Realtime playback - reduction in performance

[SoundFreak_HD]

A fair amount of E6 is 64 bit. However not all of it is, thus it cannot be called 64 bit and still installs in the x86 folder.

Too bad they left out the system memory part ;(

[Jerry]

I am not using any additional Capture / Monitor card.

The only thing that has changed in my system is that I have updated Edius to 6.05

If you roll back to 6.03 does the performance return?

[GrassValley_PS]

As all modern software is going 64 bits, I was very surprised that v6 remained as a 32 bit program (cheaper to broduce that I can only assume). The ability to be able to use more memory must be just one of the advantages of 64 bit softare. Hopefully v7 will be released sooner rather than later and move into the current standard of 64 bits.

A fair amount of E6 is 64 bit. However not all of it is, thus it cannot be called 64 bit and still installs in the x86 folder.

I am not using any additional Capture / Monitor card.

The only thing that has changed in my system is that I have updated Edius to 6.05

[Jerry]

I have been using E6 since it came out and with 6.01 I set up a comparrison project with CS5.5.

I placed a background video on one track and 4 others on the tracks above, and used layouter to make 4 PIP's. The first video played by itself then each of the PIP's come into action after each successive three seconds so that they pop up in turn.

Playback in realtime with no problems.

Then I placed a video effect in each of the five video tracks in use.

Again playback in realtime with no problems (no stutter etc).

I updated to 6.03 and then to 6.05 and edited OK.

Now I have set up another project to demo the software to someone.

Without effects added no problems, with effects it gets into the second video (the first PIP) and realtime playback grinds to a halt and Edius moves the cursor at a snails pace.

I have not had time to look into the problem further, I do have a cloned hard drive of the system as at 6.01 and so I will swap the boot hard drives and recheck.

I did exactly the same test with a new CS 5.5 project and that playsback fine.

There have been no changes to the PC other than updating Edius.

Has anyone encountered the same problem with E6.05?

Ok, are you using a GV hardware card i.e., Spark, Storm 3g etc.? If so, make sure that you physically install the drivers from the 6.05 download for your particular board. Reboot.
Now go into system settings and tell Edius to use the hardware card and not OHCI.

Without installing anything go into system settings now and choose OHCI. The system should run fine (this depends if you are using a hardware card). If this returns playback to normal....it is a driver issue.

[Harro]

As all modern software is going 64 bits, I was very surprised that v6 remained as a 32 bit program (cheaper to broduce that I can only assume). The ability to be able to use more memory must be just one of the advantages of 64 bit softare. Hopefully v7 will be released sooner rather than later and move into the current standard of 64 bits.

[John Lewis]

Will a 64bit version of Edius help as this should enable Edius to address more mermory than its present 2gb

[VideoTrack]

Buffer is certainly taking a hit on E6 I have noted this on another thread
I think we must be on a limit now and engineers soon will struggle to retain RT

Totally agree John. That's exactly what I'm thinking, and that is currently what gives Edius the zenith NLE posiiton above its peers. GV can't afford to lose that feature...

[John Lewis]

Buffer is certainly taking a hit on E6 I have noted this on another thread
I think we must be on a limit now and engineers soon will struggle to retain RT

[VideoTrack]

I have been using E6 since it came out and with 6.01 I set up a comparrison project with CS5.5.

I placed a background video on one track and 4 others on the tracks above, and used layouter to make 4 PIP's. The first video played by itself then each of the PIP's come into action after each successive three seconds so that they pop up in turn.

Playback in realtime with no problems.

...
There have been no changes to the PC other than updating Edius.

Has anyone encountered the same problem with E6.05?

Col, this is a very good 'seat of the pants' way to quantify performance differences between the two versions. Using the same hardware, operating system etc, the same tasks as a benchmark, and only a change in NLE software revision.

I too would be very interested to know if other users have experienced the same difference in performance (and how significant it is) when undertaking exactly the same tasks between versions.

[SoundFreak_HD]

Of course, it's very true, my earlier dual Xeon just couldn't cope, even with 8 threads. The i7 is truly amazing for video, I'm just eyeing up the 2700K - can I get my system up to 5.2Ghz ?? Ha!

Paul :-)

5.2 Ghz ...... You might need ice water to cool that !

Better record that attempt with a wide angle cam set up, one to capture the smoke, one more tightly famed for the melt down :)

[PaulTV]

Of course, it's very true, my earlier dual Xeon just couldn't cope, even with 8 threads. The i7 is truly amazing for video, I'm just eyeing up the 2700K - can I get my system up to 5.2Ghz ?? Ha!

Paul :-)

[SoundFreak_HD]

Paul, don't forget you use a i7 :)

I also bought a new machine for E6, E5 was running fine on my old system.

[PaulTV]

With 1920x1080 AVCHD 25Mbps I can run a background layer with a cc on it and 4 layers above with Layouter pip's and cc on each.

Adding a single additional layer with layouter applied it slows to a buffer 2/3 and stutter's (cpu 98% )

If I use HQ files the same test grinds to a halt at 10 layers. ( cpu 80% )

This all with an HD 1920x1080 50i timeline

Paul :-)

[SoundFreak_HD]

Not sure if it's a 'problem' but E6 needs a lot more grunt compared to E5.
If you have a powerful machine the difference is not that huge.

A lesser system like my 2nd will come to a halt quite fast while performing still fine doing the same thing in E5.

We are still very early in version 6, I still remember that the beginnings of 4 or 5 were similar, bug fixes first, RT improvements later.

(hopefully)