![]() ![]() Second, look at the effects and layering you are working with. That is why one would normally expect to see light CPU usage during rendering but high usage during encoding. I'm not an Adobe guru, but do have some additional suggestions.įirst, Dave, since you have a GTX570, are you running with hardware MPE enabled for your sequence? You do understand that the point of hardware MPE is to offload rendering from the CPU to the GPU? Encoding is a different story: it is done primarily in the CPU. I think Dave gave us the Codec - Cineform 1080p 23.976 in a Cineform preset. Give us more detail about what you are doing (CODEC? Which effect(s)? Stand alone PPro?) and maybe one of the Adobe gurus will be able to point you in the right direction. You'll get best performance if your source disk and render (target) disk are two physically separate HDDs. IIRC I read somewhere that you'll get better rendering performance with a minimum of about 2GB per processor core.Īnother possibility is that you're disk starved. It's possible that the effect you want to use is itself not fully multi-threaded yet.Īnother possibility is that the various processors are being memory starved. But it does point to the fact that it takes time for software to make the full transition to 64 bit and multi-threaded. In this case PPro used AE to apply the effects, but AE would only run as a service, which limited it to a single processor, so it was a huge bottle neck. I've had a similar problem when I've applied some effects in AE and brought them into PPro via dynamic link. I am using Premiere pro CS5.5.2 and when I render video files with effects applied premiere only is using 20-30% of the processor. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2023
Categories |