Quote Is there a list of the fastest hardware PD365 can use? It appears my system is too slow for rendering 4K60 with Luts & Presets. I'll buy what I need, but some software can only take advantage of certain GPUs or processors. Currently, I'm seeing 50% CPU usage, 40% mem usage, and 25% GPU usage under the heaviest of loads when rendering with PD365. Will moving up to even faster CPUs or GPUs help? Or, does the program only use so much horsepower and that's it no matter what you have under the hood?

Hi,
Not sure if I've ever seen a top limit spec published, the standard minimum spec is here:
https://www.cyberlink.com/products/powerdirector-video-editing-software/specs_en_US.html

I'm sure that some members have more observations of what's used and what's "wasted" in PDR, but so much depends on exactly what features you need to use and how important rendering time and preview fluidity are important to you.

The specs of your current system would be useful - post the DxDiag as an attachement?

Cheers
PowerDirector Moderator

For customer support related issues, please contact:
- Customer service: https://membership.cyberlink.com/support/customer-services.do
- Technical support: https://membership.cyberlink.com/support/service/technical-support.do

Quote


Hi,
Not sure if I've ever seen a top limit spec published, the standard minimum spec is here:
https://www.cyberlink.com/products/powerdirector-video-editing-software/specs_en_US.html

I'm sure that some members have more observations of what's used and what's "wasted" in PDR, but so much depends on exactly what features you need to use and how important rendering time and preview fluidity are important to you.

The specs of your current system would be useful - post the DxDiag as an attachement?

Cheers
PowerDirector Moderator

Both render time (incl preview render) and preview fluidity matter. I input 4k30 & 4k60 video in small clips cut from larger ones. My system performed adequatly until I tried using LUTs and Presets via Color Director. Attached is the DXDIAG report.

A good rule of thumb is to take the minimum that the software manufacturer recommends and at the very least double it. And even then, treat it like a MINIMUM.

Though what you buy will always be determined by a) the source of the video you're editing (phone, camcorder; 2K, 4K, etc.) and b) how much you have to spend on your computer. Also remember that laptops are built for portability rather than speed -- so you'll likely pay at least 50% more for a comparably powerful laptop than you will for a desktop.

There are so many possible configurations out there that it's really impossible to list all the systems that will run this program. But I'd recommend focusing first on the processor. Get one that rates a benchmark of at least 10,000 on this chart.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

Get that,16+ gigs of RAM and at least a 1 TB hard drive and the rest is gravy.

Quote A good rule of thumb is to take the minimum that the software manufacturer recommends and at the very least double it. And even then, treat it like a MINIMUM.

Though what you buy will always be determined by a) the source of the video you're editing (phone, camcorder; 2K, 4K, etc.) and b) how much you have to spend on your computer. Also remember that laptops are built for portability rather than speed -- so you'll likely pay at least 50% more for a comparably powerful laptop than you will for a desktop.

There are so many possible configurations out there that it's really impossible to list all the systems that will run this program. But I'd recommend focusing first on the processor. Get one that rates a benchmark of at least 10,000 on this chart.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

Get that,16+ gigs of RAM and at least a 1 TB hard drive and the rest is gravy.

Thanks, that site was very helpful. I have roughly 4 times the minimum now from those benchmaks and much more than that in SSD & storage. 64g very fast (3600) memory.

What I am seeing is by upgrading the CPU from a Ryzen 7-3700 (rates at 22731) to a Ryzen 9 - 5950X (rates at 46211) I can about double the computing power. For around $600 this seems like a no brainer. But, with PD365 cranking its hardest my current CPU only shows 50% usage - so is a faster CPU going to help? Same is true for the GPU. I can about double the speed of what I have (GTX1650 Super) by going to a RTX 3070ti but, my current GPU usage is only 25 - 40%. This cost is around $1K so i hesitate unless someone can tell me PD365 would actually use the increased GPU resources.

Quote But, with PD365 cranking its hardest my current CPU only shows 50% usage - so is a faster CPU going to help?

You probably have AMD SMT enabled in BIOS which will show 50% CPU load as PD does not effective use the two logical processor cores per physical core. Disable SMT and you will probably see near 100% CPU usage for the same comparative task that you said showed 50%.

Quote Same is true for the GPU. I can about double the speed of what I have (GTX1650 Super) by going to a RTX 3070ti but, my current GPU usage is only 25 - 40%. This cost is around $1K so i hesitate unless someone can tell me PD365 would actually use the increased GPU resources.

A RTX3070Ti will not improve timeline playback fluidity with LUTS, render preview with LUTS, or encoding with LUTS relative to a GTX1650 for the current PD20 release.

Jeff

Quote

You probably have AMD SMT enabled in BIOS which will show 50% CPU load as PD does not effective use the two logical processor cores per physical core. Disable SMT and you will probably see near 100% CPU usage for the same comparative task that you said showed 50%.




A RTX3070Ti will not improve timeline playback fluidity with LUTS, render preview with LUTS, or encoding with LUTS relative to a GTX1650 for the current PD20 release.

Jeff

Thanks, I'll check that. Sounds like the CPU upgrade is the way to go.

Quote


Thanks, I'll check that. Sounds like the CPU upgrade is the way to go.

Ordered a Ryzen 9 5950X - which is compatible with my existing hardware but about double the CPU benchmark. Thinking of making a test video of about 2 min worth of mixed 4k60, 4k30, and 1080p video before and after applying presets with Color Director. Then look at the realtime display, measure preview render times and measure produce times. Anything else I should look at?

Quote

You probably have AMD SMT enabled in BIOS which will show 50% CPU load as PD does not effective use the two logical processor cores per physical core. Disable SMT and you will probably see near 100% CPU usage for the same comparative task that you said showed 50%.




A RTX3070Ti will not improve timeline playback fluidity with LUTS, render preview with LUTS, or encoding with LUTS relative to a GTX1650 for the current PD20 release.

Jeff

Should I turn AMD SMT off?

Quote Should I turn AMD SMT off?

Did you do the little study I had suggested? Did the CPU load go to 100% as guessed? From that little comparison you would have recorded your time differential too for your comparison on your exact encode task.

For the most part, Intel HT or AMD SMT is usually in the noise for PD. Basically some things maybe 0-10% faster, some things 0-10% slower. It's really not a major differentiator.

What I did state, since you claimed your CPU was unloaded at only 50%, if you judged that with the basic Task Manager, that percentage is calculated of the SMT logical processor cores which is 2X. So tasks that can really only load the physical cores at best can achieve 50% by that metric.

Jeff

Quote

Did you do the little study I had suggested? Did the CPU load go to 100% as guessed? From that little comparison you would have recorded your time differential too for your comparison on your exact encode task.

For the most part, Intel HT or AMD SMT is usually in the noise for PD. Basically some things maybe 0-10% faster, some things 0-10% slower. It's really not a major differentiator.

What I did state, since you claimed your CPU was unloaded at only 50%, if you judged that with the basic Task Manager, that percentage is calculated of the SMT logical processor cores which is 2X. So tasks that can really only load the physical cores at best can achieve 50% by that metric.

Jeff

Actually I was about to pursue this further when I received some other tests to run. It got real interesting then.
It would take awhile to document. What I saw was when I produced with PD using a 30 sec 4K60 clip in/1080p30 out and no corrections i got CPU usage of ~30% and GPU usage of 20%

When I produced with PD in 4k60 with color corrections from within PD and 1080p/30 out with no fast rendering i got cpu usage of 86% and GPU usage of 40%. While slower to produce, production was smooth and steady

When I used the Fast NVIDIA option to produce the same 4K60 clip with corrections fron PD it went quicker and CPU dropped to 50% while GPU went up to 50%

When I went to use the corrections from CD CPU went to 45% & GPU went to 50% but the produce was horribly slow.

So, once I saw a CPU of 86% (and occasional peaks to 100%) it made me wonder. Maybe when you enable fast rendering it limits the CPU and relies more on GPU??? It clearly is overworked when the color corrections come from Color Director.

I could do more with this but frankly, if all this is as good as Power Director is going to get using Color Director Corrections, I need to spend my time learning a new editor.

Quote Maybe when you enable fast rendering it limits the CPU and relies more on GPU??? It clearly is overworked when the color corrections come from Color Director.

Yes of course, when you enable "Fast video rendering technology:" and then you use the "NVIDIA NVENC" the GPU is doing the encoding. That's what you told it to do with this option. However, any color correction like a LUT is done by the CPU prior to being encoded by the GPU. Usually the application of the LUT is the more time consuming piece for PD, with current PD, this is done by the CPU. When you don't use the "NVIDIA NVENC" feature, both the frame prep by the LUT and the encoding is done by the CPU which will put more load on it.

Jeff

Quote

Yes of course, when you enable "Fast video rendering technology:" and then you use the "NVIDIA NVENC" the GPU is doing the encoding. That's what you told it to do with this option. However, any color correction like a LUT is done by the CPU prior to being encoded by the GPU. Usually the application of the LUT is the more time consuming piece for PD, with current PD, this is done by the CPU. When you don't use the "NVIDIA NVENC" feature, both the frame prep by the LUT and the encoding is done by the CPU which will put more load on it.

Jeff

The Ryzen 9-5950x arrived today, which should roughly double my processing power if the benchmarks are any indicators. I'll be running the same tests once I get it installed later in the week. One thing that has me wondering though, Does PD apply all the facets of a preset or lut even though they are set to no changes? I tried limiting myself to a few changes, but it did not seem to make any difference.