Movie Edit Pro 2013 Premium not using multicores

soren2 wrote on 2/21/2013, 11:57 AM

Hi there

Just bought the Movie Edit Prof 2013 Premium version.

I am VERY sad to see that the program is not able to use all 8 cores on my Intel i7 CPU (Quad core + HT).

When I am exporting as MP4 in 1024*768 for my iPad Mini, it uses a maximum of 25%, and NEVER uses the Hyper Threading cores.

Why not utilize all the power i have? Using CUDA on the GFX card, does not make any difference at all.
I have tried to see if the problems is I/O to and from the harddrive, but that is not the case.

A program like Handbrake, easily uses 100% of my CPU power.

I have a high end machine with 16 GB of memory.

How come you do not use the power the machine has?

Comments

johnebaker wrote on 2/21/2013, 2:09 PM

Hi

Welcome to the forum.

Please note this is a users forum not Magix support.  You could address this question to Magix to see what they say.

There is a misconception that HT = more cores.  A Quad core processor has 4 real cores.  

HT cores are 'virtual processors'  - they are duplicated 'sections' of a core which feed instructions (process threads) to each core which is shared by two sections. 

In effect it 'timeshares' the processing core between two hyperthread sections ('cores'). 

I have seen it mentioned that for processor intensive operations - video editing? - it is better to turn off hyperthreading.

. . . . When I am exporting as MP4 in 1024*768 for my iPad Mini, it uses a maximum of 25%, . . .

How long does it take to export for example a 10 min video?

. . . . I am VERY sad to see that the program is not able to use all 8 cores on my Intel i7 CPU (Quad core + HT). . . .

I am very puzzled by this statement - what says it is not using all the cores (real or virtual) ?

. . . . A program like Handbrake, easily uses 100% of my CPU power. . . .

I do not think you can compare MEP to Handbrake - they are two very different programs.

. . . .Using CUDA on the GFX card, does not make any difference . . .

I agree totally - I have found the same on my system which is lower spec than yours.

I have a high end machine with 16 GB of memory.

Which version of Windows are you using?

John

Last changed by johnebaker on 2/21/2013, 2:09 PM, changed a total of 1 times.

VPX 16, Movie Studio 2025, and earlier versions 2015 and 2016, Music Maker Premium 2024.

PC - running Windows 11 23H2 Professional on Intel i7-8700K 3.2 GHz, 16GB RAM, RTX 2060 6GB 192-bit GDDR6, 1 x 1Tb Sabrent NVME SSD (OS and programs), 2 x 4TB (Data) internal HDD + 1TB internal SSD (Work disc), + 6 ext backup HDDs.

Laptop - Lenovo Legion 5i Phantom - running Windows 11 23H2 on Intel Core i7-10750H, 16GB DDR4-SDRAM, 512GB SSD, 43.9 cm screen Full HD 1920 x 1080, Intel UHD 630 iGPU and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (6GB GDDR6)

Sony FDR-AX53e Video camera, DJI Osmo Action 3 and Sony HDR-AS30V Sports cams.

soren2 wrote on 2/21/2013, 3:03 PM

Hi John

Thanks for your answer.

As a computer engineer and software developer, I know the difference between a real core and a hyperthreading core. But that does not change the fact that the Magix program never uses more than 25% of the available CPU power. When using all 4 real cores, it should be 50%.

I also now that concatenating 52 small pieces of WMV video into a single Mpeg4 video is a process that is highly parallizable (sorry for spelling errors), that is the reason using the GPU instead of a CPU can speed it up quite a bit.

I am not doing any scaling, videoeffects or anything, only merging many small videos into a single video for easier showing on my iPad mini.

Handbrake can also convert videos into other formats, and is able to use all the CPU power available.

I still think that I have either configured the program wrongly, or there is some bugs in the program, not using the power available on the machine running it.

I am using Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit, with a SSD system drive, and high speed HDD's for video.


Hope you have some tips to speed up this simple task. Converting the 52 files, into 1 file, takes around 30 minutes, no matter if i use the CPU og the GPU. :-(

johnebaker wrote on 2/21/2013, 6:26 PM

Hi

. . . .  the Magix program never uses more than 25% of the available CPU power. When using all 4 real cores, it should be 50%. . . .

On what basis do you make this statement?

. . . .concatenating 52 small pieces of WMV video into a single Mpeg4 video is a process that is highly parallizable . . .

This depends on whether the codecs algorithms can scale up linearly to benefit from hyperthreading, and the amount of memory needed for calculation. Video rendering is very calculation intensive and can suffer from bottlenecking in the memory bus.

The important figure, as far as video rendering is concerned, is the number of frames per second that are rendered. 

. . . . Converting the 52 files, into 1 file, takes around 30 minutes . . .

How long is the total video?  How many frames per second are being rendered?

I would be interested in seeing what fps you get as I am looking to upgrade to an i5 or i7 in the near future.

. . . .no matter if i use the CPU og the GPU . . .

Agree on that one

To give you an example my processor is a Intel Quad Core Q8300 2.5 GHz with 4Gb RAM and a GT-630 2Gb RAM, a system hard drive and another 7200rpm HDD for the editing - so my bottleneck is available memory and disc access speed.

Using MEP 2013 - rendering 1920 * 1080i 25fps AVCHD to mp4 with no video effects or transitions (cuts only) the processor runs an average of 60 - 70% while rendering and achieves a frame rate of 15 - 18 fps.

With complex transitions, effects and collages the frame rate can drop to about 8-10 fps worst case and CPU usage jump to 85 - 90%.

After another discussion some time ago on here I did some research into using SSD drives for the 'editing drives' and one recommendation was to use a SSD for the editing process and back up to standard hard drives at the end of a session.

This should give a significant increase in rendering speed as SSD's can read/write at up to 500Mb/s compared to a 7200rpm HDD speed of 120 - 300 Mb/s

Do you have the filepaths for MEP pointing to the second hardrive? - my settings are shown here.

John

Last changed by johnebaker on 2/21/2013, 6:26 PM, changed a total of 1 times.

VPX 16, Movie Studio 2025, and earlier versions 2015 and 2016, Music Maker Premium 2024.

PC - running Windows 11 23H2 Professional on Intel i7-8700K 3.2 GHz, 16GB RAM, RTX 2060 6GB 192-bit GDDR6, 1 x 1Tb Sabrent NVME SSD (OS and programs), 2 x 4TB (Data) internal HDD + 1TB internal SSD (Work disc), + 6 ext backup HDDs.

Laptop - Lenovo Legion 5i Phantom - running Windows 11 23H2 on Intel Core i7-10750H, 16GB DDR4-SDRAM, 512GB SSD, 43.9 cm screen Full HD 1920 x 1080, Intel UHD 630 iGPU and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (6GB GDDR6)

Sony FDR-AX53e Video camera, DJI Osmo Action 3 and Sony HDR-AS30V Sports cams.

soren2 wrote on 2/28/2013, 1:58 AM

Hi John

Sorry for the slow answer, the mail about a new answer was tagged by gmail as being spam :-(

I'll have a look at the FPS and report back.

What i am doing is simply joining many wmv videos into a single mp4 video:

It's in the resolution 1024*768 both input and output. No transitions or anything.

The output and input fps is 15 fps.

The total length is 2-4 hours.

I have watched the CPU usage, never gets above 25%, and the disks are nowhere close to being maxed.

I can work on the computer on the same harddrives without feeling any slowdown at all, compared to when not converting videos.

It does not matter wether the input/output files are on the same harddrive or not.

I'll try to put the videos on my SSD drive and see if that makes any difference, i doubt it.

 

My theory is that the codec being used, is not well written to cope with multithreading and parallelizing of the calculations :-(