Grass Valley Forums

Grass Valley Forums (http://forum.grassvalley.com/forum/index.php)
-   EDIUS: Compatible Hardware and Accessories (http://forum.grassvalley.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=38)
-   -   Export issue i9-7900x (http://forum.grassvalley.com/forum/showthread.php?t=40563)

jambrich 09-26-2017 10:41 AM

Export issue i9-7900x
 
1 Attachment(s)
Hi,
do not use new Intel procesors i9 for exporting EDIUS timeline to h.264 format.
EDIUS is not able to use all cores (to 100%) to export the video. Check the attachment to see how processor cores are doing almost nothing :(
Old 4-cores Intel processors are working well (all 4 cores are used for export to maximum).
The only fast solution is to use QuickSync. It will accelerate your MPEG2 or MPEG4 (h.264) export by using intel hardware (graphic chip).

Jerry 09-26-2017 05:39 PM

1 Attachment(s)
I just tried with my 4790k using the Edius h.264 exporter without using Quick Sync and I get 100% usage for the encode.
Attachment 17887

I personally prefer the TMPGE Movie AVC plugin. It offers x.264 and dual pass. It takes longer but the file is smaller and the image in most cases is better.

What is your chip speed. The 7900x will run quite well at 4.5GHz.
I do know the 6950x will run all 10 cores at 100% using the TMPGE plugin. The new exporter wasn't available at the time I built the 6950x.

Bassman 09-27-2017 05:59 AM

I did some testing on my 7900x in Edius 8:

I get 100% CPU on all cores when using the TMPG AVC plugin. All Resolutions.

I get ~80% CPU on all cores using the Edius mp4 encoder in 720p60

I get ~65% CPU on all cores using the Edius mp4 encoder in 1080p60

So it looks like your system can be improved once you can discover what is holding it back.

noafilm 09-27-2017 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassman (Post 298590)
I did some testing on my 7900x in Edius 8:

I get 100% CPU on all cores when using the TMPG AVC plugin. All Resolutions.

i see you also have a i7 4790k. Does the 7900x outperform the 4790k when you use quicksync on the 4790?

Jerry 09-27-2017 07:54 AM

Outperform in speed or quality? Quick sync will be faster but not as good in output quality.

noafilm 09-27-2017 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry (Post 298594)
Outperform in speed or quality? Quick sync will be faster but not as good in output quality.

Wanted to know if it was the same speed or faster to render. I also have the tmpg avc plugin, didnt know quicksync vs processor rendering made a difference in output quality?

David Clarke 09-27-2017 10:52 AM

I recently tested some exports on this processor and while it did not use all the cores (it was about 50%) it did export a 10 minute HD timeline to a Blu-ray format file in about 3 minutes. I was not able to test TMPEG but I would expect that to use all the cores.

When it came to editing the i9 coped with about 5 layers of 4K GH4 footage - again more than I could get from the i7 with Quick Sync, and it was generally better all round.

noafilm 09-27-2017 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Clarke (Post 298600)
I recently tested some exports on this processor and while it did not use all the cores (it was about 50%) it did export a 10 minute HD timeline to a Blu-ray format file in about 3 minutes.

i dont have access to my pc to compare but it sounds like its faster then what my i7 4790k can do with quicksync.

Bassman 09-27-2017 03:30 PM

I have not done any timed tests, just normal job encodes. I will do some on the near future.

The key to comparing Quicksync to any software encoder is to determine what settings on the software encoder equal the quality level of Quicksync. Jerry, 4k, what would you say is equal to Quicksync from the AVC Plugin? 1-pass "normal" quality/speed? Lets make a determination so we can compare as this question is on everybody's minds. Then we can run some tests.

I do not have the 4790 system anymore but remember Quicksync was about 1 to 1 on encoding speed.

Ron Evans 09-27-2017 04:39 PM

I know that Quicksync is supposed to be less quality than pure software encoding but for my subject matter and with my displays I have never seen the difference for the data rates for Bluray I have used so encode speed is important. I believe that the Quicksync GPU in the new i7 8700K due out next week is supposed to be improved too. Comparing encode times for parts like this and pure software with a PC costing maybe three times as much is important. I think it is also important to compare quality at specific data rates because I think at data rates of 20Mbps or above there is likely very little difference between Quicksync and a software encoder. Low data rates for a small file size I can understand software encoding with 2 pass should be better so that application is important.

It will be interesting to see comparisons between encode times for the 6 core i7 8700K and the 10 core i7 7900K considering the potential difference in overclocking capability. It gets close to putting together a whole i7 8700K system for about the cost of the i7 7900 chip cost alone !!


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:43 PM.


Copyright 2014 Belden Inc. All rights reserved.