Joined: Dec 23, 2011 03:46 Messages: 6 Offline
[Post New] Dec 23, 2011 10:24
I am very curious, if somebody obtained a significant higher processing speed, on account of GPU. I would like to know if these improvement is possible, because in my case is more cheaper to upgrade the GPU in place of CPU.

Until somebody will show me the facts, for the moment, I suppose there are a lot of marketing regarding the hardware acceleration on behalf of GPU.
kingsmeadow
Senior Member Location: Cambridge, UK Joined: Dec 06, 2011 11:52 Messages: 179 Offline
[Post New] Dec 23, 2011 10:45
Quote: I am very curious, if somebody obtained a significant higher processing speed, on account of GPU. I would like to know if these improvement is possible, because in my case is more cheaper to upgrade the GPU in place of CPU.

Until somebody will show me the facts, for the moment, I suppose there are a lot of marketing regarding the hardware acceleration on behalf of GPU.


I just did a very simple test with and without GPU enabled. The "with" test took 18 seconds and the "without" test took 44 seconds.

I did not use enable preview to make it fair. I was using AVC as the test profile and AVC-HD 1920 X 1080 as the format.

in this case I think it's fair to say that it does make a difference. i think also it may depend on the hardware and the format chosen. Intel Core i7 3770K 3.6 Ghz,
GTX 680, 2 X Benq23 3D monitors,
6G DDR3, Win 7 64, Win 10 (Insider) 64
PCIE SSD, Intel Sata SSD 2 500 Gbyte Seagate,
Minoru 3D WebCam, NVIDIA 3D Vision-Ready
Notka
Newbie Location: Romania Joined: Dec 23, 2011 03:46 Messages: 6 Offline
[Post New] Dec 23, 2011 12:46
Quote: I just did a very simple test with and without GPU enabled. The "with" test took 18 seconds and the "without" test took 44 seconds.

I did not use enable preview to make it fair. I was using AVC as the test profile and AVC-HD 1920 X 1080 as the format.

in this case I think it's fair to say that it does make a difference. i think also it may depend on the hardware and the format chosen.

I am happy to hear that! This is a huge difference (2,4 faster). Please tell us some details:
- Do you use PD 10?
- What kind of GPU and CPU do you use?
- What kind of settings do you have in the Preferences/Hardware acceleration?
- How did you disable/enable GPU (take out from the computer or change it)?
- Did you measure the CPU and GPU load in both cases?

Please give us a feedback. Thank you.
kingsmeadow
Senior Member Location: Cambridge, UK Joined: Dec 06, 2011 11:52 Messages: 179 Offline
[Post New] Dec 23, 2011 13:16
.

I am happy to hear that! This is a huge difference (2,4 faster). Please tell us some details:
- Do you use PD 10?
- What kind of GPU and CPU do you use?
- What kind of settings do you have in the Preferences/Hardware acceleration?
- How did you disable/enable GPU (take out from the computer or change it)?
- Did you measure the CPU and GPU load in both cases?

Please give us a feedback. Thank you.


I am using PD 10,

My GPU's are 2 GTX480s in SLI mode

My CPU is an ,Intel Core i7 Extreme 965 ,,OC'd to 3.8Ghz

To enable/disable I check or uncheck the "use Hardware acceleration " option.

I have a CPU monitor ap which gives me a visual and % indication of CPU usage

I also have 2 GPU monitor aps which give me a visual and % usage indication.

in the preferences/hardware I have both Enable OpenCL...and Enable Hardware decoding checked.

I have 2 monitors and my aps are on one monitor and my PD 10 production on another so I can easily watch performance.

remember this was only a short test, I could do a complete video and see what the difference is but I won't be able to do that until early next week, as I have run out of time Intel Core i7 3770K 3.6 Ghz,
GTX 680, 2 X Benq23 3D monitors,
6G DDR3, Win 7 64, Win 10 (Insider) 64
PCIE SSD, Intel Sata SSD 2 500 Gbyte Seagate,
Minoru 3D WebCam, NVIDIA 3D Vision-Ready
Notka
Newbie Location: Romania Joined: Dec 23, 2011 03:46 Messages: 6 Offline
[Post New] Dec 23, 2011 15:22
Quote:
To enable/disable I check or uncheck the "use Hardware acceleration " option.


Thank you kingsmeadow.You have very nice setup.

In my case, it doesn't matter if "hardware acceleration" in the preferences, in on or off (I mean the "Enable AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing technology ..."+ "Enable hardware decoding" are enabled or disabled. In both cases, the "Fast video rendering technology" remain enabled. I even can't disable it from the production window. It is all the time enabled.

kingsmeadow
Senior Member Location: Cambridge, UK Joined: Dec 06, 2011 11:52 Messages: 179 Offline
[Post New] Dec 24, 2011 03:54
Quote:
Quote: I just did a very simple test with and without GPU enabled. The "with" test took 18 seconds and the "without" test took 44 seconds.

I did not use enable preview to make it fair. I was using AVC as the test profile and AVC-HD 1920 X 1080 as the format.

in this case I think it's fair to say that it does make a difference. i think also it may depend on the hardware and the format chosen.

I am happy to hear that! This is a huge difference (2,4 faster). Please tell us some details:
- Do you use PD 10?
- What kind of GPU and CPU do you use?
- What kind of settings do you have in the Preferences/Hardware acceleration?
- How did you disable/enable GPU (take out from the computer or change it)?
- Did you measure the CPU and GPU load in both cases?

Please give us a feedback. Thank you.



I think the short test is misleading, I did a 59 minute test and this is the result.

With hardware encoding enabled it took 17 min 36 seconds,

with hardware encoding NOT enabled it took 36 min 14 seconds.

About 2 x which looks better. Attached are 2 screen capture images. enabled and NOT-enabled, showing CPU and GPU usage.
[Thumb - enabled.jpg]
 Filename
enabled.jpg
[Disk]
 Description
 Filesize
24 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
318 time(s)
[Thumb - NOT-enabled.jpg]
 Filename
NOT-enabled.jpg
[Disk]
 Description
 Filesize
23 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
327 time(s)
Intel Core i7 3770K 3.6 Ghz,
GTX 680, 2 X Benq23 3D monitors,
6G DDR3, Win 7 64, Win 10 (Insider) 64
PCIE SSD, Intel Sata SSD 2 500 Gbyte Seagate,
Minoru 3D WebCam, NVIDIA 3D Vision-Ready
Notka
Newbie Location: Romania Joined: Dec 23, 2011 03:46 Messages: 6 Offline
[Post New] Dec 24, 2011 04:26
Quote:
I think the short test is misleading, I did a 59 minute test and this is the result.
With hardware encoding enabled it took 17 min 36 seconds,
with hardware encoding NOT enabled it took 36 min 14 seconds.
About 2 x which looks better. Attached are 2 screen capture images. enabled and NOT-enabled, showing CPU and GPU usage.

If the preview was disabled during production, then obviously GPU decrease the production time. But why in my case it doesn't work?
kingsmeadow
Senior Member Location: Cambridge, UK Joined: Dec 06, 2011 11:52 Messages: 179 Offline
[Post New] Dec 24, 2011 04:41
Quote:
Quote:
I think the short test is misleading, I did a 59 minute test and this is the result.
With hardware encoding enabled it took 17 min 36 seconds,
with hardware encoding NOT enabled it took 36 min 14 seconds.
About 2 x which looks better. Attached are 2 screen capture images. enabled and NOT-enabled, showing CPU and GPU usage.

If the preview was disabled during production, then obviously GPU decrease the production time. But why in my case it doesn't work?


I have another PC system with a Radeon HD 4800. I am curious about this issue, so I am going to install PD 10 on it and do the same experiment. I don't expect great results, but just the same I would be interested also if there is any difference. I have managed to create some extra time this morning, so I am going to do it now !!! Intel Core i7 3770K 3.6 Ghz,
GTX 680, 2 X Benq23 3D monitors,
6G DDR3, Win 7 64, Win 10 (Insider) 64
PCIE SSD, Intel Sata SSD 2 500 Gbyte Seagate,
Minoru 3D WebCam, NVIDIA 3D Vision-Ready
Notka
Newbie Location: Romania Joined: Dec 23, 2011 03:46 Messages: 6 Offline
[Post New] Dec 24, 2011 05:20
Quote:
I have another PC system with a Radeon HD 4800. I am curious about this issue, so I am going to install PD 10 on it and do the same experiment. I don't expect great results, but just the same I would be interested also if there is any difference. I have managed to create some extra time this morning, so I am going to do it now !!!

Thank you. Please check without preview.
kingsmeadow
Senior Member Location: Cambridge, UK Joined: Dec 06, 2011 11:52 Messages: 179 Offline
[Post New] Dec 24, 2011 06:50
Quote:
Quote:
I have another PC system with a Radeon HD 4800. I am curious about this issue, so I am going to install PD 10 on it and do the same experiment. I don't expect great results, but just the same I would be interested also if there is any difference. I have managed to create some extra time this morning, so I am going to do it now !!!

Thank you. Please check without preview.


results from 2nd PC, using the same video file and same settings,
AMD with hardware enabled 46 minutes,

AMD without hardware enabled 1.15 minutes.

No previewing was selected .

It does seem to work on AMD as well. Very strange about your results.
[Thumb - AMD enabled .jpg]
 Filename
AMD enabled .jpg
[Disk]
 Description
 Filesize
41 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
329 time(s)
[Thumb - AMD not-enabled .jpg]
 Filename
AMD not-enabled .jpg
[Disk]
 Description
 Filesize
40 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
290 time(s)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Dec 24. 2011 06:51

Intel Core i7 3770K 3.6 Ghz,
GTX 680, 2 X Benq23 3D monitors,
6G DDR3, Win 7 64, Win 10 (Insider) 64
PCIE SSD, Intel Sata SSD 2 500 Gbyte Seagate,
Minoru 3D WebCam, NVIDIA 3D Vision-Ready
Michael8511
Contributor Location: U.S.A. Indiana Joined: Jan 14, 2012 16:12 Messages: 374 Offline
[Post New] Jan 20, 2012 09:03
Ok I found this post. I bought the PowerDirector Ultra last weekend. I have 2 Dell computers. One is a Laptop with a Intel i5-2410M CPU, 6 GB of memory and a Intel HD Graphics. The other computer is a Dell desktop with a i7 860 CPU with 8 GB of memory and a Nvidia geForce GTS 240 with one GB of memory on the card. Plus the laptop is a Sandy Bridge.

Last Sunday I load in two video tracks each over 1 hour and 20 minutes of HD video From a GoPro in to PowerDirector. 10. I edited it down to a 12 minute video. When doing the production I never see it use over 3.9 GB of memory, Oh I"m running Windows 7 64 bit Home Premium with Service Pack 1.

I did have hardware acceleration and decoding check. I will say it only took the laptop 4 or 6 minutes to render the video.

Intel i7 5960X overclock to 4 Ghz 16 GB of ram.
GoPro 4
Canon VIXIA HF G10
Canon EOS Rebel T3
Canon EOS 70D
My Vimeo Channel http://vimeo.com/user3339631/videos
countrybob1 [Avatar]
Newbie Location: boston, ma Joined: Feb 06, 2012 14:41 Messages: 2 Offline
[Post New] Feb 15, 2012 23:35
I found that this AMD catalyst driver, hotfix version 11.6b (or 11.7), works with the AMD Radeon HD 6570 to enable hardware acceleration. There seemed to be a 40% speed increase in rendering MPEG-4 files. The driver is found at:

http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/AMDCatalyst116bHotfix.aspx

Before installation, you need to uninstall the current Catalyst driver completely and reboot. Also enable acceleration in the Video secton of the Catalyst control panel and in the Power Director program preferences.

footnote: I have since switched to an NVIDA card with a Geoforce GT 430 processor and had no problems fiddling with drivers and much faster performance in producing MPEG-4 than with the AMD Radeon HD 6570.
Powered by JForum 2.1.8 © JForum Team