Quote: OH yeah, the Intel HD4600 is much faster (at least rendering MP4) than my ATI card and have considered removing it.

Thanks would be interesting to see what impact the newer Intel 5000 & 6000 GPU's might have on PDR13.

My 20 x Boats H.264 1920x1080/60i 24Mbps with my little i5 CPU and Intel 4600 graphics took 1:54

Tried again with Intel Quick Sync Vid off and got - 3:51 Power Director 13&14 Ultimate, Photo Director 6, Audio Dir, Pwr2Go 10
Win 10 64, Intel MB DH87MC, Intel i5-4670 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 16Gb DDR3 1600, 128Gb SSD, 2x1Tb WDBlue 7200rpmSATA6, Intel 4600 GPU, Gigabyte G1 GTX960 4GB, LG BluRay Writer

3:50 for my aging PC with:
- AMD 1055 Phenom (6 cores, 50% load)
- Nvidia GTX650 (full load according to GPU-Z)
- 8 Gb DDR2-memory (30% load or something like that)
- 512GB harddisk (probably 5400 rpm)

What is irritating however that when I use the same setting (1080P60 AVC 264) on a multi-cam video, the Nvidia gets almost zero load and the CPU nearly 100%. It has a lot of fading in/out and positioning changes for every camera, so that might be the reason the graphics card isn't working alongsite. But it would have been nice to let the Nvidia sweat on it

Quote: 3:50 for my aging PC with:
- AMD 1055 Phenom (6 cores, 50% load)
- Nvidia GTX650 (full load according to GPU-Z)
- 8 Gb DDR2-memory (30% load or something like that)
- 512GB harddisk (probably 5400 rpm)

What is irritating however that when I use the same setting (1080P60 AVC 264) on a multi-cam video, the Nvidia gets almost zero load and the CPU nearly 100%. It has a lot of fading in/out and positioning changes for every camera, so that might be the reason the graphics card isn't working alongsite. But it would have been nice to let the Nvidia sweat on it

Something a little funny here with your GTX650 performance times with the sample timeline, can you please post:
1) Screen capture of GPU-Z GPU load
2) Screen capture of produce screen so one can see selections
3) Version of PD13
4) Version of Nvidia drivers

Almost looks like you are using the older CUDA encoding with your GTX650, nothing really wrong with that, just slower. The above 4 should give a little insight as each point to a different potential cause.

Jeff

Quote:

Quote: OH yeah, the Intel HD4600 is much faster (at least rendering MP4) than my ATI card and have considered removing it.

Thanks would be interesting to see what impact the newer Intel 5000 & 6000 GPU's might have on PDR13.

My 20 x Boats H.264 1920x1080/60i 24Mbps with my little i5 CPU and Intel 4600 graphics took 1:54 - No graphics card.

EKSVid with GTS 960 was 1:47. The plot thickens!

Just a quick correction AIS.

My result 1:47 is CPU's only (I have an AMD Radeon HD 5450 GPU - that is not in play since HE is off)

I would like to see someone post the results for the GTX960 to see how compares to the GTX970 of JL_JL above. Win8.1 Pro x64 / Dual x5670 / 24GB / GTX960 4GB / 240GB SSD + 640GB HDD / PD13 Ultimate

Just to thrown some lower end results into the mix, I did the Boats x 20 "test" on both PCs - rendered to AVC H.264 M2TS 1920x1080 @ 24MBps. Screenshot ttached.

i7-920 GTX260 - render time = 4:07

i7- 3930K GTX680 - render time = 1:51

A bit sad, but if that's the worst thing that happens today it'll be a good day!

Cheers - Tony
Visit PDtoots. PowerDirector Tutorials, tips, free resources & more. Subscribe!
Full linked Tutorial Catalog PDtoots happily supports fellow PowerDirector users!

Quote: Just a quick correction AIS.

My result 1:47 is CPU's only (I have an AMD Radeon HD 5450 GPU - that is not in play since HE is off)

I would like to see someone post the results for the GTX960 to see how compares to the GTX970 of JL_JL above.

My mistake, sorry - I corrected my post. Thanks, Al Power Director 13&14 Ultimate, Photo Director 6, Audio Dir, Pwr2Go 10
Win 10 64, Intel MB DH87MC, Intel i5-4670 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 16Gb DDR3 1600, 128Gb SSD, 2x1Tb WDBlue 7200rpmSATA6, Intel 4600 GPU, Gigabyte G1 GTX960 4GB, LG BluRay Writer

Just found something interesting.

A joint Intel/Cyberlink presentation on how Cyberlink has been working with Intel to optimize Graphics performance on PDR12&13.
http://intelstudios.edgesuite.net/idf/2014/sf/aep/GVCS003/GVCS003.html
Cyberlink presentation starts from about 32 min

It looks like PDR13 has been developed to work with Intel Iris Graphics - further adding to the question of what (if any) expensive GPU card is best for satisfactory PDR13 performance. Power Director 13&14 Ultimate, Photo Director 6, Audio Dir, Pwr2Go 10
Win 10 64, Intel MB DH87MC, Intel i5-4670 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 16Gb DDR3 1600, 128Gb SSD, 2x1Tb WDBlue 7200rpmSATA6, Intel 4600 GPU, Gigabyte G1 GTX960 4GB, LG BluRay Writer

Quote:

Quote: 3:50 for my aging PC with:
- AMD 1055 Phenom (6 cores, 50% load)
- Nvidia GTX650 (full load according to GPU-Z)
- 8 Gb DDR2-memory (30% load or something like that)
- 512GB harddisk (probably 5400 rpm)

What is irritating however that when I use the same setting (1080P60 AVC 264) on a multi-cam video, the Nvidia gets almost zero load and the CPU nearly 100%. It has a lot of fading in/out and positioning changes for every camera, so that might be the reason the graphics card isn't working alongsite. But it would have been nice to let the Nvidia sweat on it

Something a little funny here with your GTX650 performance times with the sample timeline, can you please post:
1) Screen capture of GPU-Z GPU load
2) Screen capture of produce screen so one can see selections
3) Version of PD13
4) Version of Nvidia drivers

Almost looks like you are using the older CUDA encoding with your GTX650, nothing really wrong with that, just slower. The above 4 should give a little insight as each point to a different potential cause.

Jeff

Hi Jeff, if you could give a clue to what's missing, that would be nice. Rendered a video last night with 34 tracks (multicam, 5 stationary cams) with a lot of keyframes to switch from one cam to the other, and with zooming in and panning using keyframes. It took almost 7 hours for a resulting duration of 1:20 (1080P60 same settings as the boat-test), with 100% CPU usage and the Nvidia-card doing nothing....

Screen captures:
- GPU-Z output: Link
- settings PD13: Link
- Version PD13: 13.0.2408.0
- Version Nvidia-drivers: 347.52 (d.d. 10 Febr 2015, not the latest)

Thnx, Joop

Quote:
- settings PD13: Link

Your link there shows you selected 1920x1080/60p (28Mbps) which was not the test being performed and compared. The time you quote of 3:50 would be consistent for that profile, charts show everythings working fine. The test being performed was 1920x1080/60i (24Mbps) for which your GTX 650 should be well under 2:00 to encode.

Jeff

Quote:

Quote:
- settings PD13: Link

Your link there shows you selected 1920x1080/60p (28Mbps) which was not the test being performed and compared. The time you quote of 3:50 would be consistent for that profile, charts show everythings working fine. The test being performed was 1920x1080/60i (24Mbps) for which your GTX 650 should be well under 2:00 to encode.

Jeff

I'm sorry, messed up a bit. However, with 1920x1080/60i (24Mbps) it is 2:34. So well above the 2:00 mark.

Quote:

I'm sorry, messed up a bit. However, with 1920x1080/60i (24Mbps) it is 2:34. So well above the 2:00 mark.

My guess is that's the penalty of using the 347.52 Nvidia drivers with PD13 release 2408. The details were presented here http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/42749.page in my post dated 25/02/2015 18:10:35 with results in the pic that was attached to that thread. In a few threads lower you see confirmation that it was duplicated by CL, that's all I know. PD is now at release 2725 (beta) and issue still present. If the ~1.3 factor holds for you, that would put you at the 2:00 mark.

I'm not going to tell anyone which drivers to run, that's their choice. If you do decide to evaluate, be sure to use "Custom" and "clean install" features of the Nvidia installer.

Jeff

New Problem
Don't know if anyone can help but after running the MTS test above I was browsing the Intel website.
I ran the test and posted my render time on the forum. I then updated my mother board BIOS from the Intel website. Everything ran OK. I then went back to PDR13 and rendered the same project to MTS and got the error I have attached. The Intel Quick Sync suddenly stopped working. I rendered again using the same project and Quick Sync and it ran fine for H.264 MP4 but will not work for MTS.
Why has Quick Sync suddenly stopped working for MTS. Please check my BIOS and Intel Graphics driver and tell me if I need to change. I cannot understand why this problem has suddenly occurred when it has been working fine until now.
I submitted the problem to Support and they simply said "turn off Quick Sync" and my render time goes from 1:54 to 3:51.

I re-installed my GPU driver but same problem.
Thanks
Al Power Director 13&14 Ultimate, Photo Director 6, Audio Dir, Pwr2Go 10
Win 10 64, Intel MB DH87MC, Intel i5-4670 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 16Gb DDR3 1600, 128Gb SSD, 2x1Tb WDBlue 7200rpmSATA6, Intel 4600 GPU, Gigabyte G1 GTX960 4GB, LG BluRay Writer

Quote: I submitted the problem to Support and they simply said "turn off Quick Sync" and my render time goes from 1:54 to 3:51.

I re-installed my GPU driver but same problem.
Thanks
Al

This may be another option to get QS back compared to Supports advice, http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/43754.page#226112

Jeff

Looking at this link: https://downloadcenter.intel.com/product/69045/Intel-Desktop-Board-DH87MC . Not sure if your bios update was successful as there is no date for it. The graphics driver date is different from the one issued 3/27/2014.

Thanks Jeff and tomac.
My bios update was from
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/product/69045/Intel-Desktop-Board-DH87MC for Win 8.1 64.
My old bios which came with the board was ver 0152 dated 11/04/2013. I updated to ver 0158 09/12/2014. I downloaded and ran the .EXE version. It ran, rebooted, and said bios updated sucessfully. Everything is running fine including PDR13 except I lost the Quick Sync acceleration for MTS files.
Intel doesn't make life easy. Using their "Driver Update Utility" my M/Board's latest GPU driver 10.18.10.3496 3/27/2014 (same as tomac's link above) but the Utility ignores the CPU. The Haswell board supports a range of CPU's from Celeron to Xenon (with no graphics). My i5 4670 CPU has the 4600 on-board GPU. After digging around the Intel website I found:
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/search?keyword=4th+Generation+Intel%C2%AE+Core%E2%84%A2+Processors+with+Intel%C2%AE+HD+Graphics+4600
This is the Graphics driver (Iris) for my CPU graphics which is different from the latest Graphics driver for the M/Board. The IRIS driver is 15.36.19.64.4170 dated 4/10/2015. This is the driver I had installed prior to the BIOS update and which I re-installed after I found MTS was not working but still got the same error which makes me think the BIOS update caused the problem. Power Director 13&14 Ultimate, Photo Director 6, Audio Dir, Pwr2Go 10
Win 10 64, Intel MB DH87MC, Intel i5-4670 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 16Gb DDR3 1600, 128Gb SSD, 2x1Tb WDBlue 7200rpmSATA6, Intel 4600 GPU, Gigabyte G1 GTX960 4GB, LG BluRay Writer

PROBLEM FIXED! Thanks Jeff- I hate playing with the Registry but took your advice from the link above. Support should put you on their payroll! I found two problems. (see attached) I changed them to zero - ran PDR13 BOATS and it rendered my MTS with Quick Sync perfectly!

I went back to support and they confirmed your solution (attached). Maybe Dafydd Bevan - SoftDeko could add this solution in a locked post on the forum. It saves users from playing with REGEDIT. Power Director 13&14 Ultimate, Photo Director 6, Audio Dir, Pwr2Go 10
Win 10 64, Intel MB DH87MC, Intel i5-4670 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 16Gb DDR3 1600, 128Gb SSD, 2x1Tb WDBlue 7200rpmSATA6, Intel 4600 GPU, Gigabyte G1 GTX960 4GB, LG BluRay Writer

Quote: PROBLEM FIXED! Thanks Jeff- I hate playing with the Registry but took your advice from the link above. Support should put you on their payroll! I found two problems. (see attached) I changed them to zero - ran PDR13 BOATS and it rendered my MTS with Quick Sync perfectly!

This regedit edit is pretty benign. You can edit the file CL support sent you and see what they are doing. My guess, they probably deleted all variables in the area as PD will recreate as you produce to different formats. It locks (1) during produce and unlocks (0) after success. I've had it error a time or two, especially if messing with various QS and/or Discrete GPU configurations. I swap cards and toggle on or off Intel HDxxxxx GPU in BIOS a lot for testing and often run into this anomaly.

Quote: Just found something interesting.

A joint Intel/Cyberlink presentation on how Cyberlink has been working with Intel to optimize Graphics performance on PDR12&13.
http://intelstudios.edgesuite.net/idf/2014/sf/aep/GVCS003/GVCS003.html
Cyberlink presentation starts from about 32 min

The video is a little dated, but I’d like to highlight a few items because they are consistent with what I stated earlier in this thread and in other posts and I think are very relevant for many users. I think it's important to understand the technologies a little so the average user knows if they will benefit from them and what hardware may be a good choice for their editing needs.
From the video, on:
Chart 39, Stanley from CL states his focus today was to talk PD13 OpenCL2.0 support with SVM
Chart 40, The title, "Apply Video Effect without SVM", notice the words, Video Effect
Chart 41, The bullet "We can reduce memory copy time when applying FX filters", again notice the words FX filter, ie. Video Effects
Chart 42, The title, "Apply Video Effect with SVM", notice the words, Video Effect

At time ~40:20 Stanley states a test example, a 3x3 video wall with "one video effect added to each video", again, take note of the terminology, video effect, fx in PD13.

I've attached a sample PD13 project with boats.wmv which mimics a 3x3 video wall and highlights the benefits of OpenCL. In the video test case they were using an integrated Intel GPU but OpenCL is supported in ATI and Nvidia GPU’s as well, the SVM benefit is not.

For this sample 3x3 wall with video effect applied and 1920x1080/60i 24Mbps H.264 M2TS encoding:
GTX970 HA encode time: 11:34
GTX970 HA encode time: 3:37 GTX970 with OpenCL for video effects activated
CPU encode time: 11:44
CPU encode time: 3:40 GTX970 OpenCL for video effects activated
Everyone’s experience will be different, it’s highly dependent on relative capability of the CPU and GPU. Enabling OpenCL on a very weak GPU could be detrimental to encode times.

As you can see, a great technology and significant encoding time benefit when OpenCL is used for PD13 fx’s added, here ~3x improvement is demonstrated in this example.

My point earlier was, OpenCL is probably rather insignificant for most users timelines. Many on this forum seek improved encode times for timelines that they have trimmed out some video sections, added a few transitions, some titles, some PIP's, and so on. My perception is for an average user with say a 30 minute timeline, very little of the timeline duration is "applied video effects" so the real benefit for the average user in reduced encode times in my opinion is minimal as I stated earlier.

I've used a 3x3 video wall in several videos but I've never applied a video effect to all 9 videos nor has this editing section occupied a significant duration in my timeline. To my knowledge, the benefit of OpenCL for video encoding with PD13 is currently only applicable for the applied video effect duration, note Stanley goes to great levels to compare a encoding example with “Video Effects to each video” applied. If you are one to create lengthy timelines of 3x3 video wall with a video effect applied to each video, then OpenCL benefit is great for you to reduce encode times so shop for a card strong in OpenCL implementation.

Jeff

Encode Time Discussion:Some may question why the GTX970 HA encode and the CPU encode times are essentially identical. What requires the horsepower to encode this example is the "Video Effect" that's been applied. With GTX970 HA encoding without OpenCL benefits, the CPU does the "Video Effect" and this requires the horsepower and governs the encode time. With CPU encoding without OpenCL benefits, the CPU again does the "Video Effect" and this requires the horsepower and defines the encode time. Therefore, both times should be essentially the same even though the GTX970 can encode a plain boats.wmv significantly faster, the encode time in this example is totally governed by the "Video Effect" that's been applied to all 9 videos. When the GTX970 OpenCL features are utilized during encoding, regardless if CPU or GTX970 HA encoding is used, the times will be nearly the same. In this situation one has the GTX970 OpenCL features doing the "Video Effect" heavy lifting and that dictates encode times.

Thanks for that 3x3.pds. Ran the test and only took 2:59 on my old ATI HD7870. Was the first time I've ever seen the GPU Utilization go up to 80% and rarely see the GPU Speed max at 1Ghz. Shows just how 'can' utilize the GPU. Intel i7 4770k, 16GB, GTX1060 3GB, Two 240GB SSD, 4TB HD, Sony HDR-TD20V 3D camcorder, Sony SLT-A65VK for still images, Windows 10 Pro, 64bit
Gary Russell -- TN USA

Quote:
Thanks for that 3x3.pds. Ran the test and only took 2:59 on my old ATI HD7870. Was the first time I've ever seen the GPU Utilization go up to 80% and rarely see the GPU Speed max at 1Ghz. Shows just how 'can' utilize the GPU.

That's were one would typically check the bitrate of the produced file, ATI with HA has had a rough history here with PD, namely, you don't always get what you specify. At 47.7MB should throw up immediate I've got some issues. 1:05 min at ~24Mbps profile should be a file size about ~195MB (24/8*65)=195MB, my produced file is 186MB, with an average bitrate of 22.8Mbps which is about right, 22.85/8*65= 185.6MB

Either you produced to the wrong format or your ATI with HA and PD didn't produce what you asked for, either are possible.

The good side, your card was loaded, which you wanted to see. Replace the boats.wmv with a real 1920x1080 24Mbps video file or higher and you can load it up more!

Jeff

GGRussell, your file size looks a bit small for a 1920x1080/60i 24Mbps H.264 encoding of the 3_3_wall.pds project.

Your file sizie is 47.7MB, I think it should be 131.9MB

Win8.1 Pro x64 / Dual x5670 / 24GB / GTX960 4GB / 240GB SSD + 640GB HDD / PD13 Ultimate

you're both are correct. Media info says the file is Variable Bit rate 5586Kbps Max 23.9Mbps

This issue caused by how HA is used with the Radeon?

If I choose 1080p 24fps at 16Mbps (MP4), it took 1:47 and bit rate was correct. Still Variable bit rate but Min/Max bitrate is the same.

Not too concerned as I only use PD13 to convert WTV to MP4. Intel i7 4770k, 16GB, GTX1060 3GB, Two 240GB SSD, 4TB HD, Sony HDR-TD20V 3D camcorder, Sony SLT-A65VK for still images, Windows 10 Pro, 64bit
Gary Russell -- TN USA