Sony Vegas GPU accelerated rendering

[PrincessFrosty]

Just curious, why not use ShadowPlay instead of FRAPS and get an easy to use MP4 to start with?

FWIW, I see the same results with Sony Movie Studio. Same render times with GPU acceleration enabled and barely and GPU use. I gave up on it since some renders took longer. I decided to let my 4790k do its thing.

The first encode is just to reduce the size for storage purposes since the raw files are so large and I'm low on HDD space, it allows me to record more in one session and then deal with the editing later.

It sounds a lot like most people are having issues with the GPU and like you have given up which means that it's quite hard to find people in the know with this stuff.

There's nothing "broken" about Sony's implementation. You are straight-up encoding bound, and a GPU is not going to help you here.

GPUs are pretty awful on the whole for H.264 encoding; it's a fairly linear task that doesn't mesh well with the thousands of threads model that GPUs use.

This is essentially what my guess was, it seems like encoding is a fairly linear thing since the next frame relies heavily on the result of the previous, although it does seem like it could be done better, preferably by creating the key frames first across the entire encode and then having 1 thread working on each key frame. I'm fairly sure with some work they could make an encoder work better multi-threaded and that's all that seems to be stopping the GPU from using 100% of its resources, going from 5% usage to 100% would result in 20x faster encodes which is nice when some take upwards of 3 hours. Ah well.

*edit*

I'm doing this for youtube and you might be interested in the content, my Drunken Gamers channel is in my sig, we're just starting and looking for feedback both good and bad. We know the audio sucks we have a good mic on order at the moment.

 

[Eng8492]

My new R9 390 will not do any rendering in Sony Movie Studio 13 or Sony Vegas 12 Platinum. Sony Vegas 12 Platinum even has a "Check GPU" button, and after I press it, it says OpenCL is available.

Of course, the project preferences and applicable templates have "Use GPU if available" checked.

Any ideas?

 

[n0x1ous]

My new R9 390 will not do any rendering in Sony Movie Studio 13 or Sony Vegas 12 Platinum. Sony Vegas 12 Platinum even has a "Check GPU" button, and after I press it, it says OpenCL is available.

Of course, the project preferences and applicable templates have "Use GPU if available" checked.

Any ideas?

Holy Necro Batman!

 

[tweakboy]

Very cool stats,, thx ,,,,

 

[chummy]

Are you sure you're not encoding-bound? Vegas can use the GPU to accelerate the rendering process. However most of the encoders make little-to-no use of the GPU.

I use Vegas only to small changes focused more in cutting parts out and doing some split screen videos which should be encoding-bound. But in my test encoding only with a Fermi card it was capable of speed up the encoder a lot decreasing time by less than 50% with mainconcept/avc, while using Kepler give 0 gains in same test. I made not a specific test focused in a more complex production at all to see if in this scenario things change.

My new R9 390 will not do any rendering in Sony Movie Studio 13 or Sony Vegas 12 Platinum. Sony Vegas 12 Platinum even has a "Check GPU" button, and after I press it, it says OpenCL is available.

Of course, the project preferences and applicable templates have "Use GPU if available" checked.

Any ideas?

My 390 give no gains in Vegas Pro in Mainconcept or Sony/AVC templates. Vegas Mainconcept and Sony/AVC is limited to old Fermi and Vliw cards to boost encoding with Cuda and OpenCL.

 

[tweakboy]

I would get a Titan instead,,, cuz what your doing is very CPU depended,, not soo much video,,, gl

 

[tenks]

Save your money, save your card and switch to Adobe Premiere Pro. CUDA accelerated, huge speed ups and low CPU utilization. Oh and it's also a way better NLE than Vegas

 

[Makaveli]

Save your money, save your card and switch to Adobe Premiere Pro. CUDA accelerated, huge speed ups and low CPU utilization. Oh and it's also a way better NLE than Vegas

And what good is CUDA acceleration going to do for his 390 Radeon that doesn't support it?

Does Adobe Premiere offer Open CL acceleration?

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

Save your money, save your card and switch to Adobe Premiere Pro. CUDA accelerated, huge speed ups and low CPU utilization. Oh and it's also a way better NLE than Vegas

Premiere is pretty lousy at a lot of things. Vegas is definitely better at mastering Blu Ray for example (not a shock since it's Sony software). Plus, when you buy Vegas -- and you own it. With Adobe's creative cloud nonsense, nobody really owns Premiere anymore.... You all rent it. No thanks -- I'll keep using CS6.

 

[Makaveli]

Premiere is pretty lousy at a lot of things. Vegas is definitely better at mastering Blu Ray for example (not a shock since it's Sony software). Plus, when you buy Vegas -- and you own it. With Adobe's creative cloud nonsense, nobody really owns Premiere anymore.... You all rent it. No thanks -- I'll keep using CS6.

+1

 

[tweakboy]

I'm doing video editing with Sony Vegas and rendering out to mp4 and trying to decrease render times by using hardware acceleration, I was under the impression that GPUs ought to be able to render a lot faster?

I have a GTX 980 and CUDA is enabled but I'm getting really long render times which are a bit slower than real time video, we're at 1920x1080 and 30fps. I've followed all the guides to enable CUDA but it doesn't seem to make a difference to CPU only.

Looking at GPU usage its fluctuating up and down between about 3% and 5% which is tiny, and CPU is pegged at 100% for all 8 cores (it's a i7 2600k @ 4.9ghz)

Is this just a case of rendering not being something you can parallelize well? In which case is this low GPU usage expected, or should it be higher? I find it hard to believe that Vegas can only use a few percent of th

 

[SolMiester]

In % terms of hours of work on a weekly basis over a year? A $120 7970 beats the $470 980 by 21%. My statement stands true that if rendering speed is the priority for this program, 6-8 core Intel i7 + AMD GPU is the way to go. Alternatively, the OP can re-assess his future GPU upgrade path in 2016-2017 based on the performance of future cards in Sony Vegas Pro and their compatibility/performance with Oculus Rift. Right now, everything we hear online is that NV also sucks for VR as its latency is way too high.

That graph certainly doesn't support your 21% different between the 980 and 7970.

 

[Makaveli]

That graph certainly doesn't support your 21% different between the 980 and 7970.

What is the percentage difference been 28 seconds and 23 seconds?

 

[SolMiester]

What is the percentage difference been 28 seconds and 23 seconds?

just checked...19.6%, however TBF, I just saw the small 5 sec difference without checking....