Hello
To render i used my GPU but it only uses 15% of my GPU. Is there a way that I can up that? So that it uses 50 or more? (I'm using Vegas Pro 16)
Which version and build is used?
What sourcefiles are used?
Which rendertemplate, settings and codec is used?
What are the exact specs of your used hardware?
Version 16.0
Most DVR files and one MP3 file
MAGIX AVC/AAC MP4 Internet HD 1080p 60, max 20 000 000 bitrate and average 15 000 000, rendering quality best
Specs: GPU 1050 TI CPU: I5-7400
That rendertemplate does not exist in Vegas 16,
you have to customize the default 59,.. to 60 fps and use the one that uses your GPU, this one with the given customizations.
If you use modern drivers for your GPU the use of your GPU will increase.
That rendertemplate does not exist in Vegas 16,
you have to customize the default 59,.. to 60 fps and use the one that uses your GPU, this one with the given customizations.
If you use modern drivers for your GPU the use of your GPU will increase.
Thank you so much, will try this when i render my next vid!
Just because it only shows 15% usage does not mean your GPU is any more capable of rendering any faster. There could be another bottleneck along the way that is slowing your GPU down, forcing it to wait, or you could not be getting an accurate reading... Case in point, GPUz often will show higher GPU utilization than Windows 10's native GPU activity report.
Just because it only shows 15% usage does not mean your GPU is any more capable of rendering any faster. There could be another bottleneck along the way that is slowing your GPU down, forcing it to wait, or you could not be getting an accurate reading... Case in point, GPUz often will show higher GPU utilization than Windows 10's native GPU activity report.
Don't use gpuz, it just confuses things. Everyone has taskmanager. Vegas just isn't capable of utilising GPU efficiently. On my gtx1070 I have the same low gpu use on Vegas as most others, but I was using Davinci Resolve last night to render, I was getting 67% GPU use. Very impressive.
Looking at more graph, to me seems that the low percent is an averaged value by Windows task manager graph.
I'm quite confident GPU is not 100% used, but is actually much more used than Windows suggests...
"Don't use gpuz, it just confuses things. Everyone has taskmanager."
One or the other is reporting incorrect results, or at least results that appear incorrect in this context.
Looking at more graph, to me seems that the low percent is an averaged value by Windows task manager graph.
I'm quite confident GPU is not 100% used, but is actually much more used than Windows suggests...
on my computer vegas15 uses about 1/3 of the GPU Resolve uses, I've never even had the fans spool up on my gpu using vegas , but with Resolve Fan noise is noticeable, and gpu wattage & temperate high. The comparison isn't 'benchmark fair' though because of Davinci's ability to use cuda or openCl acceleration, while Vegas only has OpenCl. A better comparison could be made with an AMD card.
The people whom complaints the most are the people whom continued to buy GTX XXXX Card for Vegas. The answer is simple. If you care about Vegas performance in TL and rendering. AMD Cards is the only choice in my book.
Let's not blame the hardware Vegas claims to support for Vegas not supporting it as well as other programs do.
The people whom complaints the most are the people whom continued to buy GTX XXXX Card for Vegas. The answer is simple. If you care about Vegas performance in TL and rendering. AMD Cards is the only choice in my book.
++1!
The people whom complaints the most are the people whom continued to buy GTX XXXX Card for Vegas. The answer is simple. If you care about Vegas performance in TL and rendering. AMD Cards is the only choice in my book.
It would be foolish for Magix to only support one (minority) hardware manufacturer. Truth is, core development is lagging behind contemporary GPU acceleration capabilities, and this is fairly obvious .
Unless VP17,18,19 or maybe 20 will change that. But as its stands. AMD Card are still a preferred choice over the other.
That changed with the new range of the Nvidia cards though, more efficient at OpenCl. Gtx1660ti is as fast as RTX590, & GTX1660 is same as RTX580. So it would seem the best value card for vegaspro would be Gtx1660 at $219.
* Results for Luxmark3.0, cards won't exactly scale the same for vegaspro
This is about right although I would love to hear from anyone who has better.
This week I built a new Vegas PC with the following specs:
Ryzen 2700x
RTX 2060
NVidia drivers 419.67 CRD with the 2 NVENC session limit removed
16GB 3000mhz RAM
X740 Mobo
Samsung 970 EVO M.2
Vegas Pro 16
I have tested EVERY combination of codec and settings to try and get past the 15-20% limit I seem to get on CPU and GPU when rendering. I also tried the legacy CUDA renders but that was even slower. When I say every I mean it. HEVC, AVC, Sony AVC, CBR, VBR, High quality, standard, fast, low latency, video quality draft, good, best. With sound, no sound. Plugins on, plugins off. Only a slight change in render speeds but CPU and GPU usage the same.
I have tested using both plan footage from a C100 with a re-encode and graded using Vegas GPU built in plugins and Magic Bullet Looks. Same results.
Using the NVENC and HEVC gives the fastest renders on a RTX 2060. But only uses around 30% CPU and 15% GPU. When using NVENC I do see around 30% of the Video engine being used which I suspect is where the NVENC processing resides.
If I render using a CPU only profile I do hit 100% usage but still, NVENC at 15% is faster so I stick with that.
I dont think its a hardware bottleneck as I have monitored every possible aspect of my PC and see nothing slowing it down. I was rendering from a Synology NAS so tried going from SSD to SSD and the render performance was the same. When working with 1080p footage the network is no where near being utilized so it's not that.
The only thing I can see is that either that is as fast as an NVENC encode can go. The NVENC engine on the cards doesnt use all of the GPU. It's not supposed to. Its designed to give great video processing while still leaving the GPU free to play games.
One thing I do notice though when using an NVENC processing that I dont get with others and would love to know if this is everyone or just me. When watching the render preview it starts and stops. So it will process around 80-100 frames, then pause for half a second and then do the next batch. CPU or CUDA rendering doesnt experience this stop start. That said, it's still faster than any other renders.
What I can do though to get the usage up is open multiple copies of vegas and render out using NVENC. On GTX and RTX cards this is limited to 2 NVENC sessions but this is an artificial driver limit. Quadro cards dont have it. You can patch your drivers to remove the limit so I can kick off 4, 6, 20 copies of vegas. All rendering with NVENC and eventually hit the 100% dream.
This is about right although I would love to hear from anyone who has better.
This week I built a new Vegas PC with the following specs:
Ryzen 2700x
RTX 2060
NVidia drivers 419.67 CRD with the 2 NVENC session limit removed
16GB 3000mhz RAM
X740 Mobo
Samsung 970 EVO M.2
Vegas Pro 16I have tested EVERY combination of codec and settings to try and get past the 15-20% limit I seem to get on CPU and GPU when rendering. I also tried the legacy CUDA renders but that was even slower. When I say every I mean it. HEVC, AVC, Sony AVC, CBR, VBR, High quality, standard, fast, low latency, video quality draft, good, best. With sound, no sound. Plugins on, plugins off. Only a slight change in render speeds but CPU and GPU usage the same.
I have tested using both plan footage from a C100 with a re-encode and graded using Vegas GPU built in plugins and Magic Bullet Looks. Same results.
Using the NVENC and HEVC gives the fastest renders on a RTX 2060. But only uses around 30% CPU and 15% GPU. When using NVENC I do see around 30% of the Video engine being used which I suspect is where the NVENC processing resides.
If I render using a CPU only profile I do hit 100% usage but still, NVENC at 15% is faster so I stick with that.
I dont think its a hardware bottleneck as I have monitored every possible aspect of my PC and see nothing slowing it down. I was rendering from a Synology NAS so tried going from SSD to SSD and the render performance was the same. When working with 1080p footage the network is no where near being utilized so it's not that.
The only thing I can see is that either that is as fast as an NVENC encode can go. The NVENC engine on the cards doesnt use all of the GPU. It's not supposed to. Its designed to give great video processing while still leaving the GPU free to play games.
One thing I do notice though when using an NVENC processing that I dont get with others and would love to know if this is everyone or just me. When watching the render preview it starts and stops. So it will process around 80-100 frames, then pause for half a second and then do the next batch. CPU or CUDA rendering doesnt experience this stop start. That said, it's still faster than any other renders.
What I can do though to get the usage up is open multiple copies of vegas and render out using NVENC. On GTX and RTX cards this is limited to 2 NVENC sessions but this is an artificial driver limit. Quadro cards dont have it. You can patch your drivers to remove the limit so I can kick off 4, 6, 20 copies of vegas. All rendering with NVENC and eventually hit the 100% dream.
Getting 160+ frames rendering 1080P and almost 2X the speed in real times rendering in 4K is that good enough for me.
What are you using to see the render progress like that?
Ive just come from VP12 to 16 so still finding it all out. Plus what are your specs and which profile are you using? I used to hit 80% on the CPU on my old i7 2600 but lower on the new Ryzen. The bottleneck is elsewhere.
What are you using to see the render progress like that?
Ive just come from VP12 to 16 so still finding it all out. Plus what are your specs and which profile are you using? I used to hit 80% on the CPU on my old i7 2600 but lower on the new Ryzen. The bottleneck is elsewhere.
You need to instal SeMW Extensions to get that.