@AbbaTheHorse

Hi

Is there something else I need to do? I should say that I don’t have any monitor connected to my motherboard, only the GTX 1080.

Try connecting the internal graphics output on your motherboard to a monitor. It could be a second monitor although preferably set to be your Primary, or just a second input on the same monitor as the Nvidia if you only have one monitor.

Edit: Thanks John, 1) was going to be my next step.

Peter

Thanks everyone, it's now working!

Very much appreciated!

@johnebaker

Hi John.

This may be a stupid question but why choose 'Power Saving' over 'High Performance'? Using the power saving mode on my machine cuts down the amount of cores my PC uses in MEP and reduces the amount the remaining cores work.

Ray.

it is deemed that the iGPU on the CPU uses less power than the purpose build NVDIA/ATI cards thus the so-called "power saving" mode will force usage of the Intel iGPU.

@wongck

But John's image shows the INVIDIA card on High Performance and the Intel GPU on power saving.

I have just looked at my settings and in fact it can't be changed from what John is showing.

I thought it would be possible to get the Intel GPU set to High Performance but it is not possible.

Interesting.

@CubeAce

Hi Ray

@wongck's comment is correct the UHD 630 iGPU's maximum power draw is ~15W compared the the RTX 2060's ~180W 😱.

So far in testing with MEP and VPX, in terms of speed performance per Watt the UHD 630 beats the RTX 2060, it is interesting watching the interplay of the GPU's and the performance figures when rendering real projects, UHD and FullHD, with titles, collages, image stabilisation (Mercalli 2) and effects applied, in general:

1. both GPU's activated - the encoding load is shared dynamically between both GPUs and the CPU, depending on what is being processed
    
2. UHD 630 only, or RTX 2060 only - CPU load tends to increase over 1 and render times are very similar ~ 1.5x real time for UHD and 0.7x real time for Full HD.

HTH

John EB

@CubeAce

But John's image shows the INVIDIA card on High Performance and the Intel GPU on power saving.

To clarify that window you must be referring to is just showing which GPU is named High Performance ie. the Nvidia, and which is named Power Saving = the Intel.

MEP/VPX need the application to be set to "Power Saving GPU" to enable Quick Sync HWA for export rendering.

@johnebaker

both GPU's activated......

Do you mean activated in the system and present in Task Manager?

UHD 630 only, or RTX 2060 only - CPU load tends to increase over 1....(?)

You mean if you disable one or the other in Device Manager ?

over 1....

over 1 what?

Peter

@Scenestealer

Hi Peter

. . . . over 1 what? . . . .

Post amended - the point should have been numbered 😕

. . . . Do you mean activated in the system and present in Task Manager? . . . .

Yes - had to turn on in BIOS first.

. . . . You mean if you disable one or the other in Device Manager ? . . . .

No - in the BIOS to ensure actually is disabled.

HTH

John EB

@johnebaker

Thanks John - got it.

What happens to the respective CPU & GPU loads during playback if you swop between the Nvidia and the Intel in the Program settings > Display Settings?

On my system setting to Intel saturates (95-100% load) the HD530 and there is no activity on the Nvidia. CPU load drops also and the UHD timeline stutters a little at full res on the Blue Flash setting.

With the GTX1060 selected playback is smooth with most standard effects with the Nvidia showing a bit more load than the Intel.

Peter

@Scenestealer

Hi Peter

Have not got to testing playback settings yet - I have concentrated more on rendering, what you suggest seems to be the way to go.

I have been testing various NVidia GPU options to see if performance can be increased starting with settings I found for another video editing program.

I should say that, as yet, I have not yet used the Headless Ghost as I my 2 monitors are connected one to each GPU.

John EB

@johnebaker

Hi John

Let us know how you get on.

I have played around with those Nvidia settings for the individual programs over the years and have never been able to see any difference in performance in MEP / VPX. I just set the Prefer Max performance to Max, oh and make sure that the iGPU Windows Power setting is set to 100%.

You should not need the Ghost if you have 2 monitors.

Peter

@Scenestealer

Hi Peter

I got around to testing the playback in MEP and VPX with interesting results, all tests were done with a 4K project, no proxies, with transitions, titles,Mercalli stabilisation and some effects eg keyframed blur.

1. setting the UHD 630, as the preview device, iGPU averaging 35 - 50% usage max 65% and glitched at a few of the transitions early in the project then smoothed out reasonably well after that - buffer size??
    
2. setting the Nvidia, as the preview device, smooth as silk, no glitching, iGPU and Nvidia were very similar at 12-35% usage

HTH

John EB

@johnebaker

Hi John.

Did you have to have the anything active in the blue lightning symbol?

When you say 'setting the Nvidia as the preview device', do you mean you placed the preview panel in the monitor that was running off of the Nvidia card? I don't know if you are running audio in that project but I've found audio with too high a buffer causes glitching and too low a buffer sounds like an electronic crunch grungilizer. (More Nintendo like, 8bit sound).

@CubeAce

Hi Ray

Oops should have said in the post that the blue lightning icon was off, ie it was playing at full resolution (4K UHD) and framerate (25fps) - to give max possible load to the GPU's

. . . setting the Nvidia as the preview device . . .

The following program setting:

. . . . running audio in that project but I've found audio with too high a buffer causes glitching . . . .

Audio running for most of the movie - default buffer size, have not tried other sizes.

HTH

John EB

@johnebaker

Hi John.

UHD? 3,840 x 2,160p?

Why doesn't the top left hand box show your Intel GPU?

Mine always had since activating MEP.

Having said that my present setup looked like this.

So I changed it to resemble your image to this.

But on my current project I'm getting ready for the 15th Dec I still have to use the lightning symbol with all but 'Turn off effects' ticked to get smooth playback. So I'm guessing that is down to your graphics card being somewhat more suited to MEP than my current aging one. However, the resources on my PC have changed dramatically on playback and on export.

That's playback.

That's export rendering. [EDIT] I've just noticed the memory use has also dropped by about two gigabytes.

The Intel and the Nvidia GPUs are doing much more work with the Intel not doing as much as it did before, but the export time of that project was four minutes faster. Not much difference because the total render time was 44 minutes, but it is still a slight improvement.

It's quite fascinating to see how MEP is adapting to different system setups.

Thank you for pointing this out.

There should be a sticky on this site or a video showing how to set MEP up for maximum efficiency. I know systems differ and so will performance accordingly but it's only being here and watching these threads and exchanging experiences that I am slowly getting better and faster results.

If you want John (either john if either of you are interested) I can send you this project which is quite small so far to see if it causes your setup problems or whether you can also play this one without the need reduce resolution or frame rate.

If you can export the project faster (I can supply the export settings I used) or get smoother playback then it's either because of the graphics card differences or there is a difference in disk performances, which at this point doesn't seem likely.

Ray.

[2nd EDIT]

Just finished exporting again using MEP's standard MPEG4 codec and it shaved another four minutes off of the export.

This time the resources were divided up as follows when rendering shot video rather than the mainly graphic portion of the export..

[3rd EDIT]

Trying one more time to render using the HEVC codec but ticking the UHD box which I've never bothered with in the past and now my system is certainly working harder causing the CPU as well as the GPUs to work harder.

It's the first time I've seen my CPU get this hot and the subsequent faster fan speeds.

Export time equaling the MPEG4 export.

@johnebaker

Thanks John.

1) As I said earlier my HD530 was nearly maxed out at 90 - 100%. Was there any activity at all on your Nvidia?

2) Very similar to my results.

@CubeAce

That activate video output should be deselected as this is designed to output to an external device like a video recorder and appears to put more load on the graphics system.

I would be interested in testing your project if you want to PM me a Dropbox link.

My observations are with 3840 x 2160 25P Sony XAVCS material and I imagine John is too. You mentioned somewhere else that you were working with 60FPS footage which of course will be affected more by the Blue Flash > Reduce framerate activation when playing back.

Peter

@CubeAce

Hi Ray

. . . . UHD? 3,840 x 2,160p? . . . .

Yes - the correct technical term is Quad HD, however nobody uses it, 4K UHD is generally taken to be 3840 x 2160 and 4K is 4096 x 2160

. . . . Why doesn't the top left hand box show your Intel GPU? . . . .

Good question - I do not know, however activating the video output results in a full screen display, no transport controls and you cannot edit in it.

HEVC - I have found an issue with exporting to this at 3810 x 2140 25 fps - source video is 3180 x 2140 25fps - pan shots and movement are very jerky - I suspect because of the higher compression.

I get somewhat smoother results exporting at 50fps with Interpolate intermediate images turned on for every video clip.

. . . . It's the first time I've seen my CPU get this hot and the subsequent faster fan speeds . . . .

Depending on the CPU, ie whether it has thermal paste or solder between the chip and the heat spreader, at idle temperatures in the range 35 to 50°C are quite normal, and when under a high load this can rise to 60-80°C. thermal throttling, where incorporated in the CPU cuts in above 80°C

The i9-9900 has solder between the chip and the heat spreader and will run at the bottom end of the above ranges.

John EB

@Scenestealer

Hi Peter.

There has never been a way for me to have that box blank Peter.

It was active the way you see it when I installed MEP and dropping down the box doesn't give me an alternative. The activation box is not ticked though.

This project is 50fps. UHD.

My project settings depend on intended final usage and this one isn't for me as such. I'm just getting opening titles and end credits ready before the day of the event so I can edit the final video more quickly. My last project John tried was 60fps, full 4K and used proxy files. I tried this project without proxies but find there are possible future problems with archiving as I change drives regularly as they fill. I do like the smallness of the project folder though.

I've exported this project to a new folder so it contains the needed audio and video clip. It should load as I have it set up I think, but I am not sure.

If you PM me an email address I'll wetransfer the project to you as my dropbox account currently has a lot of files being worked on between me and the Dockyard film crew support department as they prepare new brochures for next year to attract new production companies.

I suspect the reason I have had to use the reduced frame rates and resolution is the amount of effects running to produce the graphics I wanted. All the work is my own to avoid copyright problems so don't expect the soundtrack to be up there with Vangelis although the music track was produced using one soft synth in Cubase 😅. This is a rough draft and will probably get changed multiple times before I pass it on. I think the intro is too long but I get caught up in experimenting and trying out new ideas. The full music track will also be edited down or maybe even re-recorded and mixed.

Meanwhile I'm taking my QWERTY keyboard apart and removing the power button for now until I can modify it as it's directly above the Print Screen Button and I've accidentally turned off my PC twice this evening.🙁.

[Update] This mod I did should fix that problem 😂

Slightly larger and bright red.

Ray.

@johnebaker

Another interesting image. I only get the one choice in the box. The Intel GPU. See my reply to Peter for an image.

If the original video file isn't showing any jerkiness then you could be correct, which is why sometimes I increase the bit rate of my exports and select best over better or auto. That and the blockiness of areas of colour where there should be detail or banding of colour graduations. It's more of a problem when I use my small sensored video camera and less of a problem with a much larger sensored camera. I suspect inboard sharpening automatically applied within the cameras at the point of recording to be the culprit. I can adjust sharpening on my DSLR but not my mini-cam and the larger sensor gives more accurate colour information from each photo-site.

Having said all that, panning rates when recording can also throw up problems that only show up when exporting a re-rendered clip. I have a Steadicam for my DSLR which when I use (not often because the combo weighs a ton) I can pan at any speed I like and get smooth footage when panning as it is ball-raced and very smooth but panning manually is more problematic.

I knew about the Intel die of the i9900K but never seen it go above 42c until now or seen it work as hard. It has dropped the export time down by around seven minutes of my current project which I never expected to get from altering one setting from within MEP.

Ray.

@CubeAce

Hi Ray

Another interesting image. I only get the one choice in the box. The Intel GPU. See my reply to Peter for an image.

Yes I am not sure what that means - mine was blank until I saw your SS so I clicked the dropdown where the only choice was Nvidia and ticked exited the Activate Video Output and now I can only see Nvidia in this box - ticked or unticked. My best guess is that is because I have the Nvidia output to my second screen which is where the default "Output" gets sent....but this does not explain why @johnebaker has two choices?

One thing to note is that with the Output activated the GPU('s) are sending the video at the full UHD of the project so more resources will be used including VRAM, than if you have only dragged the preview window to the second monitor where it will be previewing at the resolution of your 2nd monitor.

"That's export rendering. [EDIT] I've just noticed the memory use has also dropped by about two gigabytes."

This may be due to one of your GPU's using more shared system memory for VRAM.

.....or banding of colour graduations.

Noticed that you nor John EB have the "Use Dithering for Output" ticked. It is not clear whether this is only for the Display in the program and that it needs to be checked to have effect in an 8bit export to improve banding , but the Help files say it is checked by default leading me to think it should be left that way even if you do not have a 10bit monitor. If you are not familiar with this subject - Magix has stated that dithering even an 8 bit export can improve banding.

I will PM you my email address so you can send me your Christmas project to play with.

@johnebaker

HEVC - I have found an issue with exporting to this at 3810 x 2140 25 fps - source video is 3180 x 2140 25fps - pan shots and movement are very jerky - I suspect because of the higher compression.

If those non standard resolutions you mention are not typos then there may be problems associated with the fact that their frame sizes are not divisible by 8x8 MPEG block sizes. A bit out in left field I admit but the Help Mpeg Encoding appendix does mention to be aware of this when using non standard MPEG resolutions.

Peter

@Scenestealer

Hi Peter.

.but this does not explain why @johnebaker has two choices?

It is puzzling. I'm never sure if I'm learning more as I go along or just getting more confused 😀 but I test each time I see some new information here and see if there are either visible improvement differences or performance variations in use. Has John done something in the Nvidia control panel that could effect this? Speaking of which there are so many choices in the Nvidia 'Manage 3D Settings' box that could be changed Such as the 'Threaded Optimization' option that could customised for MEP only. that then could become another 'can of potential worms'.

This may be due to one of your GPU's using more shared system memory for VRAM.

Looking at the Nvidia control panel for System Information it is reporting my card has 2048 GDDR5 so that seems to tally and I notice it also reports using 16308 MB of shared system memory which is around half the memory I have installed and it reporting it has a total of 18356 MB available graphics memory at its disposal.

What did surprise me is apparently seeing my graphics card being used in export in any manner and seemingly helping out. I'm still slightly confused as to whether CUDA cores are playing a part or not or if they matter or if its purely down to the grunt and amount of memory a graphics card has. So in other words would a graphics card clock speed be more important than the amount of CUDA cores it had or amount of memory on board?

Noticed that you nor John EB have the "Use Dithering for Output" ticked. It is not clear whether this is only for the Display in the program and that it needs to be checked to have effect in an 8bit export to improve banding , but the Help files say it is checked by default leading me to think it should be left that way even if you do not have a 10bit monitor. If you are not familiar with this subject - Magix has stated that dithering even an 8 bit export can improve banding.

I have had that ticked in the past Peter but I was looking to see if having it ticked improved export times rather than for anything else so I will try it again with a clip I know had banding in it after export but not before to see if it makes a difference. Thank you for that thought as it helps if I know why things are being used or not.

I will PM you my email address so you can send me your Christmas project to play with.

Yes, that's fine Peter. I will wetransfer the project as it now stands. It's slightly different to as it was a few days ago but nothing extra has been added, just played with and tweaked a bit (changed one font and it's positioning / size) I'm currently re-exporting the project yet again to see if it has effected export times. The last time I exported with the newer settings in MEP it was down to 34 mins 35 secs from an original export time of 47 min 43 secs when I first tried. Feel free to play with it, de-construct it, whatever. I'm exporting the project at the maximum quality I can, selecting 'Best' in the HEVC export box along with now having the 'Use Dithering for Output' now ticked as well in the project management section.

[OK. Export finished and is now down to 32 mins 53 secs.]

Will now upload project to you.

Ray.

It is puzzling. I'm never sure if I'm learning more as I go along or just getting more confused 😀 but I test each time I see some new information here and see if there are either visible improvement differences or performance variations in use.

Do you keep a table of "tweaks" that you have done with the results (render time & quality) ?

I am watching his thread to know what;s the best settings. I cannot contribute anything as you guys are so far ahead of me in the curve, not to mention the powerful rigs you guys have, but the result/settings is of uptmost interested !!

Thanks to everyone for these information