UHD Layers test in Edius 9

[createmedia]

I have done a layers test in Edius 9.54 in 25p and 50p on my fastest PC which has a Passmark of 35,068 and with different Codecs, in some cases Premiere Pro is faster but limited by a GTX1080TI, but not worth getting the credit card out for, even the latest GPU's are only half as fast again. Edius X is little different.

Certainly without reducing the playback resolution to 1/4 at 50p it isn't easy to do my normal HD green screen work in UHD

[Bassman]

Thanks for sharing your testing. I agree that 4k is very taxing and I do not believe modern computer systems have caught up with the requirements for complex projects. Maybe in a few years.

[PaulTV]

Interesting - I tested the usefulness of the PCC "acceleration" and it does indeed slow the system down when on.

I get much the same playback as you do - especially with XAVC which is a bit of a pig. I have no Quicksync.

I noticed you're running 72 threads with dual Xeons - I'm currently testing using an AMD 3900X which is 12 core 24 threads and a lowly GTX1660 - I'm guessing using the GPU only helps if you've got a low core count
or your CPU is heavily loaded - but no one will ever tell you how the resources are shared - Edius has always been a bit poor at taking advantage of whats on the shelf.

That said, by running a 4K project and monitoring in half rez to a 1080 output allows me to run the base and 5 pip's - all 6 tracks with PCC - and with Nvidia PCC support OFF, turning it on will not allow all 6 tracks to play,
so I would say GPU support does not add anything but in fact reduces playback.

For me working with half rez 4K on a 1080p monitor looks absolutely fine, I use my BM4K card to do a hardware downconversion - so I'd say Edius in fine except for the PCC/Cuda accelleration/ decelleration.

Paul :-)

[Ron Evans]

Paul I am getting nowhere near your performance with my Threadripper 12 core using the AX100 at 30P UHD as the XAVC-S source it is just as bad as using GH5 UHD at either 30P or 60P makes no difference. You can see my performance in the other thread. Your AMD 3900X is 4.6Ghz compared to my stock 3.7 for the Threadripper which will auto boost to 4.2 but I am not sure that makes to much difference ? For me 30P XAVC-S UHD with pips is not really usable at 1/2 preview without PCC. One track can be managed but more is just not viable.

[PaulTV]

Ron,

That doesn't sound right, what's the file source drive? and do you get a different result without GPU assist with PCC?

On benchmarks the 3900X is overall 16% faster than your TR - but thats not enough to cause this.

Matter of interest with 5 pip's and a base file PCC on ALL - with the Nvidia OFF I get a building buffer from a standing start, the 3900X has all cores at 100% and the
CPU reduces its speed to 4.1Ghz under the stress but only reaches 65C ( water cooled )

comments?

Paul :-)

[Ron Evans]

It doesn't matter if the source drive is an NVME or the hard drive. Outcome is the same for GH5 files or XAVC from the AX100 in UHD. HD is not a lot better from the AX100 either but usable. . What is strange is EDIUS will play h265 files encoded by Resolve better than the source files from the GH5. These are all with PCC OFF worse when it is on.

[createmedia]

I have that same problem GPU assist on PCC is faster in SD than off, in HD it is break even, and in UHD it is slower when it's on. The Open Hardware Monitor never shows the GPU core doing very much, about 10-15%. My thought is not enough RAM allocated to the GPU task.

It does seem that some codecs Edius seems lost on and lowering the playback resolution does't seem to help.

UHD YouTube downloads confuse it completely.

Whether that is the lack of Quicksync I don't know.

Yes my Xeons turbo up to 3.9GHz single core but all cores active it automatically limits itself to 2.9GHz mine are 2.41 GHz base overclocked from 2.3GHz