Expanding GPU acceleration in the future

Richard Jones wrote on 10/20/2011, 9:31 AM
Like many, I've been caught short with an nVIDIA GPU with a Compute Capability of less than 2.0 which means that I can't take advantge of the acceleration feature (and this seems to be the main benefit offered by SVP 11). C'est la vie but I think I read somewhere in all the plethora of comments about the new version that Sony are working with nVIDIA and hope to be able to expand GPU acceleration in the future.

Am I right or have I imagined it? If so, can I take it that, when they talk about extending GPU acceleration, they mean that they will try to embrace cards with a Computer Capability of less than 2? Now that really would be good news.

Richard

Comments

VidMus wrote on 10/20/2011, 10:05 AM
I wonder how much increase of speed would come from the lesser cards. Will it be enough to justify it? Will there be stability?

There has to be a valid reason why they chose 2.0 and above.

I think SCS is tired of trying to support subpar systems and outdated operating systems.

Jøran Toresen wrote on 10/20/2011, 10:51 AM
Richard, from the Vegas Pro 11 Relase Notes:

"nVIDIA GPUs with Compute Capability prior to 2.0 are currently not available for GPU-accelerated video processing. We are working with nVIDIA and hope to be able to expand GPU acceleration in the future. See this Web page for a list of Compute Capability levels for various nVIDIA GPUs: http://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-gpus."

http://sony-366.vo.llnwd.net/dspcdn/releasenotes/vegaspro11_readme_enu.htm

Jøran
GatorBait wrote on 10/20/2011, 10:56 AM
Last night I installed vp11 and ran the trial version to test it out. I have a graphics card with a GeForce 8600GT (cc 1.1). Playback is much better on a secondary monitor. I currently have vp9 and the preview used to drop to half quality if I put any transitions or effects on clips. Now they stay at full resolution. I did notice that dissolves with another effect on the clip would maintain resolution but frame rate dropped to 26-27fps. I am very happy with the way it is playing back video. Im sure it is using the graphics card a little more than vp9 did. Also, when rendering out to mainconcept avc...render time was half than it is on vp9. I tested that out with the same 30 second clip. In the render window under the "system" tab...there is a button that says "Check GPU"...when I click on it is says that CUDA is available...even though my card isn't 2.0...I thought that was interesting...but under system "preferences" I dont have the option to turn on GPU acceleration of video processing. When rendering to mxf or mainconcept m2t...vp11 took a tiny bit longer to do so. I did notice that the encoding quality is better in vp11 (obviously using the same render settings compared to vp9). I also ran the rendertest and v11 took 13 seconds less to render over vp9. (9:30 vs 9:43)

I am also running a quad-core Phenom II (3.0Ghz) and 32-bit windows...its an old machine with a recent cpu. For me its a pretty big improvement without hardware upgrades....and I'll pull the trigger on it for sure.

For those that didn't get the $139 email offer (I didnt either)...if you go to "purchase" and "upgrades" on the sony website...that price is available. But if you go to "my account" and "my software"...you'll get the $189 price...at least I did!
Richard Jones wrote on 10/20/2011, 12:50 PM
Thank you Joran. I take it that this means that they are trying to give acceleration on those cards beneath CC2 (am I right?) but Vidmus is probably right about why they settled on CC2 and above although I would say that my reasonably expensive PC (just under £1000) is less than a year old so I don't think you can call it an outdated system and I'm not sure that it is subpar anyway. But there we are!

What GatorBait is saying is interesting. If there's an improvement anyway on cards less than CC2 without the use of GPU acceleration then that's got to be useful. Methinks I'll just have to download the trial (and thanks as well for the heads uip about the cost).

Richard
cal79 wrote on 10/20/2011, 1:35 PM
Well my card (NIVIDIA Quadro FX 3800) is below 2.0 but i'd hardly call it subpar, it still retails for around £700 which is still way more expensive than some of the cheaper 2.0 cards, so it doesn't make any sense to not support it.
Red Prince wrote on 10/20/2011, 2:34 PM
it doesn't make any sense to not support it.

Sure it does. CUDA 1.x does not have any hardware support for 32-bit math. So it makes perfect sense not to support it in a NLE.

He who knows does not speak; he who speaks does not know.
                    — Lao Tze in Tao Te Ching

Can you imagine the silence if everyone only said what he knows?
                    — Karel Čapek (The guy who gave us the word “robot” in R.U.R.)

wilvan wrote on 10/20/2011, 3:45 PM
Maybe , red prince , but my quadro FX3800's are supported in after effects and premiere and doing a very good job there.

I do not want to criticize sony vegas pro here ( since I like it and buy it since version 7 ) but quadro ' s are commonly installed in workstations rather than ( lots of power consuming ) gamers cards and not swapped with new versions each half a year , because of too expensive .

( now I am not complaining here , am going to order a few quadro 4000' s , the 5000 which sony tested is a litlle too expensive for what it maybe might improve on my main system )

Sony  PXW-FS7K and 2 x Sony PXW-Z280  ( optimised as per Doug Jensen Master Classes and Alister Chapman advices )
2 x HP Z840 workstations , each as follows : WIN10 pro x 64 , 2 x 10 core Xeon E5-2687W V3 at 3.5 GHz , 256 GB reg ECC RAM , HP nvidia quadro RTX A5000 , 3 x samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB M.2 2280 PCIe 3.0 x4  , 3 x SSD 1TB samsung 860 pro , 3 x 3TB WD3003FZEX.
SONY Vegas Pro 13 build 453  ( user since version 4 ) , SONY DVDarch , SONY SoundForge(s) , SONY Acid Pro(s) , SONY Cinescore ( each year buying upgrades for all of them since vegas pro 4 )
(MAGIX) Vegas pro 14 ( bought it as a kind of support but never installed it )
SONY CATALYST browse 
Adobe Photoshop  CC 2018
Adobe After Effects CC 2018 & Adobe Media Encoder CC 2018
Avid Media Composer 2022.xx ( started with the FREE Avid Media Composer First in 2019 )
Dedicated solely editing systems , fully optimized , windows 10 pro x 64 
( win10 pro operating systems , all most silly garbage and kid's stuff of microsoft entirely removed , never update win 10 unless required for editing purposes or ( maybe ) after a while when updates have proven to be reliable and no needless microsoft kid's stuff is added in the updates )

GatorBait wrote on 10/21/2011, 12:46 AM
I purchased vp11 today...exciting day...lol

I did some more testing...this time on my old laptop. Not sure if this info is relevant or will help...but I did it anyway just to compare the 2 versions. The laptop has an Intel T7200 Core 2 Duo at 2.0Ghz and a GeForce Go 7600 512MB and 4GB system memory (3GB usable on 32-bit). When the project properties is set to 8-bit pixel format..runs at full res as long as there isnt any effects at all...so good for straight cuts. in 32-bit (video) mode it previews at full res as long as I do not use a secondary monitor for preview...buts frame rate drops a little to 27fps (full speed at half quality). Laptop still had trouble using effects which I expected...but runs much better in 8-bit mode..and a little better without using a secondary monitor.

Rendering 30 second clips:
Mainconcept AVC
VP9: 4:55****VP11: 4:47

MainConcept m2t
VP9: 1:25 VP11: 1:01

Sony MXF
VP9: 1:34 VP11: 2:06

Then I reencoded clips on my desktop machine (the same machine from my post above):

MainConcept m2t...30 second clip
VP9: :34 VP11: :30

MC m2t....4:00 clip
VP9: 4:30 VP11: 4:01

MC AVC (mp4)....4:00 clip
VP9: 12:58 VP11: 5:59 gpu on...12:19 cpu only

Sony AVC (mp4)...4:00 clip
VP9: 5:51 VP11: 6:40 gpu on....6:30 cpu only

Sony MXF...4:00 clip
VP9: 3:49 VP11: 4:41

Yes...I was bored tonight..lol..I was watching the World Series...so I had company..ha. I used long clips for the heck of it...lol

My conclusion so far is that VP11 on the laptop runs a little smoother than vp9....not from the GPU (isnt supported at all...doesnt even have any flavor of CUDA) but the software seems more efficient and better (as it should).

The desktop with the GF8600GT runs a lot better with VP11 over VP9. My GPU made a difference with MC AVC but not with Sony AVC. VP11 handles preview much better and smoother. MXF is slower though. Like I said earlier...the GPU is a cc 1.1 and since it has some form of CUDA may account to the improved playback (but prob not)...and its confusing since under preferences I dont have the option to use gpu acceleration...but when rendering AVC it says CUDA is available in the system tab and it makes a difference with MC AVC. As is right now the system runs much better...expanding full support would obviously be great! Render times are slower on some codecs compared to VP9...but Im sure they will be fixed in newer releases. I am happy with the upgrade. I do not know how VP10 runs since I never installed it. Perhaps I should run the trial version and compare it to VP11. I wanted to compare the versions and see how much improvement there is and just pass the info along. Whether is it actually utilizing my gpu or not...I see a difference in playback for sure with an older gpu.

-Alan