Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I know there are tons of threads out there that ask this question, but a lot of them seem older and don't have proper answers.
When rendering my files from Adobe Premiere Pro CC 2018, it always uses my CPU entirely for rendering the finished product. This takes a really long time, as I have an i5-6500 (Quad Core clocked at base 3.2Ghz), so files can take between their own length to twice the video length to render.
When I select to use the Mercury Playback Engine, which explicitly states it uses my GPU to render, I still see 100% CPU usage with the standard idle GPU usage I get (0-2%). Not only is it selected as my Renderer in ME, but it's also selected as the default Renderer in Premiere Pro's project settings.
Sony Vegas Pro, the competitor to Premiere/AE/ME, renders on the GPU moreso than Adobe's products do. If the answer to this question is "not all effects render on the GPU, at the peak end of 2017 mind you (not 1998), then I have to sincerely raise an eyebrow how only cutting a video's length by a bit can somehow render slowly or doesn't constitute as "available to render on a GPU".
Though, if anyone has an idea of what I may be doing wrong that can be troubleshooted, I appreciate any help I can get!
Edit: I realized that I forgot to give some vital information in this regard.
My specs:
Windows 10 (64-bit Pro)
Intel i5-6500 (Quad Core, 3.2Ghz)
8GB DDR4 RAM
AMD RX460
Adobe CC is installed on my boot drive (SSD)
Files are rendering to a 2TB 7200RPM HDD
I'm checking performance via Task Manager (It shows GPU usage when games are using it all the time)
Hi RandomAnimeGamer!
I'm a consumer and fan of Anime since the 1960s. We didn't have a name for it other than "Japanese Cartoons" back then.
When I select to use the Mercury Playback Engine, which explicitly states it uses my GPU to render, I still see 100% CPU usage with the standard idle GPU usage I get (0-2%). Not only is it selected as my Renderer in ME, but it's also selected as the default Renderer in Premiere Pro's project settings.
That actually can occur in many instances. It really depen
...Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I know that the internet doesn't have a personal pager for my issues, and I get that. I'm mostly replying here because I'm seeing that this post is getting a ton of views, and no responses.
I'll be honest, I hate posting on answer forums because nobody wants to respond until you complain or double post. Either people whine that I "didn't give enough information", but then when I give sufficient information it's then "too much and I'm too lazy to read through all of it." So I give a TL;DR on posts, and now suddenly it's "patronizing the reader and assuming they're stupid."
I know people are going to respond to this with anger, that's how answer forums work these days I guess. I'm not even mad, I'm just disappointed that Adobe's products don't work like they should compared to their competitors, their support team on the phone is rude from the instant they pick up your call, and then you're expected to leave it to the community to debug something that Adobe is too lazy to troubleshoot and fix to begin with.
So go ahead, I expect the utmost disrespect that every single other Answers forums gives me, without ever answering the question to begin with. Just know that if this were 2010 or earlier, none of this would have been an issue.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi R.A.G.,
I know that the internet doesn't have a personal pager for my issues, and I get that. I'm mostly replying here because I'm seeing that this post is getting a ton of views, and no responses.
Adobe has been closed for the past 11 days for the holidays. I'm sure many of our regular contributors are also still out of town. Sorry for the delay in response. Keep in mind that these forums are largely user to user based.
I'm just disappointed that Adobe's products don't work like they should compared to their competitors
Before I came to Adobe, I was a professional video editor. I find Premiere Pro to be an excellent NLE for my personal projects. If you have specific complaints, I can try to address those. Otherwise, let our team know here.
their support team on the phone is rude from the instant they pick up your call
Odd. If that was your personal experience, then I apologize and hope to remedy that issue. Please PM me the names of agents or any case numbers if anyone was rude to you. I can assist with that.
you're expected to leave it to the community to debug something that Adobe is too lazy to troubleshoot and fix to begin with.
If you are not getting the proper response from any chat or phone support agent, again, send me a message with specifics. Please excuse that Adobe can not directly to every post on these forums (though we try). Sorry.
Regards,
Kevin
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi RandomAnimeGamer!
I'm a consumer and fan of Anime since the 1960s. We didn't have a name for it other than "Japanese Cartoons" back then.
When I select to use the Mercury Playback Engine, which explicitly states it uses my GPU to render, I still see 100% CPU usage with the standard idle GPU usage I get (0-2%). Not only is it selected as my Renderer in ME, but it's also selected as the default Renderer in Premiere Pro's project settings.
That actually can occur in many instances. It really depends on how your sequence is constructed, the media you use, the effects you apply, and what you are exporting.
The other thing you must be absolutely clear on is that encoding video is not a GPU centric process, it's a CPU intensive one. A GPU can help with effects and other video processing not related to the encoding process itself.
For example, for Premiere Pro, the things that could harness the GPU during the exporting process could include the following scenarios or a combination therof:
I hope this explanation helps. Here's more on the topic: Mercury, CUDA, and what it all means
It is very confusing, indeed. Please come back with any questions you may have.
Thanks!
Kevin
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hey Kevin,
Out of curiosity, would "Cross Dissolve" be a GPU-accelerated effect? If not, what would be the GPU-accelerated alternative if any?
Also, which would work better for exporting? An i7-4500U or an i5-6500. The former is a dual-core mobile-series and the latter is a quad-core desktop-series. Theoretically, I'd assume that the latter would export faster, please correct me if I'm wrong.
I still don't understand how video encoding is a CPU-intensive task to the extend it is with Premiere Pro when Sony Vegas Pro seems to handle it through the GPU.
Lastly, it seems the article you linked mentioned that CUDA is an Nvidia-only process. I have an AMD graphics card, so is there any chance that I would be able to use some form of a workaround to this that works for AMD cards? Since you're a staff member of Adobe, is it possible for you to send feedback to ask Adobe to consider working towards having more AMD support in the future?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi there,
Out of curiosity, would "Cross Dissolve" be a GPU-accelerated effect? If not, what would be the GPU-accelerated alternative if any?
It is. All accelerated effects are indicated in the Effects panel if you're curious about options there.
Also, which would work better for exporting? An i7-4500U or an i5-6500. The former is a dual-core mobile-series and the latter is a quad-core desktop-series. Theoretically, I'd assume that the latter would export faster, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Sorry, I don't have any empirical information on which dragster would win that faceoff. You could pose that question in the Hardware forum though. Hardware Forum
I still don't understand how video encoding is a CPU-intensive task to the extend it is with Premiere Pro when Sony Vegas Pro seems to handle it through the GPU.
Vegas might have different encoders than the ones that Premiere Pro uses. Therefore, a GPU in that NLE might assist other processes that Premiere Pro might not. As I understand it, H.264 encoding uses CPU processing in Premiere Pro.
Broadly, H.264 can use both hardware and software processes for encoding, but CPU processing is often used by video engineers for a number of reasons described in the spec (power efficiency, reliability, etc.). H.264/MPEG-4 AVC - Wikipedia
Lastly, it seems the article you linked mentioned that CUDA is an Nvidia-only process. I have an AMD graphics card, so is there any chance that I would be able to use some form of a workaround to this that works for AMD cards?
Sorry for the confusion. Yes, for AMD GPUs you can use OpenCL processing for GPU acceleration instead of CUDA. OpenCL has come a long way since the CS5 era and we now fully support AMD GPUs for GPU acceleration these days.
That article can be confusing as it talks about "CUDA" when the point of the article is more about GPU processing in general. Sorry about that! I'll see if there is something a bit more current available.
Thanks,
Kevin
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Never mind, I updated the driver and is back working
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi, I have a MAC PRO
CPU: 3 GHz 8-Core Intel Xeon E5
RAM: 64 GB 1866 MHz DDR3
Graphic card: AMD FirePro D700 6144 MB
OS: Sierra 10.13.6
When i try to export via AME i cannot select the Hardware/Software preselect under the select menu by using H264 - MP4.
I attach you a screenshot.
How to fix? I need to export via GPU OpenCL
Thanks for letting me know
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
um.... I have that problem to and
I tried to turn off the check box of "Maximum Render Quality" in the export format, then, export again.
After that, After Media Encorder use GPU to encorder (80% usage).
I hope this can help.