Poor Radeon Encoding Performance

Bannon

Newbie Joined: Dec 21, 2009 20:07 Messages: 22 Offline

Solved by

Mar 30, 2010 22:49

I was on a quest to find a GPU encoding solution that worked with PowerDirector 8 to create MPEG-2 video as well as H.264 so today I replaced my nVidia GTX 295 video card with a Radeon 5870 and I must say that I am disappointed with the results. Prior to replacing the card I’d created a 25:29 MPEG-2 1080p video without GPU acceleration in 16:49. I expected the GPU accelerated creation to scream after I installed the 5870, the 10.3 Catalyst drivers, and the latest version of AVIVO but that didn’t happen. Instead, it took 18:41, almost two minutes longer! Does anyone have any thoughts why that happened? I used the exact same profile for both runs and yes, the Hardware Video Encoder button was selected. My system specs are: Windows 7 64-bit; i7 920, 6GB memory, 160GB SSD C drive; 1 TB D drive with more than 800Gb free; and Creative Labs X-Fi sound card.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at Mar 30. 2010 23:19

deBabba

Member Location: Frankfurt, Germany Joined: Nov 28, 2009 10:33 Messages: 88 Offline

Mar 31, 2010 11:23

Hi Bannon,
I made a similar experience with my HD5770 card trying to profit from hardware encoding. My source and target format is AVCHD 1440:1080
Take a look at this thread:
http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/9718.page#42887

As a summary, I have decided to keep the hardware acceleration disabled and wait if there is any improvement in supporting ATI Stream technology in next version. I7-860, 4GB RAM, ATI HD5770, Win7 64, PD9 latest patch, Canon HG10 1440x1080 16Mbit/s, WD TV player

Best regards from Frankfurt, Germany
Andy

Bannon

Newbie Joined: Dec 21, 2009 20:07 Messages: 22 Offline

Mar 31, 2010 11:43

Thanks for the response Andy and the conclusion in the thread you referenced is disappointing because good hardware encoding is one of the reasons behind me choosing PD8 and the ATi 5870. I wonder how PD8's competitors fare with their hardware encoding solutions. In other words, is this a limitation in PD8 or is it an ATi limitation?

Speaking of the next version, what is Cyberlink's update cycle for their PowerDirector product?

Alextzi

Newbie Joined: Mar 11, 2009 15:17 Messages: 47 Offline

Mar 31, 2010 12:49

I have had similar results.
My i7 920 OC at 3.6 GHz is about as fast as a 4870 card.

so, then I got a 2nd 4870 card and I run them in crossfire, now I get about 2x the encoding performance.

The i7 is one fast processor. Now, You got a 5870, it should be about as fast as 2 of my 4870s so something isnt making sense here.

Alex

Andrew - Wales, UK

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

Mar 31, 2010 14:03

Hi Bannon,

Did the footage you were rendering have any enhancements applied to it? For example, did you apply something like the sharpness enhancement to all your clips?

Cheers,

Andrew

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Mar 31. 2010 14:03

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

James W

Senior Contributor Location: Lakeland, FL USA Joined: Aug 18, 2008 10:36 Messages: 911 Offline

Mar 31, 2010 16:09

Andrew may be on to something. Just for kicks try a new project by putting a few high definition PiPs on top of your video track. Basically you want to overload your i7. Now try rendering this project with Stream turned on and off and see what happens. Regardless of your results of this tests I do agree that it is disappointing that you did not get any rendering speed improvement. Was there any difference in video quality? Q9300 2.5 GHz
4 GB Ram
Nvidia 9800 GT

Bannon

Newbie Joined: Dec 21, 2009 20:07 Messages: 22 Offline

Mar 31, 2010 16:48

Quote: Hi Bannon,

Did the footage you were rendering have any enhancements applied to it? For example, did you apply something like the sharpness enhancement to all your clips?

Cheers,

Andrew

"The footage" is a little over 300 photos for a slideshow with an MP3 file for music and that is it. There are no special affects aside from the Ken Burns affect the Slideshow wizzard applies. If I didn't say this already the output is a custom MPEG-2 profile with the following parameters:

Resolution: 1920*1080
Mode: CVBR
Average Bitrate: 20000
Maximum Bitrate: 25000
Frame Type: Progressive
Speed/quality: 7
Audio: DD5.1
Audio compression: 384

Bannon

Newbie Joined: Dec 21, 2009 20:07 Messages: 22 Offline

Mar 31, 2010 16:52

Quote: Andrew may be on to something. Just for kicks try a new project by putting a few high definition PiPs on top of your video track. Basically you want to overload your i7. Now try rendering this project with Stream turned on and off and see what happens. Regardless of your results of this tests I do agree that it is disappointing that you did not get any rendering speed improvement. Was there any difference in video quality?

Unfortunately I do not have any HD tracks to do what you suggested.

Not only was there no speed improvement, it slowed the process down by almost 13%!

With regard to the quality: To my 57 year old eyes they both looked equally as good.

James Dotson

Senior Contributor Location: Tennessee Joined: Aug 24, 2009 20:40 Messages: 3066 Offline

Mar 31, 2010 18:57

I have a two year old dual-core CPU, so those times don't seem excessively long to me for 1080p. Could it be that your CPU is capable enough that the GPU offers no real advantage? __________________________________
CORNBLOSSOM

Andrew - Wales, UK

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

Mar 31, 2010 20:02

The only thing I can suggest is going into the Ati Catalyst application in the advanced mode, go into ATi Overdrive, and monitor the work rate, or activity, of your GPU in both scenarios.

The monitors may be greyed out but they do work.

If I've ever suspected my GPU isn't accelerating a procedure, that's always been my first course of action.

You may want to monitor your CPU work rate simultaneously using task manager.

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

James W

Senior Contributor Location: Lakeland, FL USA Joined: Aug 18, 2008 10:36 Messages: 911 Offline

Mar 31, 2010 20:30

Jaime, what you stated is exactly what I wanted Bannon to test. He stated that his project consists only of pictures which should be less CPU intensive than high definition video. Andrew, what you posted about quantifying what is actually going on is an excellent idea. Q9300 2.5 GHz
4 GB Ram
Nvidia 9800 GT

AllenChicago

Senior Member Location: Chicago (USA) Joined: Jan 28, 2010 22:06 Messages: 151 Offline

Mar 31, 2010 22:55

Before I found out that a new power supply would be needed before I
could upgrade my video card to the ATI 5770, I was all set to get a
5770 for the enhanced encoding. Now...I don't know.

Why would this Cyberlink PD8 page show test results of increased
speed, yet Bannon notices no increase?

Reference: http://www.cyberlink.com/products/powerdirector/faster-performance_en_US.html
(ATI Results and supported ATI cards are at the bottom of the page)

During tests here at home, my encoding speed didn't vary with, or
without the ATI Stream Technology box checkmarked. But I chalked
that up to the fact that my ATI 4350 card isn't on the Cyberlink list
of supported Graphic Cards.

-Allen

Quote: I was on a quest to find a GPU encoding solution that worked with PowerDirector 8 to create MPEG-2 video as well as H.264 so today I replaced my nVidia GTX 295 video card with a Radeon 5870 and I must say that I am disappointed with the results. Prior to replacing the card I’d created a 25:29 MPEG-2 1080p video without GPU acceleration in 16:49. I expected the GPU accelerated creation to scream after I installed the 5870, the 10.3 Catalyst drivers, and the latest version of AVIVO but that didn’t happen. Instead, it took 18:41, almost two minutes longer! Does anyone have any thoughts why that happened? I used the exact same profile for both runs and yes, the Hardware Video Encoder button was selected. My system specs are: Windows 7 64-bit; i7 920, 6GB memory, 160GB SSD C drive; 1 TB D drive with more than 800Gb free; and Creative Labs X-Fi sound card.

Andrew - Wales, UK

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

Apr 01, 2010 06:44

Hi,

I've used ATi Stream for re-encoding AVCHD projects into MPEG2. GPU acceleration has reduced the amount of time required to render by about 30-40%.

Additionally the quality of the output was better.

I've used it for HD video Bannon has used it for a slideshow. It depends entirely on what you plan to use the GPU for.

There are clearly situations where the GPU provides no improvement in speed or quality and vice versa.

Cheers,

Andrew

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at Apr 01. 2010 06:45

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

deBabba

Member Location: Frankfurt, Germany Joined: Nov 28, 2009 10:33 Messages: 88 Offline

Apr 01, 2010 08:40

Oups, I am missing my latest post from this morning. There was an attachment containing an compare.

I assume this was the one Andrew has answered to.

Has it been deleted or is there a technical problem ?? I7-860, 4GB RAM, ATI HD5770, Win7 64, PD9 latest patch, Canon HG10 1440x1080 16Mbit/s, WD TV player

Best regards from Frankfurt, Germany
Andy

Bannon

Newbie Joined: Dec 21, 2009 20:07 Messages: 22 Offline

Apr 01, 2010 09:14

First, I want to thank everyone for their suggestions and participation in this discussion. Now for some new information using 10:27 of HD video I was able to find ...

MPEG-2: Thanks to the advice of someone earlier, I am now aware of the ATi Overdrive panel and the information it contains. With it I was able to determine that no matter what my Hardware video encoder selection is, the program utilizes the GPU. This is true of the default (HD) MPEG-2 1080i profile as well as my 1920*1080p custom profile. Go figure!

H.264: GPU acceleration makes a whopping difference! It took 23:35 using the AVCHD 1920*1080 (24Mbps) profile without acceleration and only 11:05 with acceleration! WOW!