I’ve finally got to a point in my Vegas Experiences that I feel I can ask the following:
Q1 - Just exactly how does GPU Acceleration benefit us? Where does GPU Acceleration happen?
Q2 - Does GPU Rendering happen with ALL Render Templates?
Q3 - Not all FXs can make use of GPU ACCEL? In your experience which ones do?
Q4 - As CPU May step in, where is the overlap of these two bits of Hardware?
Thanks Guys!
Q1 With Vegas Pro 17 and up, one gets better preview performance for highly compressed timeline events with GPU Decode.
Q2 No. Only render templates that offer hardware encoder assistance like VCE or NVENC. An example:
Q3 I'm not touching that one.
Q4 The CPU runs the show. As the GPU steps up, sometimes the CPU can slack off or you can use it to read the Forum.
*
* It appears that the VCE hardware is not showing in this Task Manager view even though the GPU shows 100% utilization. Maybe, because it's specialized hardware not associated with the compute units in the GPU card. My eyes are rolling back, now.
1. 3 ways.
- Accelerating GPU supported effects on the timeline. To see which ones, there's a category in the FX panel that lets you know which ones work with GPU accel.
- Decoding video on the timeline (H.264 and HEVC 4:2:0 only, this is a GPU limitation, not VEGAS)
- Encoding the frames after they have been rendered on the timeline (H264 and HEVC only, only on the presets that have either NVENC, VCE, or QSV next to them).
2. No, see the third way it helps above.
3. There's a category in the FX window that says "GPU accelerated". Those work.
4. CPU does everything GPU can't, GPU steps in and aids where it can.
I suspect that timeline GPU acceleration has more of an effect than just GPU enabled effect rendering, because when I try to run a project with timeline acceleration turned off, I notice a big difference in timeline playback speed with no effects applied, and also on media (10 bit 4:2:2) that is not supported by GPU decoding, so I know that isn't helping any. My Radeon VII more than doubles timeline playback framerate when enabled under the video tab.
As @fr0sty mentioned, some formats don't benefit from some GPUs.
General Complete name : E:\A004C014_161124OZ_CANON.MXF Format : MXF Format version : 1.3 Format profile : OP-1a Format settings : Closed / Complete File size : 1.32 GiB Duration : 38 s 539 ms Overall bit rate : 295 Mb/s Encoded date : 2016-11-24 20:09:40.000 Writing application : CANON XC15 1.00 Video ID : 2 Format : AVC Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec Format profile : High 4:2:2 Intra@L5.1 Format settings, CABAC : No Format settings, GOP : N=1 Format settings, wrapping mode : Frame Codec ID : 0D01030102106001-0401020201323001 Duration : 38 s 539 ms Bit rate : 293 Mb/s Maximum bit rate : 300 Mb/s Width : 3 840 pixels Height : 2 160 pixels Display aspect ratio : 16:9 Frame rate : 29.970 (30000/1001) FPS Color space : YUV Chroma subsampling : 4:2:2 Bit depth : 8 bits Scan type : Progressive Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 1.180 Stream size : 1.32 GiB (99%) Color range : Limited Color primaries : BT.709 Transfer characteristics : BT.709 Matrix coefficients : BT.709 Audio #1 ID : 3 Format : PCM Format settings : Little Format settings, wrapping mode : Frame (AES) Codec ID : 0D01030102060300 Duration : 38 s 539 ms Bit rate mode : Constant Bit rate : 768 kb/s Channel(s) : 1 channel Sampling rate : 48.0 kHz Frame rate : 29.970 FPS (1601.6 SPF) Bit depth : 16 bits Stream size : 3.53 MiB (0%) Locked : Yes Audio #2 ID : 4 Format : PCM Format settings : Little Format settings, wrapping mode : Frame (AES) Codec ID : 0D01030102060300 Duration : 38 s 539 ms Bit rate mode : Constant Bit rate : 768 kb/s Channel(s) : 1 channel Sampling rate : 48.0 kHz Frame rate : 29.970 FPS (1601.6 SPF) Bit depth : 16 bits Stream size : 3.53 MiB (0%) Locked : Yes Other #1 ID : 1-Material Type : Time code Format : MXF TC Frame rate : 29.970 (30000/1001) FPS Time code of first frame : 00:30:38;17 Time code settings : Material Package Time code, striped : Yes Other #2 ID : 1-Source Type : Time code Format : MXF TC Frame rate : 29.970 (30000/1001) FPS Time code of first frame : 00:30:38;17 Time code settings : Source Package Time code, striped : Yes Other #3 Type : Time code Format : SMPTE TC Muxing mode : SDTI Frame rate : 29.970 (30000/1001) FPS Time code of first frame : 00:30:38;17
Poor Vegas Pro timeline performance was one of the many reasons I didn't buy this camera.
Grazie, i use No GPU, strictly some good old fashion CPU Power, never an issue from Sony Vegas 4 to Magix Vegas Pro 18..... But that is my preference for a happy Vegas..... My advice, invest more in your CPU than a GPU when it comes unto Vegas.
@Steve_Rhoden Thanks!!!
ASUS Z97A MB W INTEL 4600 graphics
CPU = Intel I7 4790K 4.0GHz
What about Max # Rendering threads? - Options / preferences / video
Do you have a separate Video card?
Grazie, i use No GPU, strictly some good old fashion CPU Power, never an issue from Sony Vegas 4 to Magix Vegas Pro 18..... But that is my preference for a happy Vegas..... My advice, invest more in your CPU than a GPU when it comes unto Vegas.
I've found the opposite to be true. I have a mid-range CPU (Ryzen 7 1800x), but a beefy 12TF GPU with 16GB VRAM (Radeon VII), and that machine runs as fast if not faster than my laptop, which has a i9 9980HK CPU in it and a much weaker RTX 2060 GPU.
@Steve_Rhoden said it better than me. I have more time on my hands now, and even less tolerance for quality compromises. I also prefer to cook rather than eat fast food.
Quality compromises only come with GPU rendering, not decoding or timeline acceleration.
Grazie, i use No GPU, strictly some good old fashion CPU Power, never an issue from Sony Vegas 4 to Magix Vegas Pro 18..... But that is my preference for a happy Vegas..... My advice, invest more in your CPU than a GPU when it comes unto Vegas.
So when you were talking about how good GPU performance was with the new VP18, I wasnt' talking to support forum Steve, but instead Magix marketing and advertising Steve, as however good the performance is it's too unstable for you? That's a bit confusing
Quality compromises only come with GPU rendering, not decoding or timeline acceleration.
That is correct, and when it works it is a good thing. Hardware rendering is fun [remainder of comment removed by author/].
lenard-p, What is confusing? What you have written is confusing, and represents nothing that i ever said or about me. You obviously looking for an argument and i'm not gonna waste any time to sink to your level!
@Steve_Rhoden @Former user he's probably referring to these posts
Steve_Rhoden wrote on 8/9/2020, 2:21 PM
None of them.... Really kinda strange, as this [internal prefs not opening] is the only issue i am currently having with Vegas 18, lol... Everything else is simply flawless!
From <https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/vp-18-internal-prefs--122856/#ca765860>
Steve_Rhoden wrote on 8/4/2020, 10:13 PM
The GPU performance has been greatly improved. And now there is a useful feature to automatically download the best drivers for optimum GPU performance.
Makes it seem like you might use the GPU regularly and have first-hand experience with doing so outside of maybe voukoder
Quality compromises only come with GPU rendering, not decoding or timeline acceleration.
That is correct, and when it works it is a good thing. Hardware rendering is fun for kids who couldn't cut it as gamers.
@Musicvid Seriously? You're going with personal attacks? There's no indication you meant that as a joke. I would say that the joke is beneath you but I don't know you well enough to know if you would have meant that as a joke or if it *is* beneath you.
The use of hardware rendering in games as simply a gimmick is something that stopped being a "thing" many years ago.
The GPU performance has been greatly improved. And now there is a useful feature to automatically download the best drivers for optimum GPU performance.
Makes it seem like you might use the GPU regularly and have first-hand experience with doing so outside of maybe voukoder
Yes, that's what I was referring to, and when he never replied to my question about what specifically was improved I thought nothing of it, until I see his response in this thread that he doesn't use GPU acceleration, so either he could not comment because he doesn't use GPU or it was too unstable for him to use. I use GPU, but I understand the unstable aspect. On a bad day it will take me 30minutes to complete a render on a project that I thought would take me 5mins due to crashing and having to change settings and restarting. Stability related to GPU, If I did what steve does and simply not use GPU, It might take me longer than 5mins, but not 30mins due to GPU related crashing.
To add to the original topic, I'm using VP17 regularly with GPU fully enabled in preview and rendering with few issues. Every once in a while I have to restart VP because of rendering glitches BUT, this is as likely because I'm using the machine through RealVNC as any failure of VP. The projects I'm working on use a fair number of GPU enabled fx from Vegas and BorisFx and for me the speedup I get from the GPU greatly outweighs the few times it causes me a problem.
There's also one other caveat here.
This machine is *only* used for video editing and rendering. There's nothing installed that isn't in direct support of this work. No games, no office apps (other than the bloatware forced on my by MS), no 3rd party codec packs, etc.
Ok, one more detail.
My targets are all for youtube at this point. I don't have any other special requirements for movie or tv production and so these projects don't tax the system all that much as my targets are all basic HD (1080p at most) though I do use 4K source pretty frequently. When playing back I'm lucky to see 50% GPU use and when rendering I've never seen higher than 60-70% using Magix AVC with NVENC support.
If I regularly exceeded what my GPU could do, I'd first upgrade my GPU and then also consider going the CPU-only route, though since I'm not making $ at this, I'd probably lower the need for the GPU before I upgraded or dropped to CPU use.
[added later]
Oh, one more thing. Since setting up this machine at the beginning of August I have not had a single rendering failure. Not one. I attribute all of this stability to keeping system changes to a minimum and the system as clean of extraneous software as possible.
@Former user I suspect he never replied because you didn't tag him and he never saw your reply. I habitually tag the people I reply directly to because *I* don't follow every thread I comment on because I don't want my inbox filling up just because I had something to say to a particular person. I suspect many other people do the same.
michael-harrison, of course i test all aspect of Vegas including its GPU performance, that's a given considering what i do, but i don't use GPU's in my main daily editing systems. There is no contradiction there! Vegas Pro is stable, its the vast array of GPU and the combination of drivers that causes Vegas to become unstable, i have always made that clear.... And regarding my comments above re the only issue i have which is not being able to access the internal settings, that issue is due to me using Windows 7 and not Windows 10.
At this point, you may be denying yourself more than you are helping yourself. 18's GPU use is actually quite stable, once you find a good driver for it (which so far most have been) and stick with it.
No fr0sty, im not denying myself anything my friend lol, i'm no amateur... I know Vegas 18 GPU has improved and a bit more stable, i tested it, i test all aspect of Vegas, that's why i mentioned it in the post referred above.... i simply choose to go without it on my main/daily editing systems.
Your CPU (AMD Ryzen 7 1800x 8 core) is a good choice. And i'm looking forward to the soon to be released AMD Ryzen Zen 3 CPUs.
Indeed, but when I disable my Radeon VII (not decoding, but timeline acceleration in the video tab), editing performance slows to a crawl on 4k footage.
The use of hardware rendering in games as simply a gimmick is something that stopped being a "thing" many years ago.
I actually neither said that nor implied that; my point of reference is singular -- from that of video rendering, not the unfortunate parallels and generalizations that may be drawn.
As for what I actually said, bad on me for assuming any primary editor would take it as anything but a joke, if a mild reference to a different generation from which this boomer and career educator has tolerated decades of ridicule and abuse. The ground-level truth about education is that you have to get their attention first.
In reference to the perception of "personal attacks," that would all be on the part of the individual; it was directed at no one in particular. But to take the onus off you, I've removed the offending comment, and you may take that as my personal apology. You certainly exceed my impressions of the gaming community as a whole, having already earned respect here by being a proactive learner and contributor to these discussions. I've never viewed you as a slacker. Best regards, maybe I can make it up to you someday.
You are not alone in your perspective, and there is no need to defend yourself. Just because we can have hardware rendering is not a reason that we have to use it. I try to drive my 300 hp. engine without kicking in the turbo, except to occasionally blow out the coals climbing Lookout Mountain. And my mileage exceeds EPA.
@Musicvid No apology necessary though I appreciate the thought and extension of an olive branch.
I'll admit to some sensitivity having been a gamer for decades, though now lapsed in favor of other pursuits, as well as a game and graphics developer for nearly as long.
Much of the advancements made in video production would not have been possible without the advancements made for gaming. The latter helped pay for the development of new technology used in the former. That cycle often ping-ponging between the two industries and helping each other over time.
^This is very true. Without gaming GPUs, video editing would still be in the stone age, because there simply isn't enough video editors out there to justify these companies pouring billions into the development of these super-processors just for that purpose, so if there was hardware acceleration going on, it would be in a very specialized, poorly supported card that would cost a fortune (see apple's ridiculously priced and proprietary afterburner card for example).