Help Please With LONG Render Times

crown2020 wrote on 10/1/2019, 3:31 PM

Hi. Guys. Newbie to Vegas Pro 17 here. I'm looking for advise. I'm confident I'm at the right place.

I've read some posts and forms that would indicate I do, and then again I don't, need to update my video card and or driver(s) to improve my render times. Here are my system specs:

Windows 10 Pro / 64 bit.

Dell Precision T3500 3.47GHz (so i7 I guess)

6 Core (12 threads Available at the hardware level), (16 available by default in host Vegas Pro 17, and can be increased).

24gb DDR3 Ram

Nvidia Quadro 4000 (installed with the OLDEST driver I could find on Nvidia's Site (R340), (341.96)

Hard Drives are Spinners (unfortunately). They are also in a RAID 1 Configuration. Both are 7200 rpm's

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, I tried the OLDEST driver I could find on Nvidia's site because some of the folks posted on here it was the right thing to do. I will say the first time after I opened Vegas Pro 17 and having installed this R340 (341.96) driver, the software immediately recognized it. You could see on the GUI launch splash screen things were being initialized. The card was clearly being detected now by the Pro 17 software.

I went into several settings within the Pro 17 program. Here's what I've set:

*** Under options then preferences, General Tab, the "Enable Open Cl/Gl Interop for Intel GPU is NOT checked.??? ****

In the same dialogue box but VIDEO tab Dynamic Ram is 200MB and I've not changed that at all. (Per at least (1) posted issue with this).

In the same VIDEO tab, GPU Acceleration of Video Processing clearly has my Nvida card selected with the words "Optimal" at the very front of the text.

When I search, (as suggested in a You Tube video, for "GPU" under the Preferences then "Internal" Tab, there is nothing there to switch from "FALSE" to "TRUE".

Now, when trying to Render Video, the ONLY codex options that will even attempt allowing me to "Render using GPU if available" are the Sony AVC/MVC codex included stock with Pro 17. ALL others ARE NOT an option. It will let me select the option to "Render using GPU if available" (Sony SD Codex), BUT, I suspect that it's not staying selected when I OK out to render. I say this because when I select the same codex again, let's say the Sony AVC/MVC SD 2Mbps option, it's defaulted back to "Render using CPU only".What a pain in my butt.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The source file specs, (I am trying to render as quick as possible with out sacrificing the quality of my project), are as follows:

MPEG-2 720x480x32 4:3 aspect ratio (about as basic as it gets).

MPEG Layer 2 Audio @ 4800 Hz Stereo

---------------------------------------------------------

The OUTput files I've tried to render are:

MainConcept MPEG-2 using one of the DVD Architect Specs, (14-15 hours to Render) NO option on this codex for acceleration as noted above. *** NOTE***: I'm Rendering out around 1/2 or just a bit less of the 5 hour project using this MainConcept MPEG-2 and DVD Architect Specs as to create and render (2) separate files. This is to fit 1 of the files later on a DVD9 and the other split file on a DVD5. Maybe that's why the 1 hour slower give or take?

Also tried Sony AVC/MVC SD "Memory Stick" 2Mbps option. (I did select Render using GPU if Available) for this codex. *** I'm just not sure if it STAYED selected. *** (15-16 hours to Render). So, about 1 hour slower give or take. Wow. and it's all one file.

It's worth noting I'm running (2) instances of the software here. The cpu does not appear to be taxed. It's at about 50-55% with both instances running the described above encodes.

So, as you can see, I had since enough to buy a good Vegas Pro 17 piece of software. I just need help getting my system optimized for production. I'd LIKE to see this 5 hour file encoded in 50-60% LESS time than it's original 5 hour file size.

Please, show some love. I'm all ears here. I have to be. I've just about pulled out all my HAIR around them. :)

Back to post

Comments

Sylk wrote on 10/2/2019, 10:41 PM

No, you tried to customize power plan settings instead of choosing a power plan (@ 0:11). Expand "show additionnal plans" and just select one of them.

I don't know the limits of an attachement. I already asked a modo about this but he don't know. So i limit my videos to 1080p and less of 40MB, otherwise upload fails.

No mouse pointer is a known bug from Vegas screen capture. My screencap/edit software is Camtasia, but many other exist, like the free OBS.

crown2020 wrote on 10/2/2019, 11:35 PM

@Sylk I wonder why my file of 494mb didn't fail to upload? Hummm..... Perhaps during the upload process it does compression? I don't know. Got the settings changed. Thanks. I also did not know about the bug with Vegas Screen Capture. Thanks again. So when I google search OBS, OBS Studio comes up. It's live broadcasting software. I'm sure this is not the program your speaking of. Would you be so kind as to send a link? I'd like to check it out. I've looked at what you use. $299.00 one time purchase and around $45-$50 p/year as I recall. Thank again for all your valuable input. It's appreciated.

Sylk wrote on 10/2/2019, 11:54 PM

It's the good one. Not only live broadcasting, i quote "Free and open source software for video recording and live streaming." https://obsproject.com/

crown2020 wrote on 10/3/2019, 12:02 AM

Wow "free". I'll have to you tube a vid or two on that "free" software. Thanks for all your help. Until next time. 👋

EricLNZ wrote on 10/3/2019, 1:57 AM

@Sylk I wonder why my file of 494mb didn't fail to upload? Hummm..... Perhaps during the upload process it does compression?

Yes, see C3 of Nick's post https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/important-information-required-to-help-you--110457/ for info on uploading.

crown2020 wrote on 10/3/2019, 9:07 AM

@EricLNZ Thank you. I must not be using the correct key words. 😄 I searched for this info. Your reference post was spot on. I actually was going to post a Dropbox link in one of my previous posts. I did actually. I then removed it when I could not find out if it was a usage of this forum violation. Thanks again for your info. Much appreciated.

RonB_USA wrote on 10/3/2019, 10:49 AM

Steven-Warrens wrote on 10/2/2019, 11:00 AM --- I am responding to this post even though it is probably not needed for your work anymore. Yes, mine is an RTX and I assumed that yours was also. There is a difference in Device Manager that shows RTX for mine - no RTX on yours. So you are correct. See below.

Update on mine: My builder told me to download the correct nVidia driver which I did today, so I'm on a new GPU driver version today. He said to use "Optimal Driver for Enterprise (ODE)" - NOT the beta drivers. So I did a Clean Install of that new RTX 4000 driver: 431.94, released on 09/25/2019. Yours would be different.

I got another great 4K to HD render last night (exactly 13 minutes for a 29-minute video), even before I updated my nVidia driver, so I'm eager to jump in today with a new project. I also did some minor changes to my VP17 settings which seem to help. And my i9 overclock is at 5.120GHz which really revs up the CPU. Amazing results.

Here in my Device Manager which shows the difference in mine - with the "RTX", which yours does not have. So I stand corrected.

crown2020 wrote on 10/3/2019, 12:00 PM

@RonB_USA As I see it, there was nothing for you to correct. 😀 I thank you for posting your render times. It gives me idea's. I've been Google searching how to get faster renders as well. I've have some obstacles to overcome. I believe I need a new graphics card. People are saying, (including you), that it makes a word of difference. I need a SSD hard drive(s). 24gb ddr3 memory is what I have. I MAY need to upgrade this. I need to stop reading and writing to the same source drive. One for OS and programs, the other for data. Without spending a lot of money right now, I'm trying to crawl before I walk right into a system that may cost me thousands.

I too one day will have to edit HD. For now, the bulk of what I do is SD work because I do analog to digital transfers.

Thanks again. Your input is always welcome.

RonB_USA wrote on 10/3/2019, 1:29 PM

Steven-Warrens, I saw another post to you recommending High Performance with your Windows 10. Yes, I agree with that also.

OPTIONAL: Additionally, for many W10 Pro configurations, you may also have the new Ultimate Performance option! This activated with the April 2018 Windows 10 Update 1803. This is even beyond High Performance. Not recommended for laptops since it takes more power. This is mainly for workstations or equivalent.

Go to Administrator privileges Command Prompt and enter:

powercfg -duplicatescheme e9a42b02-d5df-448d-aa00-03f14749eb61

Then using Settings, go to System | Power & Sleep | Additional Power Settings

Eureka! You will now see an additional Power Plan called Ultimate Performance. It kicks your PC into Cruising Speed! Even much better than the gaming settings for those of us who edit video and graphics.

I've used this in the past with my last PC, but just remembered it today.

I just activated this in my new Build. Stay tuned...

DrNeb wrote on 10/3/2019, 7:28 PM

It's the spindle drives in my opinion - they're not fast enough. I have a 4k 10 bit animation project I'm working which has gone past the capacity of my SSD drives. We're talking about 500 odd gig off the top of my head. On an SSD drive with no fxs I can render out 6 mins in 20-30 mins but off a spindle drive this time has ballooned out to over an hour.

Hope this helps

crown2020 wrote on 10/3/2019, 9:11 PM

@DrNeb Thanks for the advice. I know a spinner compared to an SSD is no contest. When I get the $$ things will be different. "I pay the cost to be the boss". 🤑

Curious, are you running more than 1 SSD using one for data and one for programs?

crown2020 wrote on 10/3/2019, 9:28 PM

@RonB_USA It sounds like a great idea. The command would not work for me. See screen shot. Thanks for trying to help me out.And yes.... staying "tuned".

Musicvid wrote on 10/3/2019, 9:30 PM

Drive throughput is never a consideration at the resolutions and bitrates mentioned by this poster.

The source file specs, (I am trying to render as quick as possible with out sacrificing the quality of my project), are as follows:

MPEG-2 720x480x32 4:3 aspect ratio (about as basic as it gets).

MPEG Layer 2 Audio @ 4800 Hz Stereo

---------------------------------------------------------

I attempted to draw attention to the importance of the encoding filters previously, as many are single-threaded and must be implemented sequentially, it's caveman-math, really; a bigger pipe won't make a bigger trickle.

OTOH, these self-upsell wishlist threads are entertaining to read,

Sylk wrote on 10/3/2019, 9:41 PM

@RonB_USA It sounds like a great idea. The command would not work for me. See screen shot. Thanks for trying to help me out.And yes.... staying "tuned".

Do you already have tried High Perf as i suggested you?

Do you have checked if it is not already available before unlock it?

Can't blame you to following suggestions, but do it in the right order.

crown2020 wrote on 10/3/2019, 9:51 PM

@Musicvid I'm in the process of testing with an without filters. I'd say yourself and a few others that have mentioned this as a bottle neck for me are correct. But when you NEED the filters what does one do? $$ for a better system is all I can think of. I'm not against that. I just need more $$ 😁

Since I encode SD most of the time, do you feel SSD's would be a good choice for me? My output files are rarely over 3-4gb and mp4 (generally). Now the source files can be 15-25gb at around 1080p

" bigger pipe won't make a bigger trickle" As a plumber, this is very very true. I like the analogy.

"OTOH, these self-upsell wishlist threads are entertaining to read" - Are you referring to me?

Sylk wrote on 10/3/2019, 9:59 PM

Since I encode SD most of the time, do you feel SSD's would be a good choice for me? My output files are rarely over 3-4gb and mp4 (generally). Now the source files can be 15-25gb at around 1080p

Access times always a benefit. Choosing a disk is more dependent of sata speed.

crown2020 wrote on 10/3/2019, 10:12 PM

@ Anyone who cares: Borris FX is working on a bug I think I've found in one of there filters. I asked the tech about a GPU vs. the CPU in terms of effectiveness with their filters. This was his response, (in case a few of you wan't to gloat).

" the BCC Flicker Fixer is a filter that is exclusively powered by the CPU, so the GPU would have almost no effect whatsoever in regards to performance of either playback or rendering."

@Musicvid See, even the manufacture agrees with you and others that have hinted the same thing. I know you didn't need the pat on the back. Your getting an "adda boy" anyways. 😎

RonB_USA wrote on 10/3/2019, 11:11 PM

As I said, Steven-Warrens, Ultimate Performance will only work in Windows 10 Pro 64-bit on high-end PCs that have the latest Windows Updates. But worth a try. At least use High Performance. If Ultimate does not show as an option, it is not available. Here is what it looks like...

RonB

crown2020 wrote on 10/4/2019, 9:43 AM

@RonB_USA Ok. I guess I was confused. The command prompt command I ran, I assumed, would turn it on at the command prompt level, (elevated). When I got no response from the command, I thought it didn't work. After seeing your screen shot, I DO have the option. See my screen shot. Apparently, it turned an option from hide to viewable EVERY time I ran the command no matter the dir I tried it in. See all my "options" for the same Ultimate Option. (eg: C:\windows or C:\) Thanks. I will give it a try.

Sylk wrote on 10/4/2019, 1:28 PM

Apparently, it turned an option from hide to viewable EVERY time I ran the command

You have to READ and understand a command before apply it...

powercfg -duplicatescheme e9a42b02-d5df-448d-aa00-03f14749eb61

That's why i said you

Do you already have tried High Perf as i suggested you?

Do you have checked if it is not already available before unlock it?

Can't blame you to following suggestions, but do it in the right order.

So, now to delete copies, first, type powercfg -list and post screenshot.

crown2020 wrote on 10/6/2019, 12:39 PM

@Sylk I can run the command you suggested. Is it necessary? What's the harm in the duplicate options to just leave them there, (other than people that are a little OCD)?

Sylk wrote on 10/6/2019, 12:55 PM

Like you want. Was just to clean up useless entries.

In any cases, it's important to switch back to balanced plan for normal use. It saves Hardware, Money and Earth:

Musicvid wrote on 10/6/2019, 1:34 PM

I predict little improvement by telling the tail (performance setting) to wag the dog (video encoder filters). There is also responsibility involved in guiding unfamiliar users into modifying system settings or worse, purchasing unnecessary equipment.

The newer problems with Boris and VP17 are well-documented, and much of Boris' historic "slowness" (actually from kernel based processing), isn't going away.

https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum-search/?query=boris%20bcc%2017

john_dennis wrote on 10/6/2019, 2:18 PM

"I predict little improvement by telling the tail (performance setting) to wag the dog (video encoder filters)."

I would like to see some test results posted by the proponents of the Ultimate Performance Power Profile. A simple 5 minute render with and without the profile in place. I would do it my self as a public service, but...

...wait for it...

... I'm still running Windows 7 Professional on the machine that I use to render.

Disclaimer: My knee-jerk theory is that if Vegas is leaving 24% of CPU unused, it's not going to make a huge difference tuning up the processors. or 14% or 4%.