"Faster" than current MEP 2017 engine?

Recycler wrote on 7/11/2017, 10:23 AM

On shutting down MEP 2017 Plus at present I am encouraged to buy "Video Pro X9: THE BRAND NEW VERSION" for GBP 150.

The blurb says, with true marketing-speak deliberate vagueness, Up to 5x faster + smooth 4k editing. Can anyone advise please if this engine is in practice significantly and sufficiently improved over the one currently driving my MEP 2017 Plus (16.0.4.102) to make it worth considering an upgrade? GBP150 seems a lot to pay for the other headline benefits on offer (innovative new effects and plug-ins which I doubt I would ever use).

Machine is question is 64b Win 10 Home with i7-6700K CPU overclocked towards 4.36 GHz, 16 GB RAM. nVidia GTX 750 graphics.

Thank you. - Mike -

Comments

browj2 wrote on 7/11/2017, 1:49 PM

Hi Mike,

Judging from some of the other features mentioned in the details on Magix.com, like 16 bit colour, I have to assume that there is a difference between the 2 engines. As for the speed, I can't say as I have done nothing with 4k except include a 4k file in an HD project. 5times faster than what, is still the question. I haven't seen any speed increase for HD projects, neither with rendering nor with exporting, and I have an up to date VPX.

As for switching to VPX, there are many more basic features than just the ones that you mentioned. I have listed these more than once but can't find any of the threads, so the best way is to really look at the details to see the differences. I'm using my cell phone to write this or I would give you a good listing.

Here are a few features:

2 screens

9 multicam tracks

More track buttons

Multilanguage capability

Colour curve

Many more colour adjustment features

Temporary project folder

Burning menus - export/import PSD files for menu creation and changing in Xara or PhotoShop

4 monitoring instruments

And more.

John CB

browj2 wrote on 7/11/2017, 1:51 PM

One more thing, I wouldn't / couldn't go back to MEP after using VPX.

mschagen wrote on 7/14/2017, 2:41 PM

You could download the trial software of both programs and make a testclip of three minutes (that's the export limitation of the trial versions) and see which works best for your use. I recently tried both. I couldn't notice much of a difference performance wise but I didn't compare export speed that thoroughly. For me, the responsiveness of the program while editing is more important.

For the usage you describe above, enabling smart-render or smart-copy under the advanced settings of the encoder might be beneficial. Then nothing get's re-encoded, it just copies the binary data as-is while skipping the commercials. Blazingly fast, if it considers the source material to be suitable for this and you used no effects, wipes, titles etc.

Recycler wrote on 7/14/2017, 2:48 PM

Thank you, mschagen, I hadn't noticed they did a trial software of this. I will give it a whirl. - Mike -

johnebaker wrote on 7/14/2017, 3:00 PM

Hi Mike

If you have not seen this topic raised by Terry, have a look through it, you will see I have included VPX in some comparisons we did with MEP 2016 and MEPP.

For the most part VPX and MEPP are very similar rendering on my PC using the Intel HD 4600 HWA.

HTH

John EB

Scenestealer wrote on 7/15/2017, 6:46 AM

Up to 5x faster + smooth 4k editing.

I think this is partly referring to improvements in the Quick sync hardware block in the Kaby Lake 7th Generation Intel i7 processors, and most of the improvement is with HEVC H265 4K video preview decoding and encoding, and H265 QSync HW encoding.