yes, yes.

here's one -> http://www.ebay.com/itm/DELL-XPS-8900-Desktop-i7-6700K-32GB-Ram-Blu-Ray-NVidia-GTX-960-1-Year-Warranty-/272483581045?hash=item3f71497c75:g:o-kAAOSwa-dWrB-V



go here and check the CPU and GPU scores. higgggggggggggggggher the better.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/



for an example at the cpu benchmarks search type in i7-6700k

you should get second site and click on the

2. passmark-intel core i7-6700k at 4.00GHz-price performance comparison

then you'll get the score of 11071 <- watch it, it is hoooooooot!

you don't need to check shadow files or use that thing a ma jig!



if you still have a pause, slow then it isn't your pc but PD.

good luck and whisper good words to Santa for me.


p.s.

check mine CPU- i7-2720QM and FX-8370E

GPU- GT 550M and GTX 950

p.s.

my pcs it takes 10 minute 4K an hour to produce...


happy happy joy joy

PepsiMan

'garbage in garbage out' 'no bridge too far'

Yashica Electro 8 LD-6 Super 8mm
Asrock TaiChi X470, AMD R7 2700X, W7P 64, MSI GTX1060 6GB, Corsair 16GB/RAM
Dell XPS L702X i7-2860QM, W7P / W10P 64, Intel HD3000/nVidia GT 550M 1GB, Micron 16GB/RAM
Samsung Galaxy Note3/NX1

Quote yes, yes.

here's one -> http://www.ebay.com/itm/DELL-XPS-8900-Desktop-i7-6700K-32GB-Ram-Blu-Ray-NVidia-GTX-960-1-Year-Warranty-/272483581045?hash=item3f71497c75:g:o-kAAOSwa-dWrB-V



go here and check the CPU and GPU scores. higgggggggggggggggher the better.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/



for an example at the cpu benchmarks search type in i7-6700k

you should get second site and click on the

2. passmark-intel core i7-6700k at 4.00GHz-price performance comparison

then you'll get the score of 11071 <- watch it, it is hoooooooot!

you don't need to check shadow files or use that thing a ma jig!



if you still have a pause, slow then it isn't your pc but PD.

good luck and whisper good words to Santa for me.


p.s.

check mine CPU- i7-2720QM and FX-8370E

GPU- GT 550M and GTX 950

p.s.

my pcs it takes 10 minute 4K an hour to produce...


happy happy joy joy

PepsiMan

'garbage in garbage out'

Dear Pepsi Man:

Thank you for your help. I have another question though, because I see that you are using a second generation I7

My son's computer has an i7-2600 and a GTX 750 TI SC

We are using PD 13.

Would it make a big difference if we upgraded to GTX 960 and upgraded to PowerDirector 14? (I see we can still buy PD 14 on Amazon from CyberLink).

Or maybe Gtx 1060?

I read that PD 14 has much better hardware encoding than PD13, but you need GTX 960 or above to take advantage of it.

Also, would previewing be smoother?

Or is i7-2600 series way to old and not worth upgrading?

Thanks in advance.

Quote ...

We are using PD 13. Would it make a big difference if we upgraded to... to PowerDirector 14?

I read that PD 14 has much better hardware encoding than PD13, but you need GTX 960 or above to take advantage of it...

yes! i don't have PD13 because i had a LOT of problems with it. from PD12 went to PD14!

then skipped 15(no 4K Blu-ray).

PD 14 with GTX 950 or GTX 960 it just hummmmmmmmmmsss.

Quote ...Would it make a big difference if we upgraded to... GTX 1060?

I read that PD 14 has much better hardware encoding than PD13...

from GTX 745, yes it'll make a difference. i've upgraded mine from GTX 750Ti to GTX 950.

i strongly recommend GTX 1060 with min 2GB mem eventhough PD never uses more than 700GB.

Quote ...Or is i7-2600 series way to old and not worth upgrading? Thanks in advance...

r u kidding?

did u run the numbers on my CPUs? ur i7-2600 is +500 than mine.

if you don't mind if it takes 10 minutes 4K video is rendered at little bit less than an hour then

by all means i'd keep it; however, if you add all those effects then u r looking at at least 3+ hours of rendering time.

your i7-2600 with GTX 1060 beats my PCs hands down! rendering 1080 is lickety-split!

ensure to have 12-16GB RAM.

besides 1Q 2017, intel will be showing off their Kabylake cpus that'll do 10bit & 12bit 4.2.2 4K HEVC H.265 & VP9.

i got my eyes on i7-7700K & GTX 1060!

Quote ...Also, would previewing be smoother?...

well, i'm not going to lie. there're pauses and slow downs. yes i'm talking about 4K in PD14 with HA on.

i use a substitution method then whicha ma jig. before going to bed i use Rocky Mountains Movie Converter to convert

HEVC 4K(Sammy NX1) videos to AVC FHD. i use FHD to edit(it's shmooooth) then replace it for final output!

RMMC does ProRes 422 & 444 etc. it's free. get it at sourceforge.



better be good to Mrs. Santa.

happy happy joy joy

PepsiMan

'garbage in garbage out' 'no bridge too far'

Yashica Electro 8 LD-6 Super 8mm
Asrock TaiChi X470, AMD R7 2700X, W7P 64, MSI GTX1060 6GB, Corsair 16GB/RAM
Dell XPS L702X i7-2860QM, W7P / W10P 64, Intel HD3000/nVidia GT 550M 1GB, Micron 16GB/RAM
Samsung Galaxy Note3/NX1

I’ll offer the exact opposite view of PepsiMan to your original two questions, no and no.

Neither a GPU or CPU improvements will help significantly for what is most likely causing your dislike of slow PD editing. From my experience the key is your statement here:

Quote: I will need to grade them a bit in ColorDirector, so there will be some curves and some sharpening and some HSL work.

From what I’ve seen this CD process appears to be process limited in PD and not entirely CPU throttled. To provide data to prove the point I’ll offer the following which you can replicate on your i7-3770 which is faster than either of PepsiMan’s referenced CPU’s.

For this comparison I’ve put 5 of the Kite Surfing.wmv in the timeline for working footage. I’ve simply used a Produce to basic H.264, 1920x1080/30p (16Mbps) MP4. In CD I’ve simply applied the 3 adjustments shown in the attached pic. What one should notice is that the time to produce such a timeline is dominated by the CD adjustments and not a strong function of CPU capability. So getting a higher CPU ranking will do little. Detailed data showing this effect is summarized in table below.

PassMark CPU Rating	Encode Time Basic Timeline	Encode Time CD Timeline
~9000	32	170
~17000	13	170

As shown, the encoding of non CD timeline scales very well with CPU rating as it should, however, once a CD adjustment is made, the higher rating CPU does nothing to reduce encode time. Same effect noticed for timeline playback fluidity. About the only option with PD for these editing features is to cut down the realtime display load for PD through lower resolution as you have already done.

If me, I’d do all my timeline editing without any CD effects which should be fluent for you and then simply apply the CD settings at the end of the editing phase and simply accept the produce time. Or I’d do the opposite, make all the color correction on the clips and produce, then perform other edits on this produced file so my timeline playback is not handling any color adjustments.

You don’t mention any details of your produce settings so it’s unclear if the detailed discussion presented here http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/48352.page#post_box_253035 applies or not since you have 4K source footage.

Jeff

Quote

Quote ...

We are using PD 13. Would it make a big difference if we upgraded to... to PowerDirector 14?

I read that PD 14 has much better hardware encoding than PD13, but you need GTX 960 or above to take advantage of it...

yes! i don't have PD13 because i had a LOT of problems with it. from PD12 went to PD14!

then skipped 15(no 4K Blu-ray).

PD 14 with GTX 950 or GTX 960 it just hummmmmmmmmmsss.

Quote ...Would it make a big difference if we upgraded to... GTX 1060?

I read that PD 14 has much better hardware encoding than PD13...

from GTX 745, yes it'll make a difference. i've upgraded mine from GTX 750Ti to GTX 950.

i strongly recommend GTX 1060 with min 2GB mem eventhough PD never uses more than 700GB.

Quote ...Or is i7-2600 series way to old and not worth upgrading? Thanks in advance...

r u kidding?

did u run the numbers on my CPUs? ur i7-2600 is +500 than mine.

if you don't mind if it takes 10 minutes 4K video is rendered at little bit less than an hour then

by all means i'd keep it; however, if you add all those effects then u r looking at at least 3+ hours of rendering time.

your i7-2600 with GTX 1060 beats my PCs hands down! rendering 1080 is lickety-split!

ensure to have 12-16GB RAM.

besides 1Q 2017, intel will be showing off their Kabylake cpus that'll do 10bit & 12bit 4.2.2 4K HEVC H.265 & VP9.

i got my eyes on i7-7700K & GTX 1060!

Quote ...Also, would previewing be smoother?...

well, i'm not going to lie. there're pauses and slow downs. yes i'm talking about 4K in PD14 with HA on.

i use a substitution method then whicha ma jig. before going to bed i use Rocky Mountains Movie Converter to convert

HEVC 4K(Sammy NX1) videos to AVC FHD. i use FHD to edit(it's shmooooth) then replace it for final output!

RMMC does ProRes 422 & 444 etc. it's free. get it at sourceforge.



better be good to Mrs. Santa.

happy happy joy joy

PepsiMan

'garbage in garbage out'

Thank you again. I will definitely see about upgrading to PD 14 and look at the other options.

Quote I’ll offer the exact opposite view of PepsiMan to your original two questions, no and no.

Neither a GPU or CPU improvements will help significantly for what is most likely causing your dislike of slow PD editing. From my experience the key is your statement here:

Quote: I will need to grade them a bit in ColorDirector, so there will be some curves and some sharpening and some HSL work.

From what I’ve seen this CD process appears to be process limited in PD and not entirely CPU throttled. To provide data to prove the point I’ll offer the following which you can replicate on your i7-3770 which is faster than either of PepsiMan’s referenced CPU’s.

For this comparison I’ve put 5 of the Kite Surfing.wmv in the timeline for working footage. I’ve simply used a Produce to basic H.264, 1920x1080/30p (16Mbps) MP4. In CD I’ve simply applied the 3 adjustments shown in the attached pic. What one should notice is that the time to produce such a timeline is dominated by the CD adjustments and not a strong function of CPU capability. So getting a higher CPU ranking will do little. Detailed data showing this effect is summarized in table below.

PassMark CPU Rating	Encode Time Basic Timeline	Encode Time CD Timeline
~9000	32	170
~17000	13	170

As shown, the encoding of non CD timeline scales very well with CPU rating as it should, however, once a CD adjustment is made, the higher rating CPU does nothing to reduce encode time. Same effect noticed for timeline playback fluidity. About the only option with PD for these editing features is to cut down the realtime display load for PD through lower resolution as you have already done.

If me, I’d do all my timeline editing without any CD effects which should be fluent for you and then simply apply the CD settings at the end of the editing phase and simply accept the produce time. Or I’d do the opposite, make all the color correction on the clips and produce, then perform other edits on this produced file so my timeline playback is not handling any color adjustments.

You don’t mention any details of your produce settings so it’s unclear if the detailed discussion presented here http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/48352.page#post_box_253035 applies or not since you have 4K source footage.

Jeff

Thank you so much, Jeff.

You have given me a lot of info and I need to read through that link and look into my produce settings as well.

Since I have to go out to a shoot this morning, please bear with me and I will get back later today.

I don't want to confuse anyone, but for now, on my i7-3770 machine, playback was incredibly slow for ALL clips - that was before applying ANY effects or ANY transitions or ANY CD adjustments.

If I put two five-second-long clips on a single time line, it would PLAY about the first three seconds, and then stop playing the video (while audio would continue) and then reach the end.

This is with the Magic+PD files (on a Sata 3 7200 spinning drive, while the project PDS file was on my SSD drive). And this is with the Display setting at High resolution, not even HDS resolution nor FULL HD Resolution.

When I finally got it edited, a three minute video with some effects and about 20 fade trasitions took two hours to produce.

A shorter one-minute 30-second video took close to an hour and a half to produce.

I had to turn off all hardware acceleration and unchecked fast video rendering because - while it was faster with fast video rendering on - I ended up with a TON of moire.

I was producing to H264 AVC, MP4 wrapper, 1920 X 1080p, 24fps (16MBS)

Would producing to mpg 2 1920 X 1080p 24ps (25 MBS) be better? I figured since it had a higher bitrate (25MBS vs 16MBS of H264) that it would be slower. But maybe that means the computer would do less compression...

Anyway, my i7-3770 box is a small form factor so I can't put in any significant graphics card anyway... so I need to get SOMETHING with a larger case / more powerful power supply. Maybe I can get a used / refurb 4th gen i7 and save money for ??? whatever else will truly make an impact.

Quote

Quote I’ll offer the exact opposite view of PepsiMan to your original two questions, no and no.

Neither a GPU or CPU improvements will help significantly for what is most likely causing your dislike of slow PD editing. From my experience the key is your statement here:

Quote: I will need to grade them a bit in ColorDirector, so there will be some curves and some sharpening and some HSL work.

From what I’ve seen this CD process appears to be process limited in PD and not entirely CPU throttled. To provide data to prove the point I’ll offer the following which you can replicate on your i7-3770 which is faster than either of PepsiMan’s referenced CPU’s.

For this comparison I’ve put 5 of the Kite Surfing.wmv in the timeline for working footage. I’ve simply used a Produce to basic H.264, 1920x1080/30p (16Mbps) MP4. In CD I’ve simply applied the 3 adjustments shown in the attached pic. What one should notice is that the time to produce such a timeline is dominated by the CD adjustments and not a strong function of CPU capability. So getting a higher CPU ranking will do little. Detailed data showing this effect is summarized in table below.

EDIT: Just noticed that your HD Graphic is 4000 and mine is 4600 - Not sure of the difference

PassMark CPU Rating	Encode Time Basic Timeline	Encode Time CD Timeline
~9000	32	170
~17000	13	170

As shown, the encoding of non CD timeline scales very well with CPU rating as it should, however, once a CD adjustment is made, the higher rating CPU does nothing to reduce encode time. Same effect noticed for timeline playback fluidity. About the only option with PD for these editing features is to cut down the realtime display load for PD through lower resolution as you have already done.

If me, I’d do all my timeline editing without any CD effects which should be fluent for you and then simply apply the CD settings at the end of the editing phase and simply accept the produce time. Or I’d do the opposite, make all the color correction on the clips and produce, then perform other edits on this produced file so my timeline playback is not handling any color adjustments.

You don’t mention any details of your produce settings so it’s unclear if the detailed discussion presented here http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/48352.page#post_box_253035 applies or not since you have 4K source footage.

Jeff

Thank you so much, Jeff.

You have given me a lot of info and I need to read through that link and look into my produce settings as well.

Since I have to go out to a shoot this morning, please bear with me and I will get back later today.

I don't want to confuse anyone, but for now, on my i7-3770 machine, playback was incredibly slow for ALL clips - that was before applying ANY effects or ANY transitions or ANY CD adjustments.

If I put two five-second-long clips on a single time line, it would PLAY about the first three seconds, and then stop playing the video (while audio would continue) and then reach the end.

This is with the Magic+PD files (on a Sata 3 7200 spinning drive, while the project PDS file was on my SSD drive). And this is with the Display setting at High resolution, not even HDS resolution nor FULL HD Resolution.

When I finally got it edited, a three minute video with some effects and about 20 fade trasitions took two hours to produce.

A shorter one-minute 30-second video took close to an hour and a half to produce.

I had to turn off all hardware acceleration and unchecked fast video rendering because - while it was faster with fast video rendering on - I ended up with a TON of moire.

I was producing to H264 AVC, MP4 wrapper, 1920 X 1080p, 24fps (16MBS)

Would producing to mpg 2 1920 X 1080p 24ps (25 MBS) be better? I figured since it had a higher bitrate (25MBS vs 16MBS of H264) that it would be slower. But maybe that means the computer would do less compression...

Anyway, my i7-3770 box is a small form factor so I can't put in any significant graphics card anyway... so I need to get SOMETHING with a larger case / more powerful power supply. Maybe I can get a used / refurb 4th gen i7 and save money for ??? whatever else will truly make an impact.

Hi again OTM

Don't rush to replace your machine. I have a very similar setup to you. I, like you, do not have a dedicated card, but rely on the intel HD Graphic 4600, and as you know I use Magic+PD without problems. My processor is an i7 4700t.

My machine is totally silent, therefore I dont even have a power supply as we know it. My editing experience is generally very good and my "produce" time is more than reasonable.

I'm only saying this because I KNOW that 4K can be edited very well without a dedicated card. One thing I will say is make sure that you have the very latest intel driver installed - it does make a difference. I have also found that the device manager in win 10 does a good job of finding and upgrading the HD Graphic 4600.

I do hope this helps you

Robert Panny TM10, GH2, GH4,

Quote

Don't rush to replace your machine. I have a very similar setup to you. I, like you, do not have a dedicated card, but rely on the intel HD Graphic 4600, and as you know I use Magic+PD without problems. My processor is an i7 4700t.

My machine is totally silent, therefore I dont even have a power supply as we know it. My editing experience is generally very good and my "produce" time is more than reasonable.

I'm only saying this because I KNOW that 4K can be edited very well without a dedicated card. One thing I will say is make sure that you have the very latest intel driver installed - it does make a difference. I have also found that the device manager in win 10 does a good job of finding and upgrading the HD Graphic 4600.

I do hope this helps you

Robert

Thank you for your input, Robert.

I have to figure out what is going on.

Maybe I am messing something up when transcoding to Magic+PD?

Maybe there is some setting inPD 13 that I need to check that is not getting checked.

Maybe it is a driver issues. I know that originally the HD 4000 in my computer did not offer OpenCL, but the latest driver I installed (from the built-in HP Support assistant) is supposed to have OpenCL.

I am going to try and transcode my XAVC S files using Sony's catalyst browser instead of Magic+PD. (Unfortunately for me, it looks like Sony Catalyst outputs everything with REC 79 color space, so there goes my chance for custom grading I guess.)

NOTE: SORRY ABOUT THE SCROLLING / SPACING

So I ran a quick test using the ColorDirector adjustments that Jeff had suggested (in colorDirector, +.2 Exposure, +2 Brightest, +2 Dark) , and it does indeed slow everything down, both previewing and producing.

I don't have the kite surfer video (since I am on PD13) but there is a Boats video in PD13 which is a 720p WMV file.

I chained six of them together to make a one minute video. Then tried producing them with and without CD settings applied, as well as with and without cross fades between each 10-second clip.

Time To Produce	Compression	Color Director Adjustments or not	Output Resolution
0:0:30	H.264	No CD Adjustments	1080p 24fps
0:0:17	mpg2	No CD Adjustments	1080p 24fps
0:2:44	H.264	CD Sample Adjustments	""
0:2:39	mpg2	CD Sample Adjustments	""
0:2:39	H.264	CD Sample Adjustments plus Fade Transitions between clips	""
0:2:35	mpg2	CD Sample Adjustments plus Fade Transistions between clips	""

So, obviously having color director adjustments makes it take longer to produce, and it doesn't seem like the transitions affect anything.

However... it got worser when I went into Fix / Enhance -> Enhance -> Color Adjustments -> and added +5 to ALL of the different adjustment sliders.

This is with the Color Director Color Effect turned OFF but the above Color Adjustments turned on (and fades too):

Time to produce	Compression	Adjustments	Output Resolution
0:4:35	H.264	No CD Color Effect, but WITH PD Color Adjustments and fade transitions	1920 X 1080p. 24fps
0:4:20	mpg2	No CD Color Effect, but WITH PD Color Adjustments and fade transitions	1920 X 1080p, 24fps

By the way; I re-ran the last test but removed all the fade transistions between clips and the time to render was pretty much the exact same as WITH the fade transitions.

Sorry about the spacing before the table. Tried to remove it but couldn't.

But as you can see, the LONGEST time to produce was when using the Color Adjustments that are in PowerDirector... even longer than using ColorDirector to make ColorEffect adjustments.

So where does that leave me??? Am I going to have to make sure that color, lighting, saturation, sharpness, etcetera are all PERFECT in Camera?

Quote NOTE: SORRY ABOUT THE SCROLLING / SPACING

So I ran a quick test using the ColorDirector adjustments that Jeff had suggested (in colorDirector, +.2 Exposure, +2 Brightest, +2 Dark) , and it does indeed slow everything down, both previewing and producing.

I don't have the kite surfer video (since I am on PD13) but there is a Boats video in PD13 which is a 720p WMV file.

I chained six of them together to make a one minute video. Then tried producing them with and without CD settings applied, as well as with and without cross fades between each 10-second clip.

Time To Produce	Compression	Color Director Adjustments or not	Output Resolution
0:0:30	H.264	No CD Adjustments	1080p 24fps
0:0:17	mpg2	No CD Adjustments	1080p 24fps
0:2:44	H.264	CD Sample Adjustments	""
0:2:39	mpg2	CD Sample Adjustments	""
0:2:39	H.264	CD Sample Adjustments plus Fade Transitions between clips	""
0:2:35	mpg2	CD Sample Adjustments plus Fade Transistions between clips	""

So, obviously having color director adjustments makes it take longer to produce, and it doesn't seem like the transitions affect anything.

However... it got worser when I went into Fix / Enhance -> Enhance -> Color Adjustments -> and added +5 to ALL of the different adjustment sliders.

This is with the Color Director Color Effect turned OFF but the above Color Adjustments turned on (and fades too):

Time to produce	Compression	Adjustments	Output Resolution
0:4:35	H.264	No CD Color Effect, but WITH PD Color Adjustments and fade transitions	1920 X 1080p. 24fps
0:4:20	mpg2	No CD Color Effect, but WITH PD Color Adjustments and fade transitions	1920 X 1080p, 24fps

By the way; I re-ran the last test but removed all the fade transistions between clips and the time to render was pretty much the exact same as WITH the fade transitions.

I should have picked this up before, but It's just twigged that your Graphics is 4000 and mine is 4600. I don't know what difference that would make.

Robert Panny TM10, GH2, GH4,

Here is my diagnostics file.

Quote Here is my diagnostics file.

If you have a look at thes gaming comparisons you will see that the 4000 is way behind the 4600. Maybe that's the place to start. http://www.anandtech.com/show/7032/amds-richland-vs-intels-haswell-gpu-on-the-desktop-radeon-hd-8670d-hd-4600/2?_ga=1.60366509.1651029407.1482266999

Robert Panny TM10, GH2, GH4,

Quote

Quote Here is my diagnostics file.

If you have a look at thes gaming comparisons you will see that the 4000 is way behind the 4600. Maybe that's the place to start. http://www.anandtech.com/show/7032/amds-richland-vs-intels-haswell-gpu-on-the-desktop-radeon-hd-8670d-hd-4600/2?_ga=1.60366509.1651029407.1482266999

Robert

Thanks for the link.

It was a bit hard for me to understand since it was oriented toward gaming, but I get the gist that the on-board i7 graphics are not as good as lower-tier discrete graphics cards by AMD and NVidia.

Quote

Quote

Quote Here is my diagnostics file.

If you have a look at thes gaming comparisons you will see that the 4000 is way behind the 4600. Maybe that's the place to start. http://www.anandtech.com/show/7032/amds-richland-vs-intels-haswell-gpu-on-the-desktop-radeon-hd-8670d-hd-4600/2?_ga=1.60366509.1651029407.1482266999

Robert

Thanks for the link.

It was a bit hard for me to understand since it was oriented toward gaming, but I get the gist that the on-board i7 graphics are not as good as lower-tier discrete graphics cards by AMD and NVidia.

I simply wanted to point out that the 4600 (mine) is somewhat faster than the 4000 (yours) This is most likely why my performance in PD is better than yours.

Robert Panny TM10, GH2, GH4,

Got it. Thanks!

Just to confirm, yoiu are pretty happy then with the performance on yoiur computer?

Are you doing any work in ColorDirector, too? Or just in PD 14?

Quote Got it. Thanks!

Just to confirm, yoiu are pretty happy then with the performance on yoiur computer?

Are you doing any work in ColorDirector, too? Or just in PD 14?

No I am just using the editor, only very occasionally do I use CD, but not enough to test Panny TM10, GH2, GH4,

Quote ... We are using PD 13.

Would it make a big difference if we upgraded to GTX 960 and upgraded to PowerDirector 14? (I see we can still buy PD 14 on Amazon from CyberLink).

Or maybe Gtx 1060?

I read that PD 14 has much better hardware encoding than PD13, but you need GTX 960 or above to take advantage of it...

OffTheMark, stay focused, don't chase your own tail.

for ur enquiring mind wants to know see GTX960 Performance Comparisons

-> http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/46135.page#238842

and click on the ' Click here to access the data sheet. '



i do remember Eugene taking a boat trip somewhere. on his old pc, PD 13 finished 4K rendering after couple of days.

mine, too, 2 minutes 4K finished in 28 minutes.



or

attach a pds file with short video clip so that fellow beta testers can test and compare with your time.



happy happy joy joy

PepsiMan

'garbage in garbage out' 'no bridge too far'

Yashica Electro 8 LD-6 Super 8mm
Asrock TaiChi X470, AMD R7 2700X, W7P 64, MSI GTX1060 6GB, Corsair 16GB/RAM
Dell XPS L702X i7-2860QM, W7P / W10P 64, Intel HD3000/nVidia GT 550M 1GB, Micron 16GB/RAM
Samsung Galaxy Note3/NX1

My 5 year old i7 win 7 pc died a few month ago. I only replaced the CPU, motherboard and new 16GB memory for around $600.00 and have now significantly increased the performance. Specs listed below.

For 4K videos shorter than 5 min there is no need to bother with shadowfiles, they are a must for anything much longer. Rendering is done in 4K HEVC at app 2x real time. The 4K UHD output is burned onto a 25 GB BR as a file that will play fine in the Samsung 8500 UHD BR player. They will not play on the Phillipps UHD player.

Picking the proper GPU is a major item. The GTX960 I bought a year ago cut the rendering time of a 90 min 4K HEVC from 3 1/2 days (while we did a cruise) to less than 4 hours. PQ is excellent.

Hope that CL will add real UHD burning soon. Anyone know of a editing program that does?.



I very rarely make color changes, just a few transitions and titles.



A Happy and Healthy New Year to All



Eugene 73s, WA6JZN ex DL9GC
CYBERLINK PLEASE ADD UHD BLU RAY BURNING SOFTWARE
PD14,
Win10,64bit.CPU i7 6700,16GB ,C= 480 GB SSD ,GPU GTX1060 6GB 1 fan. Plus 3 int, 4 ext HDD's for video etc.LG WH16NS40 reads UHD.
4K 24" ViewSonic monitor.Camera Sony FDR-A