E5 Rendering - Slower?

[Geoff]

I have just taken some comparative measurements of render speed between E4.61 and E5. As usual my tests were made by measuring the time taken for 4 x 3d picture in pictures to be rendered over a background, the total duration was 5 seconds. In this instance the source material was either 1280x720 50p or 1920x1080 50i, both imported from an EX1 using the Sony transfer software. Both sets of measurements for each video format were made on the same timeline so that there were no other settings that could have been changed.

The results were as follows:

1280x720 50p: E4.61 - 10 seconds; E5 - 33 seconds
1920x1080 50i: E4.61 - 12 seconds; E5 -38 seconds

Now, I have to admit that the material was imported under E4.61 and that I didn't remove the NX drivers when uninstalling E4.61, this may have an effect on performance.

What are others experiencing? Any suggestions as to why there appears such a difference in rendering speed.

Geoff

[Aristotelis]

I created some mpeg2 files for dvd today, the source material was DV 50i...
no difference here (using the generic mpeg exporter)

[redgum]

The results were as follows:

1280x720 50p: E4.61 - 10 seconds; E5 - 33 seconds
1920x1080 50i: E4.61 - 12 seconds; E5 -38 seconds

Now, I have to admit that the material was imported under E4.61 and that I didn't remove the NX drivers when uninstalling E4.61, this may have an effect on performance.

Geoff

Did you reboot between tests?

[Aristotelis]

The results were as follows:

1280x720 50p: E4.61 - 10 seconds; E5 - 33 seconds
1920x1080 50i: E4.61 - 12 seconds; E5 -38 seconds

What was the rendering format in Edius 5 during your test?
HQ fine maybe?

[Geoff]

Both sets of test were made with exactly the same settings throughout following the normal method of uinstalling and rebooting. Since my original tests I have noticed that reverting back from 5 to 4.6 resulted in the latest saved version of the project ie. the one made using E5, not being readable with E4.6, I had to revert to an earlier backup made when using 4.6.

I will try again, but will remove al drivers this time.

Geoff

[Aristotelis]

I will try again, but will remove al drivers this time.

The NX board has nothing to do with the rendering but who knows?! removing the drivers might help...

[Geoff]

I've uninstalled 4.6 together with all other Canopus software, reinstalled E5 and carried out tests again - same results. The only factor that I can see which may have caused the drop in rendering performance is that I had to use the EX1 files already imported into a project under E4.6 since my EX1 is away for a firmware update; perhaps there is a difference in the way these files are imported?

[redgum]

Geoff, is there any particular purpose for your test? Because hardware has a huge influence on the results your outcome is very specific to your setup. A thousand others could do the same test all with different results.
My Edius 5 is performing my usual tasks at about the same speed as Edius 4.61. As an editor I'm happy.

[Geoff McKay]

Ex1 firmware

Hi Geoff, my name's Geoff also, and I also have an EX1. I'm wondering what firmware upgrade you're getting?

[Geoff]

Geoff M,

Hi there in KiWi country, I wonder where abouts you are; we have had some fantastic holidays in NZ and were there last Jan-Feb. The EX1 firmware upgrade is to V1.1 and is available free of charge here in the UK - have a look at www.sony.co.uk/biz for detaills.

Redgum,

Hi there in Oz, just got back from Sydney/Melbourne last week after a good time there doing some photography with my daughter. The reason for my original posting was that I was interested to find out if this was a problem specific to me or a general one. Edius is running on a Mac using Windows XP under Bootcamp and the E4.6 performed very well on that. Apart from this performnce hit I'm very pleased with what has been achieved and will be ordering a copy. No doubt we'll get it sorted out in due course.

Cheers,

Geoff

[Crespel]

This is different with me - my setup is Vista Ultimate 64Bit.
My impression is all new output modules are faster than in 4.61(which is no wonder since its new code).
Especially I tested the HD MPEG MXF output module.
This is the faster than everything I know(as we were used it from speed encoder) all 8 cores are 100% and the memory usage is up to 3,77GB(in a 4GB memory setup) even on VBR Files with 25/35 Data Rates.
Problems is again: to find out the settings for Encore compatibility(i.e. without transcoding)

[swsw1550]

Check out the new RapidHD from Elemental Technologies, you maust have a high end NVidia Graphics card to use it and it won't be out till the midle of Oct, it will output real time at more than 2 x, You also have got to use CUDA Technologie from NVidia, RapidHD though is only for Premiere Pro, follow this link if you want to read a bit about it.
http://www.elementaltechnologies.com/how_it_works.php

Cheers
Steve

[redgum]

Sorry to hear Geoff that you missed the best city and the best photo's when in Oz - but maybe next time.
Something really nice about that Kiwi place though.
Speed wise there is a lot of truth in using a good graphics card. I put in a nVidia 9800GT (1Gb RAM) and things are moving pretty quickly in HD.

[Geoff]

Brisbane is on the next 'to visit' list, we keep the best to the last!

The graphics card is a Radeon XT1800 fitted with 512MB of RAM so I don't think that is the problem; all the new GPU base transitions are running in real time with full 1920x1080 50i footage from the EX1. The render time that I'm measuring is that used for preview, not the final output and remember that I'm comparing performance on the same machine with the same clips and timeline.

If anyone is using MXF files from an EX1 then I would be interested to know what your various settings are just in case that I'm missing something!

Geoff