Hardware Acceleration

RonH

Contributor Location: Norway (from Australia) Joined: Sep 05, 2011 10:13 Messages: 364 Offline

Solved by

Feb 25, 2013 11:02

PowerDirector can take advantage of AMD, Intel, and Nvidia hardware acceleration to speed up editing response and encoding.

I do not currently have these ticked in Preferences and it seems that many of our users also do not use these features.
Are there real advantages using hardware acceleration for editing or producing?
Is a 4 core processor loading more equally spread across the cores, hence each core being less stressed?

I confess to not understanding the use of HA (other than it is supposed to speed up activity) and what effect it has on processor stress.
Guidance sought please from those that understand.
Ron CYa Ron (W10/i5gen8/Nvidia)
Someone famous once said: "We only have the 4th dimension of 'time' so that everything does not all happen at once"

Michael8511

Contributor Location: U.S.A. Indiana Joined: Jan 14, 2012 16:12 Messages: 374 Offline

Feb 25, 2013 20:02

Ron I know if I use hardware acceleration with a i7 4 core my cpu use will drop to around 40% to 50%. Now if I have 4 tracks of video line up say doing a pip at that part it will go to 99% even with HA on.

They say just using cpu gives a better looking render video. Here is a link to a artical I read last year on it. I don't think my eyes can see the differance or not. But I have been cpu to produce.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/828-1/h-264-encoding-cpu-vs-gpu-nvidia-cuda-amd-stream-intel-mediasdk-and-x264.html

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at Feb 25. 2013 20:05

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

All vodi

Senior Contributor Location: Canada Joined: Aug 21, 2009 11:24 Messages: 1431 Offline

Feb 25, 2013 20:48

RonH ,

That is correct. Most of us do not use HA because:

- the difference ion render times is marginal
- the video quality is consistently better with PC rendering Win 10, i7

kingsmeadow

Senior Member Location: Cambridge, UK Joined: Dec 06, 2011 11:52 Messages: 179 Offline

Feb 26, 2013 04:28

Quote: RonH ,

That is correct. Most of us do not use HA because:

- the difference ion render times is marginal
-

Don't know your PC specs, however I get about 300% difference in rendering times. I hasten to add that is with mp4, other rendering options may vary considerable. A bit more than marginal wouldn't you say

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

RonH

Contributor Location: Norway (from Australia) Joined: Sep 05, 2011 10:13 Messages: 364 Offline

Feb 26, 2013 07:11

Thanks for your guidances about the use of HA.
Since I have been producing without HA and all is OK its probably best to continue this way. I might test my next produce with and without to see what effect I get ... if any.
Ron CYa Ron (W10/i5gen8/Nvidia)
Someone famous once said: "We only have the 4th dimension of 'time' so that everything does not all happen at once"

PlaySound

Senior Contributor Joined: Dec 02, 2010 10:26 Messages: 2031 Offline

Feb 26, 2013 08:44

Here I feel no difference in render time, with HA (on / off) However in PD11 (on HA) works normal.
For safety this HA (off)
In PD10, HA (on) deteriorates to render some effects, text etc ... AMD-FX 8350 / 8GB DDR3
SSD SUV400S37240G / 2-HD WD 1TB
AMD Radeon R9 270 / AOC M2470SWD
Windows 7-64 / PD16 Ultimate