Please help.

I have just bought a new laptop:

MSI 65 Thin:

SSD with Windows 10 64 bit home edition

i7 processor 

8 gig of RAM

6 gig dedicated NVidia graphics 

Video on an external HDD USB 3

Compile on a separate external HDD USB 3 

I am rendering a bluray image and it is taking ages, 8 hours render for an hour video 

I am using Pinnacle Studio 18 Ultimate for it's 5.1 audio import and export to bluray.

I have been editing with studio 18 on a very modest laptop, an HP with i3 processor, integrated graphics with 4 gig of RAM. When rendering the same project it takes 2 1/2 hours with the same setup using external drives.

Bluray best quality, render before export, 5.1 audio, 448 bitrate, h.264 codec. This has worked so well in the past. 

Am I missing something? Codecs etc.

Please help, thanks. 

 

There is no way you are going to get any type of performance using USB drives for you source and export.

acsscott:

There is no way you are going to get any type of performance using USB drives for you source and export.

....if they are on the same hub. I see you have USB 3 drives, which perform almost as fast as Sata. So this may be a connection issue, but I doubt it.

I think that is is more likely the with "Intergrated Graphics" one  PC is using harwre acceleration and one isn't. Check your settings in Harware Acceleration, reperot the exact type of acceleration and try different types.

Which stage is slow? Preparing Assets? 

I have a suspicion that the issue is quite likely due to hardware acceleration...

• On the old HP laptop (Intel integrated graphics) - if Studio 18's hardware acceleration was set as "Cuda" instead of "Intel", it would still find the Intel Quick Sync hardware in the integrated graphics and use it.
  
• On the new MSI laptop, if it is switched to use the Nvidia graphics, and Studio's hardware acceleration is set as "Cuda", Studio will see (and try to use) features in the Nvidia graphics. However, prior to around Studio 20 or 21, the "Cuda" feature actually used a software codec that ran in the GPU; its performance was truly dreadful (here, I saw a slower H.264 export than when the hardware acceleration was set as "None")!! In newer Studio versions, the "Cuda" setting uses Nvidia's NVENC hardware encoder, and is pretty quick.

So, if my suspicion is correct, a workaround would be to use the MSI laptop's Intel graphics instead, with Studio's hardware acceleration set as "Intel". There should be some tool provided by MSI to switch over to the Intel graphics or to set a program's "affinity" such that the appropriate graphics are selected automatically when the program is launched.

HTH
Richard

Thanks everyone for getting back, it is really appreciated.

I am using each external hard drive on it's own USB 3 socket, no hub.

I have had an experiment with settings, the programme will not work with any hardware acceleration, so it is set to none.

Studio 18 will not work with the NVidia graphics card and is set to integrated graphics. 

If I use Intel for hardware acceleration when rendering the speed greatly improves but I get a greyed out video with the big circular arrow.

On the old HP laptop hardware acceleration was set to Cuda, I never tried it with Intel because everything worked. 

When I did the Studio 18 installation on the MSI laptop there was an issue with the test footage and Studio couldn't play it.

I deleted the scratch folder etc but in the end I deleted the contents of the public video folder and audio folder with the Triple Scoop Music in it because Studio kept looking for it and hanging, could this be linked to my problem?

I am using Studio 18.6, Windows 10 is up to date. The hard drives are showing as linked with usb 3. I thought this laptop would shred on render, and I am so dissappointed that it is not the case.

When working on a project in Studio 18, it runs so smoothly compared to the old laptop, it is just the rendering that is a problem. The video I am working on and authoring for bluray is AVCHD 1920 x 1080 / 50i, the same video and setup as used on my old HP laptop.

Could the external drives be a bottleneck because the OS is on a SSD and the drives can't keep up? 

Any help is very appreciated, thanks 

 

Euphonograph:

eck because the OS is on a SSD and the drives can't keep up? 

Any help is very appreciated, thanks 

 

Almost certainly not. Any modern hard drive is more that capable of working far faster than the video rendering operation takes (other than one involving uncompressed video or direct stream copy). Go back 20 years and you might have a point.

The laptop could have an internal hub, however....

Hardware accleraion has improved with later versions of PS - it might be worth testing an upgrade to 24. You probably won't get the grey circles.

acscott I understand what you are saying but: : 

Quote: 

I have been editing with studio 18 on a very modest laptop, an HP with i3 processor, integrated graphics with 4 gig of RAM. When rendering the same project it takes 2 1/2 hours with the same setup using external drives.

Bluray best quality, render before export, 5.1 audio, 448 bitrate, h.264 codec. This has worked so well in the past. :  

I think that a 2 1/2 hour render time to make a 1 hour bluray image on a laptop that cost £280 is an absolutely brilliant performance.

I am trying to find the reason why a laptop with far greater specs can't touch that rendering performance.

 

Thanks jjn,

I would like to get Studio 24 but want the Dolby Digital 5.1 import and export facilty for my blurays, I don't believe that Studio 24 supports this.

Thanks 

  

Do both laptops have the same USB (Bridge) chipset?  Some chipsets only have one USB interface with a USB hub, so all of your USB could be going through one USB port.  Compare the USB ports and hubs in device manager.

Also, make sure you are connected to USB 3.0 ports.

I wonder how PS23 & PS24 would work with media on "removable" drives, since it seems to open the source files used in a cached mode to improve timeline cursor response.  Windows will not cache files on a "removable" drive.  I guess it would act just like previous versions, but 4K source could have quite a cursor position update delay.

Euphonograph:

Thanks jjn,

I would like to get Studio 24 but want the Dolby Digital 5.1 import and export facilty for my blurays, I don't believe that Studio 24 supports this.

Thanks 

  

Understood. 5.1 may make a comback.

I agree, it should be at least a upsell plugin like blu-ray burning.

Hello everyone,

Can you tell from the device manager if my drives are on a hub or have separate controllers? My drives are at the bottom connected to  2 USB 3 socket A connections.

I have had a play around with hardware settings:

Setting the computer to integrated graphics, using Intel and Cuda in hardware acceleration within Studio 18,

My top menu has a greyed out background with circular arrow and so does the video for both scenarios.

I have tried re-encode video, set the content to 1920 x 1080 / 50i just like the footage. 

I think Studio 18 hates this laptop.

Great news if Dolby Digital 5.1 in and out will be reinstated. I love Pinnacle, I've had 8,9 and 18, all great in their time.

I will definitely get the new version if it has this feature.

Thanks for your help, any more ideas? 

Could you not just use your C: drive as either the source or the target, even for just a short test project and compare the times? If the perfomance is still poor, then it's nothing to do with the drive connections.

Hello jjn,

Thanks for taking the time.

I've done some testing as you suggested.

I rendered a 5 minute bluray image with no menu:

Computer: Integrated graphics, C drive to C drive, No hardware acceleration - Slow

                                                                                 Hardware acceleration Intel - Quick, no picture grey circular arrow, audio yes

                                                                                 Hardware acceleration Cuda - Quick, no picture grey circular arrow, audio yes

Computer: Integrated graphics, C drive to external drive - as above

Computer: Integrated graphics, external drive to C drive - as above

Computer: NVidia dedicated graphics - as above

 

So there is no picture when either type of hardware acceleration is applied, any ideas? thanks.

 

 

What is the source footage?

Oh - and is your project timeline Interlaced or Progressive

Source footage is AVCHD 1920 x 1080 / 50i, Dolby Digital 5.1 audio

 

 

Timeline is 25 (50i)

The only things I can suggest is to try changing the timeline to 25p. I can't remember when, but at one time hardware acceleration fell over trying to work with interlaced footage.

I'm having issues deciphering yout test results. Is the new laptop actully slower than the old one, or just about the same when you actually get a usable result?

Oh, and I've looked back and I can't see any reference to the relative CPU clock speeds of the two laptops. The number of cores above 2 probably makes no different in PS18, and if the i3 has Intel HD intergrated graphics and the i7 has them disabled (and a nVidia card that isn't working with PS) then the i3 could acutally be quicker.

HP Laptop

CPU

Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-4005U CPU @ 1.70GHz

 

          Base speed:  1.70 GHz

          Sockets:       1

          Cores:          2

          Logical processors: 4

          Virtualisation:          Disabled

          Hyper-V support:     Yes

          L1 cache:      128 KB

          L2 cache:      512 KB

          L3 cache:      3.0 MB

 

          Utilisation      36%

          Speed 1.69 GHz

          Up time         68:01:04:00

          Processes     235

          Threads        2763

          Handles        224085

 

MSI Laptop

CPU

Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-10750H CPU @ 2.60GHz

Base speed: 2.59 GHz

Sockets: 1

Cores: 6

Logical processors: 12

Virtualization: Enabled

L1 cache: 384 KB

L2 cache: 1.5 MB

L3 cache: 12.0 MB

Utilization 5%

Speed 3.04 GHz

Up time 0:04:58:52

Processes 201

Threads 2340

Handles 92299

 

The HP is set to Cuda, I don't know why as it has integrated graphics and works well

The MSI is set to integrated graphics and is much quicker than the HP with hardware acceleration on but there is no video.

Setting the timeline to 25p makes no difference. 

The HP had no problem with interlaced frames and the video on the bluray looks fantastic

The whole point of shooting in interlaced frames is that I get smooth pans as opposed to horrid ratchet panning in 25p.

Also bluray doesn't support 25p, but it does support 50i.

Looking at the specs of these machines is it possible that the speed of the render on the MSI laptop upsets Studio 18?

 

There is the slight possibity that the Graphics card drivers on your MSI aren't working with your version of PS. Have you checked them (both nVidia and Intel). Don't use Windows, use the card manufacture's website. But given the vintage of PS18, that's unlikely

Euphonograph:

The HP is set to Cuda, I don't know why as it has integrated graphics and works well

PS18 doesn't have autodetect, and ISTR that Cuda is the default and it's up to the user to set the correcct hardware.

You say it has intergrated graphics, but are they the on-chip Intel HD graphics or part of the HP motherboard? Both can be described and "integrated".

The whole point of shooting in interlaced frames is that I get smooth pans as opposed to horrid ratchet panning in 25p.

Also bluray doesn't support 25p, but it does support 50i.

Yes, I'm fully aware of that, it was suggested as a troubeshooting step. ISTR there was one version of PS that couldn't make working Blu-rays if it had an interlaced timeline, but made working discs if the timeline was progressive and you had the right sort of Blu-ray player.

Looking at the specs of these machines is it possible that the speed of the render on the MSI laptop upsets Studio 18?

I have no idea what you mean by this. I've run all versions of PS on a 4Ghz i7 and a GXT 1070Ti and haven't noticed it ever being being slower that my 2.6Ghz laptop with HD 520 graphics - it's always much faster. Do you think the laptop might be overheating? That wouldn't affect a short test, I would have thought.

Are those utilisation figures  from when Studio is actually rendering? I'd guess not. When rendering on both machines, open the Task manager at the perfomance tab.

My gut-feeling is also that it might be a graphics driver issue - particularly if the laptop is still using the drivers MSI shipped it with. The i7-10750H is relatively new (about 9 months); early graphic drivers released for it may have been buggy... What Nvidia graphic chipset is there alongside the Intel? Nvidia have a habit of frequently updating their drivers to support (or fix problems with) the latest games; sometimes they break other functionality - so a driver that is one revision newer (or older(!)) than the currently-installed one might work better with Studio!

Also, is it certain that in the tests run earlier, that the graphic chipset in use was successfully switched over (and didn't sneakily switch back again when Studio was launched)? Note that changing the hardware acceleration setting in Studio's control panel won't trigger the laptop to switch to the "correct"/"matching" graphics hardware...

Regarding Cuda and Intel giving the same H.264 export performance on the old HP laptop - I can reproduce similar results here - this appeas to be due to a peculiarity in how Studio identifies what H.264 hardware acceleration is available

• If Cuda is selected, and Nvidia graphics are present, Studio will use them
• If Cuda is selected and Nvidia graphics aren't present, but Intel graphics are, Studio will find and use the Intel graphics instead
• If Intel is selected and Intel graphics are present, Studio will use them
• If Intel is selected and Intel graphics aren't present, Studio doesn't look to se if Nvidia graphics are present, it doesn't find and use the Nvidia graphics; instead it uses a software codec

Regards,
Richard

Hello Richard,

The GPU is an NVidia Geforce GTX 1660 Ti, I have changed the driver to a studio driver using the NVidia driver tool at the NVidia website rather than a gaming driver, which was originally loaded.

Both drivers are not working with Studio 18.

From your previous advice I set the laptop to integrated graphics and Studio to Intel hardware acceleration and again, no joy, a greyed out screen.

Should I change the integrated graphics driver?  Is there anything I need to set in Windows10? Any ideas?

thanks,

Rob