CyberLink Community Forum
where the experts meet
| Advanced Search >
Powerdirector 20 slower than Powerdirector 17 at rendering
Reply to this topic
MDavidKell [Avatar]
Newbie Private Message Joined: Nov 30, 2012 11:34 Messages: 5 Offline
[Post New]
I just bought a new PC 5950x 32gb ram rtx3090 and upgraded from powerdirector 17 to 20.
My old PC is 1800x 16gb ram gtx 1080 running powerdirector 17
On a video 1080p about 67minutes HEVC Mpeg-4 1080/30p (11 Mbps)
The new pc took over 16 minutes while the old took 13 minutes
Both are using hardware rendering while the difference is the new pc is using nvidia NVENC
while the old is using whatever 17 uses for nvidia cards.

So my question is why is my old pc much faster am I doing something wrong?
Reply
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 5439 Offline
[Post New]
Quote I just bought a new PC 5950x 32gb ram rtx3090 and upgraded from powerdirector 17 to 20.
My old PC is 1800x 16gb ram gtx 1080 running powerdirector 17
On a video 1080p about 67minutes HEVC Mpeg-4 1080/30p (11 Mbps)
The new pc took over 16 minutes while the old took 13 minutes
Both are using hardware rendering while the difference is the new pc is using nvidia NVENC
while the old is using whatever 17 uses for nvidia cards.

So my question is why is my old pc much faster am I doing something wrong?

PD17 and hardware encoding with Nvidia GPU used NVENC too for your GTX1080

You didn't supply much detail but my guess, old PC you are using hardware decoding, new PC you're not. Set in pref > Hardware Acceleration.

Jeff
Reply
MDavidKell [Avatar]
Newbie Private Message Joined: Nov 30, 2012 11:34 Messages: 5 Offline
[Post New]
Quote

PD17 and hardware encoding with Nvidia GPU used NVENC too for your GTX1080

You didn't supply much detail but my guess, old PC you are using hardware decoding, new PC you're not. Set in pref > Hardware Acceleration.

Jeff


Both are using hardware acceleration I mean decoding

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Mar 24. 2022 21:44

Reply
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 5439 Offline
[Post New]
Quote Both are using hardware acceleration I mean decoding

Not sure I understand. There is not a "hardware acceleration" button to toggle. The setting I mention is in pref>Hardware Acceleration but the toggle is to adjust decoding. Are you implying both PD17 and PD20 have toggle selected for "Enable hardware decoding" and then on the "Produce" page in the "Fast video rendering technology:" area PD20 has "NVIDIA NVENC" and PD17 has "Hardware video encoder" selected?

Is it also true that your timeline is a simple transcode from some 1080p source in both PD17 and PD20 and no color corrections or anything applied?

Jeff
Reply
MDavidKell [Avatar]
Newbie Private Message Joined: Nov 30, 2012 11:34 Messages: 5 Offline
[Post New]
Quote

Not sure I understand. There is not a "hardware acceleration" button to toggle. The setting I mention is in pref>Hardware Acceleration but the toggle is to adjust decoding. Are you implying both PD17 and PD20 have toggle selected for "Enable hardware decoding" and then on the "Produce" page in the "Fast video rendering technology:" area PD20 has "NVIDIA NVENC" and PD17 has "Hardware video encoder" selected?

Is it also true that your timeline is a simple transcode from some 1080p source in both PD17 and PD20 and no color corrections or anything applied?

Jeff


Yes both options are selected in both programs.
And also it is a simple transcode from 1080p 30 frames source with nothing corrected or applied.
The only difference I noticed is that the new pc uses 100% of GPU and almost no CPU while old pc uses 20-30 cpu and about 30 gpu.
Reply
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 5439 Offline
[Post New]
Something does not appear right. I have a GTX1070 and a RTX2070 and can't appear to collaborate your issue with a 1080p and various bitrate sample files as source. Maybe post the MediaInfo (https://mediaarea.net/MediaInfoOnline) text file of the details for PD17 and PD20 produced files to try and identify some anomaly in the results.

Jeff
Reply
MDavidKell [Avatar]
Newbie Private Message Joined: Nov 30, 2012 11:34 Messages: 5 Offline
[Post New]
Quote Something does not appear right. I have a GTX1070 and a RTX2070 and can't appear to collaborate your issue with a 1080p and various bitrate sample files as source. Maybe post the MediaInfo (https://mediaarea.net/MediaInfoOnline) text file of the details for PD17 and PD20 produced files to try and identify some anomaly in the results.

Jeff


I am going to rerun both test and make sure nothing is running in the back ground and upload the test tomorrow.
Thanks for your help so far.
Reply
optodata
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: California, USA Joined: Sep 16, 2011 16:04 Messages: 7880 Offline
[Post New]
I did a quick test with a sample 4K/30p HEVC video (the 183MB "HQ Quality Sample" of a forest from this web page), and I see the same issue, although at 4K the difference is much more pronounced:



PD365 takes more than twice as long to produce the bare clip using the suggested settings from the Profile Analyzer with NVENC enabled (I'm using the latest nVidia Studio Driver 512.15).

Using only the CPU, PD365 takes 22% longer, so all HEVC producing is clearly suboptimal in the newest version

YouTube/optodata


DS365 | Win10 Pro | Ryzen 9 3950X | RTX 2070 | 32GB RAM | 10TB SSDs | 5K+4K HDR monitors

Canon Vixia GX10 (4K 60p) | HF G30 (HD 60p) | Yi Action+ 4K | 360Fly 4K 360°
Reply
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 5439 Offline
[Post New]
I took it that the OP in mentioning 1080p, had something like m2ts, H.264 1920x1080 30p 25mbps source footage converted to default profile HEVC 1920x1080 30p 11mbps. For that, I see no hardware encode performance difference PD17 to PD20.

It would appear optodata shows yet another anomaly with random HEVC source and lack of PD versions progressing. In that, I notice PD17 to PD20 uses a different bitrate audio, should be minor encode difference though. I've noticed these "default" profile specifics can change release to release.

As indicated, initial post was lacking significant details which are always important as PD has too many anomalies to just guess at comparisons.

Jeff
Reply
optodata
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: California, USA Joined: Sep 16, 2011 16:04 Messages: 7880 Offline
[Post New]
I reported this issue to CL on ticket CS002485434 and included a link to this discussion. They've confirmed the slow producing time and have forwarded it on to engineering.

Hopefully that means a future update to PD365 and PD20 to improve the producing time for these specific clips, although who knows how applicable this potential fix will be for other encoding schemes...
Reply
JOF [Avatar]
Newbie Private Message Joined: Jan 19, 2019 01:38 Messages: 29 Offline
[Post New]
I noticed this as soon as I updated from PD18 to PD20. PD20 is much slower in rendering by a big margin. A file that I tested took 3.24 in davinci vs almost 20 minutes in PD20.
Reply
JohnnyCaps [Avatar]
Newbie Private Message Joined: May 15, 2018 12:15 Messages: 2 Offline
[Post New]
I'm going to be holding off upgrading from PD17 Ultimate to PD20 Ultimate for the time being. Perhaps I'll wait until PD 21 Ultimate is released.
Reply
Reply to this topic
Powered by JForum 2.1.8 © JForum Team