When is a hardware acceleration possible with MEP and Nvidia GTX950?

ViDRamFuge wrote on 12/25/2016, 8:59 AM

When is a HWA (hardware acceleration) possible with Magix Edit Preminium and Nvidia GeForce GTX950? Maybe sometimes in the future or never?

I bought a GTX950 one year ago and I discovered that the hardware acceleration in a normal consumer allowed way was not possible. I have been patient and waiting if something positive development happens and not to need encode my 15 minutes videos during the nights hours and hours as now.

I have read all the posts and checked information in this MAGIX forum about this matter. There is also old information about Nvidia driver panel which is not valid for me. Nvidia driver panel 2016 looks very different mentioned in the posts earlier. And for an average consumer some of these advice are tricks for computer experts.

I have Movie Edit Pro 2016 Premium and Windows computer with:
- Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit
- Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4570 CPU @ 3.20GHz
- 16335 MB RAM and

GeForce GTX950 driver vers 376.33

But it shows out, that Magix and NVidia don’t works well together, so encoding takes forever - no hardware encoding, for me. And is my Geforce GTX950 the reason also why my loaded MainConcept codec MPEG-4 doesn’t work? Always an error info. OK, I have used default codec.

Nvidia has listed GPU-accelerated applications and MEP is not mentioned, only Magix - Vegas Pro. But maybe that a list for pro use applications.

Magix is still informing when selling MEP Pre:

”Hardware-accelerated decoding (H.264) Timeline playback features faster import and smoother playback of video effects and high-resolution video material. Processing power has also been freed up, providing an improved editing workflows. 64-bit support 64-bit support in MAGIX Movie Edit Pro Plus Premium enables a more efficient use of RAM and multi-core processors. This makes it possible to encode videos extremely fast.”

I have been satisfied with my MEP:s and I like this application, but exporting and encoding takes too long time.

Is there any hope or should I buy a new application or computer or both?

Comments

Scenestealer wrote on 12/27/2016, 4:29 PM

Hi VidRamFuge

I would not be hopeful of HW accelerated export with a discreet graphics card coming to Magix any time soon. If you have read all the prior posts on this subject you will be aware that HW encodes leave a little to be desired quality wise and this maybe part of the reason Magix are not going there.

Having said that, you are may already be taking advantage of the HW encoding posible with your processor's Intel HD4600 graphics chips ability to provide fast HW exports. The problem I have found is that if you try to export with the Mainconcept encoder with any reference to HW acceleration checked (as you have in your 4th screen shot), you will get an error (5th Scrshot). Never the less I have found that with a good computer such as yours, a Software encode with the MC encoder (not the default codec which is slow ) can be almost as fast as a HW encode. But you should export via the File Menu > Export to MPEG4 route rather than the Export Tab as here you can check what parameters and codec options have been selected and that HW acceleration is not selected.

Magix is not false advertising "HW acceleration" for export as this is used effectively by the program during preview of the timeline for acceleration of the encoding and decoding for playback and of the effects applied.

Vegas Pro is not capable of HW encoding with recent graphics cards at present either, so ignore mojoaudioguru's rant.

yvon-robert wrote on 12/27/2016, 4:57 PM

Hi,

Nobody knows that Magix think or do exactly about hardware acceleration. It support no hardware acceleration that means if you buy high grade graphic card and use Magix video product you pay for nothing, simple use the onboard card. Magix product is designed for consumer level is a not for a prosumer or professionnal video users. The product is good and easy to use. The Magix video product fit for 90% users but for professional work you need a better solution. What price for a good graphic card in video this start at 330$ and more, what is the price for the software, around 100$. In my head, if you are ready to pay 300 and over for a card pay maybe 700 to 2000 for a software.

Regards,

ViDRamFuge wrote on 12/28/2016, 2:57 AM

Thank you for your comments. I am first and foremost a photographer and video making has come alongside photography as a hobby. Maybe now my video projects are already swollen for MEP too challenging, and I'm not a computer expert. As a photographer I use Adobe's image processing applications. I am pleased MEP because it is simple to use and final output quality is good. Maybe my expectations in terms of the technical quality of the picture is also increased and sometimes long-time encoding of my project is irritating, especially if you want to export the output to a BlueRay disc, and you are in a hurry for some reason. I like and used to watch my "multimedia works" on a big tv-screen or using a projector. I have tried to find a way to get the encoding time shorter but maybe it's with this level system not possible. I understand that with this price of MEP you can not get the product for professional users. But I'm not yet sure if an investment for video making as a professional level for me is still appropriate. Maybe there will be development and I can test my ideas with MEP.

Regards

VidRamFuge

Scenestealer wrote on 12/28/2016, 5:00 AM

I have tried to find a way to get the encoding time shorter but maybe it's with this level system not possible.

How fast do you expect it to be? With your system you should be able to encode, with the your Intel integrated GPU and Codec using Quicksync HW acceleration, at better than realtime ie 1min on the timeline should take less than 1 min to export. Try exporting the magix demo project to MP4 with a default Full HD 25P export template. On a system similar to yours you could see anything as quick as 0.6x realtime. Let us know what you achieve.

johnebaker wrote on 12/28/2016, 5:37 AM

I have to agree with SS comment about using the integrated Intel graphics chipset.

I am running a virtually identical computer to yours, i5-4670K @3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, and on average achieved faster than real time rendering for Full HD (1920 * 1080) using the integrated H4600 chiset - it does slow down to real time or less where there are some very complex video, eg a multi picture in picture videowall , and certain video effects which are very heavy on GPU processing.

IMHO and from practical experience I can see no advantage in having an extra graphics card, NVidia or AMD, fitted to the computer unless you are into gaming.

John EB

ViDRamFuge wrote on 12/28/2016, 9:21 AM

Here is an example.

- realtime on timeline 23 min 25 s, 251 different objects, videoclips (see pic), imagines (see pic), audio

- effects: flexible crossfade or crossfade and mostly cut no fade, some action camera videoclips lens correction

- imagines with moving templates and section effects (because of the different aspect ratio) because I used the originals from camera. Sometime I have resized the pictures before, but i feel that there has been no diffrerence with the time.

- encoding takes about three hours and If I want to burn this project directly to BD-RE disc it takes 6-7 hours. I have a slow BD-writer, but encoding take most of the time burning is faster.

What I'm doing wrong? Or is there something wrong with my CPU. Or is this realistic time for encoding this kind of project.

Videoclips like this

Imagines like this

Exporting like this

Result like this in my harddisk (sorry the last in finnish but maybe you understand). Gooda quality video also on BL-RE disc but of course different format.

Regards V.

ViDRamFuge wrote on 12/28/2016, 9:50 AM

Hi,

I tested this demo.mvp. Decoding time was about 47 seconds. But the the resolution of the material was low. Like this.

Regards V.

johnebaker wrote on 12/28/2016, 2:45 PM

From your images 4 and 5 the destination folder is on drive D: - what is this - a second internal hard drive, an eSATA external hard drive, a network attached storage (NAS) device or a USB external hard drive?

If this is a NAS drive or an external USB drive then this could be your problem - both are significantly slower than an internal hard drive.

The Demo project is of low resolution, 512 * 288, and is not a good example for comparing to Full HD video at 1920 * 1080.

What export setting did you use for the Demo project?

On my computer using the integrated HD4600 graphics chipset, the rendering (encoding not decoding) time for MP4 export was:

27secs for original project size 512 * 288

44 secs for Standard (1240 * 720)

114 secs for Full HD (1920 * 1080).

John EB

Scenestealer wrote on 12/28/2016, 5:42 PM

The Demo project is of low resolution, 512 * 288, and is not a good example for comparing to Full HD video at 1920 * 1080.

No, but if you export to Full HD it will be re encoding all the material to a higher resolution using a project that has a good range of effects, titles, etc., which will give the CPU and GPU a good workout. Also the times we are talking about are not that different with 1080 50P projects.

John, I took the liberty of quoting some of those times based on the fact that VidRamFuge's system is very similar to yours and the fact that my comparative times were similar when we compared here: [ http://www.magix.info/uk/dvd-bluray-space-issue.forum.1151592.html ] down near the bottom of the thread. In fact you time for Full HD seems to have slipped as you originally posted 64 secs for the 1 min 44 sec project render.

VidRamFuge, You say the Bluray takes much longer but are you burning it as AVCHD MPEG4? Bluray Discs can be burned as that, or MPEG2 which can be selected in the burn dialog. If MPEG2 is chosen this may extend encoding times due to conversion of all the MPEG4 material.

Peter

johnebaker wrote on 12/28/2016, 9:06 PM

Hi Peter

. . . .In fact you time for Full HD seems to have slipped as you originally posted 64 secs for the 1 min 44 sec project render . . . .

You are correct, I recently posted - about 3 months ago IIRC, in another topic some speed comparisons between my i5 PC, which the above results were from, and my i5 laptop.

There has been a slowdown of rendering times on my PC compared to the laptop when rendering a HD project.

I suspect the slowdown coincided with the Windows 10 anniversary update which truly messed up the different versions of MEP on the PC, all required total re-installation, but were OK on the laptop.

I have not had time to thoroughly investigate what is going on - have been away 'down under' for 2 months - will be able to investigate more in a few weeks time and also compare with a new i7 computer I can also test on.

Cheers

John EB

ViDRamFuge wrote on 12/29/2016, 2:23 AM

From your images 4 and 5 the destination folder is on drive D: - what is this - a second internal hard drive, an eSATA external hard drive, a network attached storage (NAS) device or a USB external hard drive?

This drive D: is a part of my 2 TB internal HDD, which is divided in two parts C: and D:. No diffrenece between encoding times when using C: as a destinantion drive.

What export setting did you use for the Demo project?

Full HD (1920 * 1080). This was not this 3 D Demo.

VidRamFuge, You say the Bluray takes much longer but are you burning it as AVCHD MPEG4? Bluray Discs can be burned as that, or MPEG2 which can be selected in the burn dialog. If MPEG2 is chosen this may extend encoding times due to conversion of all the MPEG4 material.

Peter

I have used MPEG2 option. I understand that this may extend encoding time. Never used this AVCHD MPEG4 option. I should test, always learn something new.

Regards V.

johnebaker wrote on 12/30/2016, 5:07 AM

@ Peter

. . . .In fact you time for Full HD seems to have slipped as you originally posted 64 secs for the 1 min 44 sec project render . . . .

Problem solved - the update had indeed changed my Windows Page File settings from the manual ones I specified to Auto - the laptop was unaffected because it was never changed from Auto with it having only one HD.

Render times are now back close to where they were before - just need to vacuum the fans out - they are a 'little' clogged - the processor is running about 10 deg hotter than normal.

Cheers

John EB