Messages posted by agatar

Hello

I think the most important is to make next PD able to utilize cuda on Nvidia. PD 15 doesn't use cuda in a way it could and it makes PD much behind competitors. I discovered that a project which takes me up to 9 hours to finish with PD15 ( the whole process editing + rendering) takes even 5 hours less with different program just because rendering time... so please... development team... do it.

Quote Converting some files. When they are done, will test it out. Were you producing using H264 or H265?

---

Ok downloaded the file. Produced to H264 MP4 3840x2160 @29.970fps 60MBps CABAC took abt 35sec. H265 MP4 took abt 45 sec. I don't have Color Director to test LUT.

According to GPU-z 2.2, Video engine was at 76% and GPU load was at 43%. Since you have the GTX1080, would make sense it is faster and the load not as heavy.

I think PD15 is doing as good as it can.

thanks for checking it out. yeah, everything makes sense now. Well, maybe PD 16 will have better engine. For now I decided render heavy loads in differnet program and then put everything together in PD 15. It will still give me massive time saving, although make it a bit more complicated.

thanks again

Quote

Quote yes fast rendering is on. hardware rendering is on what I forgot to mention that it was rendering UHD.

Thanks, sounds like everything is working like it should although GPU utilization is low. I don't edit 2k or 4k video yet. Perhaps someone with 4k experience can help you optimize your system.

Where did the original files come from? If I can get a sample online, I can run similar test here if you post the PD settings you used.

here is video : https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwgArTp1lM2vYkRvcWo0V0FJNjQ

here is LUT for color gradation I used: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwgArTp1lM2vczNvSTJERi1ZUXc

I produced UHD frame rate 29.97 high profile CABAC coding, bitrate 60000 quality mode, audio AAC stereo compresion 384 (although clip itself is deaf) .

the best time without LUT 26 sec.

the best time with LUT 3 min 57 sec.

And I agree with you : GPU utilization is low or rather very low. That what's this post is about. That is why I hope PD 16 will change it. I hope. It seems that PD 15 relay on CPU only or rather mainly. I also notice that the only thing which helps a bit is changing CPU clock but as said before changing from Nvidia GPU to i7 GPU and other way roung doesn't help at all. It is clear at most with more complicated projects.

Quote

Quote
I took 1 min length video and rendered it twice for each settings:

with i7 GPU : clean video was rendered in 53 second - brilliant.

If that was a 60 sec video rendered at 53 sec, doesn't sound fast to me.

How do you have all the settings in PD15? When you go to Produce the file, is 'Fast Rendering' available and checked? Doesn't sound like to me. Are you rendering to MPEG2 or MP4. That makes a huge difference.

yes fast rendering is on. hardware rendering is on what I forgot to mention that it was rendering UHD. I just rendered the same video to FHD and time was 26 seconds

But still when add LUT color time is muuuch longer and muuuch longer than other program.

Quote doesn't seem right still. I can add a one hour HDTV MPEG2 show to the timeline. No editing, then produce to MP4 1080p. Only takes abt 3mins.

If you are editing, adding transitions and special effects, those can add a lot to the produce time.

Are you using GPUZ to monitor the GPu utilization? There are two options in the Sensors Tab: GPU Load and Video Engine Load.

What type of input file? What type of output file? How do you have all the PD15 options: Settings / Hardware Aceleration? When you go to Produce the file, is 'Fast video rendering Technology' availabe and checked?

I just finished last tests.

I took 1 min length video and rendered it twice for each settings:

with i7 GPU : clean video was rendered in 53 second - brilliant.

color graduated with LUT same video was rendered in 5 min 21 sec.

now the same with Nvidia only (i7GPU switched off):

clean video was rendered in EXACTLY the same time 53 seconds...

color graduated with the same LUT was rendered in... 5 min 24 seconds... so even longer than i7GPU...

I rendered the same video with the same LUT in different program and it was done in 2 min 24 seconds...

GPUZ during the process showed up to 3% GPU load when PD and up to 25% when I used different program.

Well maybe with clean videos PD is really imperssive but when add some work, thats a different matter.

Quote Are you using a laptop with Optimus technology or MSHybrid mode? PD15 is not compatilbe with either technology. I bought a high end MSI laptop with Optimus. I had to return it because PD15 would not use the GPU. I ended up buying a Sager laptop which has an option to completely turn off the i7 GPU in the BIOS and only boot with the nVidia GPU. PD15 works great on this laptop.

Well, I use Alienware 17R4. And I tested PD with i7 GPU switched off. This is the only way to use PD with Nvidia (only then there is an option in Nvidia settings for PD) . But as I said, speed improvement was marginal if at all and usage of GPU maximum 2% . I just finished another test and I'm going to make another one. Still no improvement though.

I'm not saying PD is wrong or so, it is just about rendering. Apart from that PD works fluently and it is real joy to use it.

Quote I have GTX1060 and PD15 uses the GPU to render the video. The GPU is only used on certain transitions/FX and with particular file formats. Have you installed the latest nVidia driver 385.41? What file format are you producing or are you creating a Disc?

hi

yes : I use last drivers 385.41. video format mp4. What I mean that PD doesn't use cuda in a way it is used by different programs and practically is useless. I did a lot of tests and differences are huge. The same video rendered by PD in 1h26min was rendered by different program in 38 minutes... and program I use for monitoring computer activity showed that during the process PD used GPU in 0% ...(the maximum usage of GPU by PD I have ever seen was 2%..) when different program up to 20% with the same usage of CPU (about 95%).

Again : PD use Nvidia in a way which doesn't give any benefit. It is clear especially if you switch off Nvidia and use internal card (if you have such possibility). PD in that case renders movie in exactly the same time... It is clear for me that PD uses mainly CPU only for getting jobe done...

So I hope Cyberlink will change it in PD 16. Otherwise it be more wise to switch to save time despite fact that PD is really nice tool.

Hi everyone.

I know this subject was before and I know it is impossible to use Nvidia cuda with PD15, however I'm interesting if something is going to change in the matter when PD 16 be released . Anyone know anything about it? I just wandering if it is worth to wait or get different program straight away. I personally useed PD 13 and PD15 now and unfortunately my videos get so complicated that PD takes ages to render it. I got i7 with gtx 1080 and when rendering 1080 is used at 0% by PD ... while competitive program use it and renders same video 4 times faster... I got used to very handy PD tools and would hate to leave it aside but saving literally up to 9 hours on one project is more than convincing...