|
|
SoNic67,
265 is at 35Mb and 264 at 60Mb.
That is also the setting of the AX100 camcorder. Did try the 4K AX100 at 100Mb for a while but found that it made a difference only in rare circumstances, so I went back to 60Mb.
Increasing the 265 bitrate would without a doubt improve the video quality but at the expense of storage space. One of my videos, a 4K 32 min video in 265 takes 8.2 GB of space, in 264 12.2 GB, the space saving is not worth the trouble.
the main reason for my use of 265 is that our 70" VIZIO Tv USB port will not handle 264 4K but only in 265 format.
Most of my own video is shown as 4K 60P 264 via HDMI2 from the PC that is app 10"away from the TV.
More UHD players are showing up in the market place, with PD 15 it might just fall into place with improved encoding.
Eugene
Just love that GTX960, thanks for bringing that up some time ago. It reduced the 265 encoding time from DAYS to just Hours.
|
|
|
I edit mostly in 4K and have rendered most of my videos to 265 as well as 264. The rendering time, thanks to the GTX960 is about the same, but the 265 quality is not the same.
There are noticeable defects in 265 (but not 264) when looking at scenes with very little contrast change like grey clouds or distant water ripples shot from a cruise ship.
Regardless of PB software including 4K TV USB player.
These defects are there using GPU or CPU rendering.
I hasten to say that most people might not notice them.
265 wii likely improve in time. Hoping that PD15 will allow the burning of UHD, the price of the Samsung player has gone down to near 280 US.
Eugene
|
|
|
Depends in what format you will edit. For HD looks like you will be ok. A GPU card like the GTX 960, etc can make a huge difference in rendering time.
I mostly edit in 4K, no problems with my setup, noted below. The 5 year old setup only works because of using Shadowfiles.
Eugene
|
|
|
This is the heading
Re: CyberLink is Expecting Your Submission of 'I Love Travel' Video Contest
How can this be stopped?
Can I unsuscribe from the contest?
Gene
|
|
|
I signed up for the contest and I am now deluged with emails "Request for submissions" got about 30 today from all kinds of people.
Gene
|
|
|
I too use only 4K and have no problems at all. Using shadow files is a must, I doubt that there are any reasonable priced pc's or editing programs that can handle the original UHD data stream w/o any hickups.
A very important factor is the GPU, mine is a GTX960, it and its cousin GTX950 are the only ones (Ithink) that have all the 264 and 265 codecs for rendering and HDMI 2 output.
And PD14 does a terrific job as far as video quality is concerned
My computer is over 4 years old, has 12GB memory, that proved enough even for 90 min long videos.
Download some 4K video from the internet and try editing it in the PD14, that way you find out.
Good luck
Eugene
|
|
|
Using V2707, edited a 30 min 4K video w/o any problems, not any faster or slower. Shadow files now generate almost twice as fast. That is better but 4X should be doable, there is enough horsepower left.
Totally agree with Jeff
Gene
|
|
|
Will it play different regions in DVD and BR ? Like Europe?
Eugene
|
|
|
Thanks all.
Installed the patch and it works fine here too, and the SF are generating about twice as fast now with the exception of 264 MP4 files.
1 minute of 264 4K MP4 takes app 4:21 CPU at 15% -PDHanuman
1 minute of 4K XAVC-S from AX100 at 2:14 CPU at 28%
1 minute of 265 4K HEVC MKV takes 1:50 CPU at 28%
The 1 minute test files are all the same video clip from the AX100 and converted to the different formats in PD14, bit rate app. 60Mb.
Would have been better if PD had given an option to set the CPU allowance for SF conversion.
But I am glad it is speeded up after years of griping.
SF generation of AX100 camcorder files is app 2X real time, not too bad.
No idea why my MP4 files only get 15% of CPU allotment. And the most compressed file format 265 HEVC takes the least amount of time. In all this the GTX 960 GPU was not used.
Eugene
|
|
|
Thank you tomasc, yes the faster shadow file generation would be a major benefit for me and about the only reason to change.
Eugene
|
|
|
Even though I back up and clone religiously, I don't want to be the second one to try this new patch.
Any inputs?
Eugene
|
|
|
I disagree, the tests, while limited, show to me that a faster CPU is not as important as a GPU that has the appropriate codecs build in and can make use of them.
For those with an obsolete CPU like me, money spend on a GPU like the GTX960 brings a much bigger video editing improvement than a much larger amount spend on a faster CPU.
Very likely, in most videos, about 90% of the time is spend in rendering the video stream.
Thanks for doing it Tony
And a Happy and Healthy New Year to All!!
|
|
|
|
Quote:
Concerning note: "Enhances the program performance when generating shadow files."
Looks like CL doubled the CPU usage for shadow file generation but still falls significantly short of this users expectations. Yes, the double CPU allotment has reduced shadow file generation time by ~50% but,
1) Why not give the user the ability with a pref option to use the full capability of his CPU to generate shadow files if desired?
2) Why not give the user the ability with a pref option to use the GPU to generate shadow files if desired?
Jeff
AMEN
and a Happy New Year
Eugene
|
|
|
Makes a lot of sense
Happy Holidays !
Eugene
P.S> To me English is a second language, would be nice to enable a spell checker.
And paste and copy.
|
|
|
Can someone knowledgable diddle the PDhanomanSvc.exe file to in crease the priority from "below normal" to a higher value? Doing it in win 7 makes no difference.
Hanuman only gets 15% of CPU power regardless of priority setting.
Generating SF from 94GB of 4K video took over 9 hr over night.
I like the simplicity of using PD to do this internally, rather than externally.
Eugene
|
|
|
Yes, the ^%$ slow shadow file generation.
Last night put 94GB of 4K video into PD14 to be edited, took from 2100 to 0840 this morning to generate the SF. Problem is only 15% of CPU power is allocated to that, can someone knowledgeable diddle the the software to make it, say 30%?
Happy HOLIDAYS !
Eugene
|
|
|
QUOTE:
I've been testing with a 20 second sample project with a 1080p30 video, fading transitions, a title and using ColorDirector for adjustments to saturation, constrast, vibrancy, etc, and noise reduction & sharpening.
-------------
That makes it near impossible to find out which process is eating up all that time.
Try one item, like sharpening, at a time
Then the drivers are a factor too.
Eugene
|
|
|
Checking every day to see if the BETA has turned into an ALPHA.
Even if there are only a few fixes.
Eugene
|
|
|
Julien,
I agree with your assessment.
If I had more confidence I would have gotten a faster CPU to reduce that bottleneck. However my main concern is to render 265 in a reasonable amount of time and about 2x real time I consider great, remembering that what now takes perhaps two hours used to take days.
BTW, there are a number of other results getting the same rendering time for 265 and 264.
So I am a happy camper, waiting for UHD BR, expecting to be able to use a sub format, UHD on a regular 25GB BR disk.
Eugene
|
|
|
Thanks TonyL for collecting and providing the test Data.
Interesting to note that the replacement of the CPU resulted in only a 20 sec time saving.
How much faster is the new CPU compared to the 920 using a benchmark test?
It sure proves that the 960 is an amazing GPU at only $200 and just as great that PD14 makes full use of it.
BTW have you tried this on your iMac with whatever editing program Apple has?
As to the SSD, on my computer it has 3 partitions, C for OS , PD14 etc major stuff only. partition D has all the lesser stuff like Format Factory, PD SAVE files, MPC and other players, CCleaner, Skype, TsMuxer and so on. Part. E is used for mail etc. My SSD is 250GB and about 60% used and will stay in that range.
Makes life so much easier.
Eugene
|
|
|
The key are the build in en and decoders of the GTX 960.
With the 960 I can render 4K 264 and 265 at about 2x real time. In the case of 265 a 30x improvement over rendering with the CPU and at outstanding quality. And it has HDMI 2.0 output allowing 4K 60 FPS on a 4K TV and a 24" monitor
The 960 kept me from getting a new computer! Yes, in my setup it IS a miracle! It is future proof for some time to come. Any better GPU cards, and there are none at this time, will really only bring incremental improvement.
Eugene
|
