Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Edius 64 BIT

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Paranova Films
    replied
    Originally posted by tingsern View Post
    Hmmm, I wondered why some people are facing so much problems.

    Good for you, Paranova.

    Now - what problems you are getting with Quicktime?

    from the "5.1 won't recognize QT .mov files" post:

    Originally posted by Paranova Films View Post
    by the time we receive our 5 i found that the QT that came with the disc didn't work (even no opnening the quicktime player) unistalling it and installing and old one solve the issue but... now i finish to install the 5.11 with same issue, tryed to made the same (uninstalling and installing another qt) didn't work: a few .mos that i am using in a project that were working fine now are offline and with no chance to restore, the curios thing is tat qt player can play thoose from the explorer... i'll download a fresh version from the page and see...

    upss almost forgot it no mather the source of the files (digital juice, after effects renders, etc) some files works (in edius) and some not...

    downloaded and uninstalled the previous version, intalled the new one... not even open... (i have to say that mine is XP64Bit os) so went back to my old qt 7 and still the same: some clips recognized and some others not...

    and no matter if there are SD or HD clips... opening another SD project found the same issue... the strange is that when i play the clip from the explorer it plays fine, when loading again the clip to edius, it loads offline... but: when i copy the clip to a different folder or rename this one and load to edius it works...


    i know that i can replace the offline clip with the new copied but there must be a resaon or a solution for the "offline clip"

    Leave a comment:


  • tingsern
    replied
    We don't need the Ultimate version. If you can get "lower" version - like BUSINESS, that will be cheaper. Just make sure it is 64 bits :-).

    Leave a comment:


  • STORMDAVE
    replied
    Vista x64 Ultimate SP1 has been pretty much stable for me for a while now. If there are problems, then it must be the hardware.

    Leave a comment:


  • tingsern
    replied
    Hmmm, I wondered why some people are facing so much problems.

    Good for you, Paranova.

    Now - what problems you are getting with Quicktime?

    Leave a comment:


  • Paranova Films
    replied
    AT LAST!!

    after dozens (not thousands, not hundreds, really dozens) of tests, cleans installs of xp32, xp64, vista 64 with and without filters, different project settings, intalling and no installing other programas, finally after upgrading to 5.11 my machine is not crashing any more!!!

    (ups) -sorry- just 1 hour ago of testing and i'm so happy as i can... more tests (and try to solve the QT issue) and reporting here...

    Leave a comment:


  • VETOREART
    replied
    hello amigo, espero que esteja tudo bem com voce, de onde voce é?

    Leave a comment:


  • VETOREART
    replied
    Hello amigo, espero que esteja tudo bem com voce e sua familia.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paranova Films
    replied
    miliseconds response EXCELENT!!

    Originally posted by tingsern View Post
    I suspect a faulty RAM module or a faulty RAM controller for your case .
    ups...

    Originally posted by tingsern View Post
    OR worse, corrupted device driver.
    OUCH!

    Leave a comment:


  • tingsern
    replied
    No problems ... hopefully, it will go some way to solve your problems.

    Vista 64 is the way to go. It is a supported OS - not WinXP 64. You have to get Vista 64 device drivers for your motherboard and for every other piece of hardware. This is because Vista runs device drivers in Ring 1 and Vista 64 expects all device drivers to be 64 bits.

    Programs can be 64 bits or 32 bits - it is okay.

    I suspect a faulty RAM module or a faulty RAM controller for your case OR worse, corrupted device driver.

    Good luck on your reinstall then.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paranova Films
    replied
    Originally posted by tingsern View Post
    If you run your program that is 32 bits on a 64 bits OS, then the performance should be equal or better than the 32 bits OS. In your case, I suspect that there is something wrong with your 64 bits WIN XP install. It could be bad device drivers, or bad memory (causing the memory controller to retry), or it could be hard-disks - Windows uses your hard-disks to swap if you don't have enough RAM installed. A 64 bits OS will tax your hard-disk much harder than a 32 bits OS - because of its larger memory space (and a larger swap file).

    wow man... thank for your reply... btw: WHAT A MACHINE YOU HAVE!!! that's a nice system...

    just today are gonna to reinstall win64 bit because my NHX-01 has a bug since E5, and before contatc support we wanna be sure about doing everything right: the thing is that when i export to a file or render the timeline and the CTU is placed over any video (not black or empty area) the system crash and restart... we installed vista ultimate 64 and the same thing, (fortunatelly we use GHOST), we went back to xp32 (working good with E4.54) installed E5.01 and in one morning the system crashed around 8 times... nothing of it happens when testing E5 in our NHX-02 (another machine) so one feelling is taht our WP64 may not be correctly installed...

    my boss is very dissapponted at this time, Edius was a ROCK stable and we almost quit of Premiere at all (we have a DPS Velocity, 2 media 100, 2 DVStorm2, 1 ACEDVIO, my NHX01 and other NHX02) and right now he's thinking to buy 2 Final Cut stations...

    We know that the driver is not certified for XP64, but, again, testint it with vista 64 the system crashes... oh... i forgot: with vista the system crash and shows the classic "blue screen" telling that memorys may not be working fine so my boss buy 2 new modules in the US (each one 2gb -thoose not availables in Colombia-) but the bug keep and as i said: today are gonna try reinstalling the OS...

    one more time: thanks for your reply, hope this would be helpfull for our technician and i'll let you know about it...

    oh and my system spcs i'm gonna update to the signature later.. right now i use another machine to internet...

    bye and thanks
    Last edited by Paranova Films; 01-21-2009, 03:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • tingsern
    replied
    If you run your program that is 32 bits on a 64 bits OS, then the performance should be equal or better than the 32 bits OS. In your case, I suspect that there is something wrong with your 64 bits WIN XP install. It could be bad device drivers, or bad memory (causing the memory controller to retry), or it could be hard-disks - Windows uses your hard-disks to swap if you don't have enough RAM installed. A 64 bits OS will tax your hard-disk much harder than a 32 bits OS - because of its larger memory space (and a larger swap file).

    Try running a performance monitor on the 64 bits OS and see where your bottlenecks are.

    Can you give me your computer specifications (motherboard, graphics card, CPU type, amount of RAM, etc) ...

    Leave a comment:


  • Paranova Films
    replied
    Originally posted by tingsern View Post
    Whether a program is 64 bits or 32 bits - if the program is I/O bound or CPU bound - it makes little difference to the end results. The main benefit of 64 bits is the large address space (2 PBytes) in size (or 2,000,000 Gbytes) - of course, this is virtual..
    sorry if my reply is a little bit dumb... but my english ain't good and i hardly understand about I/O bound or CPU bound (i asked to an expert who explain it to me later) but if i have a 64 bit system: does a 32 bit program would work better, equal or bad? i ask it because the example of my render with ulead cool 3d... (174 frames 1920*1080 takes 1 hour 15 min in xp32 and takes 4 h in xp64 -same machine-)

    thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • redgum
    replied
    I totally agree with Tingsern. The last comment I saw on 64 bit Edius on this forum mentiond V6 at the earliest and only if demand was there.
    Some confuse the issue with the pending HD Storm drivers for Vista.

    Leave a comment:


  • tingsern
    replied
    Whether a program is 64 bits or 32 bits - if the program is I/O bound or CPU bound - it makes little difference to the end results. The main benefit of 64 bits is the large address space (2 PBytes) in size (or 2,000,000 Gbytes) - of course, this is virtual. No mainstream processor (Xeon, Core 2, AMD, etc) supports all 64 bits real addressing today. However, even if hardware addresses, say, 512 GBytes real - I don't think we see mainstream motherboards supporting that much today.

    So - programs like Adobe Photoshop (that exploits large virtual addresses), 3D rendering programs, Autocad, etc - these programs will benefit the most from 64 bits virtual address.

    Programs like EDIUS, Premiere, etc are more I/O and CPU bound than virtual address bound. I don't think you will see a quantum leap in performance from a EDIUS 64 as opposed to EDIUS 32.

    Most of the gain are in operating system (VISTA 64 is extremely fast - especially if you feed the OS with more than enough RAM) - and that impacts the enduser's perception of things going faster.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paranova Films
    replied
    i agree with that, but... i believe that Edius now is a Major program... recently i found that using Ulead cool 3d in my XP 64bit (now with 8 gb RAM) the renders are too long... meaning TOO LONG i mean that before (in xp 32 bit) one render of 174 frames HD (1920*1080) was taken about 1 hour 15 min... now it takes 4 hours... i wonder if Edius would be best (like "the best") being a 64 bit app...

    and please excuse my latin english

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X