I have also tried with source material from a fast USB stick - no change in rendering time I am using 3 physically distinct drives for source, temp and output (two IDE HDs, one fast NAS for output) hardly any load on hard discs and network according to resource manager plenty of RAM free, Videopad.exe only uses ~500MB, h264enc5.exe ~70-80MB I have tried and checked quite few things: mov files from Nikon camera as source, 2 cross-fades, avi with H.264 as output - different output formats had little impact on rendering time). Rnedering time for my 3-minute test clip: 3 minutes.īut with VideoPad, I see an average of 30% CPU load, the rendering is only down from 30 minutes to ~20 minutes for the same 3 minute clip (720p, 2 Quicktime. Other rendering software (for example Cyberlink Powerdirector) makes full use of it's power, runs 2-3 times faster than with the old CPU, all cores almost at 100% busy. I actually got a new CPU, an Athlon II X4 640 quad-core. What are the critical components for good rendering performance with VideoPad, besides CPU? Please NCH folks, make version info (also change log) more visible! Strangely enough, if I let my browser guide me to the German NCH website, I'm offered 2.31! And both files have exactly the same name. Oh, BTW, I have been using 3.0 from the start. I would love to use VideoPad as I like the efficient user interface, small footprint (Cyberlink dowloads about 15 times more for instalation!) and the ease of operation. How can I analyse the issue of my PC and VideoPad? Maybe it's just one bottleneck that I could fix, maybe even a misconfiguration? Any advice or ideas are highly appreciated! On the other PCs I tried the difference is much smaller. It seems VideoPad performs extremnely poor on my desktop system, while other programs (like Cyberlink, Magix) show a much better performance. Both CPU are theoretically ~30-40% faster than my desktop, but render the Video using Videopad dramatically faster: The laptop needed a tad less than 10min, the HTPC just 7:52! That's factor 3-4! I have made a few more tests and came to astonishing results: I rendered the same video on two different PCs, a laptop sporting an Intel Core 2 Duo P8800 and my HTPC with an AMD Athlon II X2 250 CPU. If you select a different format (e.g MPEG4 Native) you can play about with the bitrate. If you set the slider to the far left, rendering will take for ever and you may not see much improvement. The default value is around the middle of the range but even a little shift to the right may make a difference to the rendering speed without affecting the result too much. Try it out with a short sequence to see how you think the result looks. Rendering will be very much faster if this set to the far right (value 51) but the quality will be rubbish.(blocky) You should now see a Video Quality (Ratefactor) slider. The video compressor will now show H264 (Native) The remaining windows will now show the defaults. If you are creating an avi on your PC then click the "Save Movie" tab and select "Computer/data"Īlthough the default preset window may read Custom, click the down arrow for this choice and select the HD option at the top of the list. PPS: I found out that I am running 3.0 - finding out which version one is downloading from NCH is impossible until you check the version in the installed program. PS: Is there any way to correct my user name in this forum? I introduced a stupid typo, it should read "TechnoViel". For 1h+ movies it won't even complete rendering over night :-( I love the programm and working with it is very pleasant and fluent - but the rendering time is a show stopper for me. would it help, to add a better graphocs card, so CUDA, APP or the like can be used?Īny ideas for speed-up are highly welcome. Or is VideoPad just that slow on my hardware?ĭoes VideoPad make any use of the GPU - i.e. Is there anything that might be wrong in my configuration? Any specific output format that's specifically efficient? Radeon X1250 based), 4GB RAM.īut other programs like Cyberlink are ~4 times faster. I know my PC is not a great video editing platform (AMD 64X2 4200+, Asus M2a-VM, integrated graphics AMD 690G (i.e. mov, mp4, avi and asf - it's alway 30min+, with avi seeming to be the fastest option (~30min). Renderning time for a less than 3 minute test video is 30-38 minutes (depending on output format), so more than 10x real time. MOV files from a Nikon camera ibn 720p, 29.7 fps.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |