GPU Hardware accellaration

[NightsGamingHD01]

Here is the problem I'm having now with adobe premeire pro cc 2018. I want to use (Hardware Accelleration). But I'm not running intel I am running AMD now please Intel fans don't give a crappy respones that it's just AMD ryzen. now in adobe premeire pro cc 2017 was able to use this when converting over video's now since i have went to 2018 adobe premeire pro 2018 i am not able to use and i want to enable to this option again here are my specs to my computer

asus B350 motherboard ,ryzen 1600x proceossor ,16gigs of ram DDR4 ,and 6T hardrive SSD (please help if possible)

[yenaphe]

Hello,

GPU hardware acceleration has nothing to do with your CPU. SO don't worry about your Ryzen.

It only has to do with your graphic card. Which one do you have on your system?

[NightsGamingHD01]

yenaphe.. yes i get that but how comes it's not using my GPU and it's only using my CPU which is not good for the hardware accelleration should be able to use the GPU not the CPU this is when it comes exporting the file not watching inside adobe premeire pro cc2018

[R Neil Haugen]

PrPro uses the CPU for standard encoding and always has. The GPU is used for those parts of a sequence where those effects that are on the GPU Accelerated Effects list  ... things like Lumetri and other color correction, Warp Stabilizer, major resizing, that sort of thing.

I'm on my phone or I'd link to the list online. It's available from the links at the top of the Overview page.

My GPU works when those things are on the sequence and only as things are sent to it from the CPU. As always.

The mention in the summary section of the export dialog has nothing to do with GPU use. Only with whether your CPU has the acceleration internally built into the newer Intel ones.

Neil

[NightsGamingHD01]

if that is so then why in the encording part of the program it only said software not hardware and this is when it's time to export the file into what ever you want. like mp4 or MXF. So on and so forth i still should be able to pic on of these not have them grayed out

[R Neil Haugen]

If you have a dedicated GPU that PrPro can use, and have Mercury Acceleration set to other than Software Only in project settings  .... and are using GPU accelerated effects,  *then* ... PrPro will use the GPU for those sections of the sequence where those GPU accelerated effects are happening.

And nowhere else.

Neil

[juanmario]

I do not know if this comment confuses or clarifies.

The coding of the hardware is not a novelty of the cc 2018, since in the cc 2017.1.2 it has this characteristic.

Hardware coding will be present if it has Intel support.

The hardware encoding is only compatible with the progressive field order, and is not compatible with 2 PASS and High10.

The hardware coding intervenes only for the creation of the final file and does not process the effects that have been applied.

[megacinn]

@juanmario

I totally agree with your comment.

maybe one addition ....

<<<<and is not compatible with 2 PASS and High10>>>>  yes , but 10bit encoding could/would be part of the capabilities of intels Quicksyncvideo in case you have one of the newest 2017 chipsets //see "intel ark"....... but yes , adobe does not support it at the moment.

... the term and option "hardware acceleration" first appeared in version 12.1.0 (april 2018). If someone is installating as an enterprise-customer, you will notice that the "updater" from any version before in this case is marked as a "full installer". I got this information as well confirmed by adobe.

...but you are right...it seems that even in 12.0.1 (the good working version) it does not make any difference in selecting any of the "renderer" options in MediaEncoder...always the same cpu-load and rendering time (just checked it).

For what reason is that option ??????

@neil

<<<<

PrPro will use the GPU for those sections of the sequence where those GPU accelerated effects are happening.

And nowhere else.>>>>>

NO ...

the selection is and was called "video rendering and PLAYBACK".

If you have a plain sequence with, for example native 4K clips and absolute no effects attached, you will notice a huge difference between mercuryplayback set to "software only" (= super stuttery) , and some CUDA or other GPU acceleration (=smooth playback).

The renderbar above the timeline immediately chages from red to yellow (in my case)

So in this case , the dedicated gpu will be used for reading the native clips and sending the stream to the videocards framebuffer (or I/O-box). If this would not be the case , what reason should have the checkbox besides the option "mercury transmit" !?

This is the current dilemma of adobe's official announcements and some comments.

The confusing mixture of these 2 different "accelerations" (see my comment above).

The most important result is, you cannot mix both at the same time, because the date will be sent to either one or the other chip.

Therefore the options are sometimes greyed out.

so, finally @ billh ...

as you are using a powerfull AMD-cpu , you should be able to see and use the mercuryoptions as before , but you should have the "hardwareaccelaration " in the exportsettings greyed out.

If not.....it is one more of theses bugs of this totally betastage-software 12.1.x

[Ann Bens]

so, finally @ billh ...

as you are using a powerfull AMD-cpu , you should be able to see and use the mercuryoptions as before , but you should have the "hardwareaccelaration " in the exportsettings greyed out.

The mercury options MPE have nothing to do with the cpu but with the gpu of the videocard.

But as OP did not mention what videocard he is using which he wants to use again as he did in 2017. Its all guess work for now.

[juanmario]

megacinn  escribió

... the term and option "hardware acceleration" first appeared in version 12.1.0 (april 2018). ..................................................... I got this information as well confirmed by adobe.

Excuse me, but no, my exact comment was:

• The coding of the hardware is not a novelty of the cc 2018, since in the cc 2017.1.2 it has this characteristic.

Tutorial Activar QSV Premiere CC2017 1 2 YouTube - YouTube

Maybe Adobe did not want to reveal its secrets ...

[R Neil Haugen]

When I uncheck Mercury Acceleration, my renders occasionally are slower. But for clips that have no GPU effects the change is negligible. For clips with GPU effects there is a big difference.

If I have a sequence of untouched clips, playback is marginally affected by changing the M. A. setting. However tracking GPU use, it doesn't change. The GPU wasn't involved before, nor was it involved afterwards. So I do not see evidence of GPU activity on non-Gpu involved effects.

And red and yellow bars are "suggestions", as to the likelihood of dropping frames. I have yellow bar areas that drop a ton of frames and red bars that never do. I pay little attention to them anymore.

Neil

[NightsGamingHD01]

what the gpu is better for exporting in hardware acceleration not matter you never want to put a high load of the cpu at all. and ever when you are doing HDR stuff you know it would hours just to do that with CPU. that is what the GPU is for is to use the hardware where do you get off that GPU has nothing to do with hardware accelerations the GPU save Less time and encodes faster then the CPU have ran more video editor like vegas pro and cyberlink power director with hardware acceleration on both of them programs and it beat adobe premeire pro in 32mins and it took me freaking 9 Hours just to encode HDR now see dont tell me that GPU has nothing to do it with it what would saying your motherboard as nothing to do with your CPU. hardware acceleration needs to be enable for use to use on RYZEN NOT INTEL. i am not running INTEL at all

[NightsGamingHD01]

yes it is grayed about and should not be at all. encording and playback is only for the playback through the adobe premeire pro not encording which would take less time using the GPU Hardware acceleration and not CPU. CPU take longer and more time to encode with a heavy work load and the GPU takes less time to Encode Now i have used more then on took for this test. like vages pro and cyberlink power director. this of them for the encoding now only take 32mins in HDR for a 50min video after editing and ect. now when you do this and the CPU it would take 8 hours to render that on the CPU. Once you use your GPU hardware acceleration it takes less time So yes in the part where it's all grayed out need to be not grayed out. I have to say not all the world is going to run out and get a INTEL Processor. WHEN you can get RYZEN 7 1800X OR 2700X FOR UNDER THE PRICE OF INTEL PC AND HAVE MORE PCI LANES

[R Neil Haugen]

Whatever any us us users wants or thinks should happen is what we as individuals want or think. And it's fine to discuss what we think ​should​ happen, be an option, all that sort of thing. As any other user, I have at times opinions and wishes that are rather starkly different than what the app actually allows.

Such is Life.

In working though, well, what is Reality is what I have to deal with. I still want SpeedGrade to be rebuilt and brought back in Direct Link as in the 2014 and first 2015 releases. Ain't happening. So I've learned to work with Lumetri and am pretty good & fast with it. And I ​also​ know when I've got something I'm running over to or through Resolve for color.

How other apps behave, what they use GPU or CPU or Jack knows what for, is interesting discussion and can easily give points supporting a push for something in the UserVoice system. They have been steadily increasing the things that the GPU is used for over the years, and many of us would like that to move a bit faster. I've certainly pushed for wider GPU use both here, the feature report system, and when at NAB visiting (and always arguing!) with engineers for several years now.

For a long time, the AMD hardware was simply not built such that the code of PrPro could use it well. My gamer friends have loved AMD for some time of course, and for gaming it's been a cheaper and at times faster gear than Intel.

But that's gaming ... and gaming software is ​not ​the same as NLE code.

PrPro teams have spent their time where it seemed they got the best results for their clients. Mac & PC's with Intel guts.

In the last two years, AMD has made amazing strides into traditional computing capabilities. The most recent things I've seen for testing systems in NLE's by those who commercially build some of the best out there is they can still get a bit farther out on performance with Intel ... but certainly can build AMD rigs that work very hot & fast with PrPro and other video post software. That said, optimizing code for both Intel and now AMD needs to be done.

I ​like​ competition. I do hope the PrPro design team ups the ability of PrPro to use AMD gear and that right quickly.

But again, that's back to what I ​hope​. Reality is what's here now. Well, there's another release they've announced at IBC, so should be a few weeks and we'll see what we get with the next release.

Currently, a lot of people are confused by various settings and naming issues. For instance, in Project settings you can set it for some sort of "Mercury Acceleration" which just means GPU use, and the non-GPU phrase is "software only mode". In Preferences, you can set it to use accelerated H.264 encoding. But ... go to the Export dialog, and in the summary, it says ... "software only" ... !

That is confusing as all get out.

The ​summary​ section of the Export dialog, when is says "software only", refers to whether or not your computer's CPU is a specific sub-set of recent Intel chips that have a specialized additional bit of hardware in them. If you have one of those few chips, the CPU does internally set H.264 encoding. All other CPUs, it's the same behavior as always ...

And this Export dialog software summary comment of "software only" has only to do with having one of those specific chips. Nothing whatever to do with the Mercury Acceleration setting, or the presence or lack of an appropriate GPU.

As to the GPU, note that above I've stated that when I set the Mercury Acceleration in the Project settings to Software only, I get fairly close to the same playback and exports as for clips that have no GPU accelerated effects there. Not exactly the same, but close.

So ... that proves, the GPU is doing something, right?

Well ... no. When I watch GPU usage while testing this, GPU use ain't involved either way. The ​CPU​ behaves a bit differently, leading me to assume the underlying code is a bit different and is maybe more efficiently using my machine when MA is set to CUDA even when ​it's not using the CUDA capabilities of my GPU at all.

​Even though I'd have preferred to buy the cheaper AMD parts, I've stuck with the Intel/Nvidia stuff for three computers now just because I work in Realville. It's what gets the job done best at this time.

I hope both AMD and the PrPro developers get that side working better soon, as again ... more competition is a very good thing.

Neil

[NightsGamingHD01]

I am glad you love intel and that your intel fan. I had one the best intel I7 which was the 960 but we are not talking about Intel and cheaper parts. I Understand that you are Intel fan boy thats fine. but still why would even want to put a heavy load of the cpu at all when your graphics card is suppose to handle the hardware acceleration. Mercury Acceleration and nothing to do with exporting as i should say HDR file.  that is for video play back only nothing more when it comes to exporting HDR Video and also doing Color correction at all.  Mercury Acceleration is only a play back engine thats all their really no confusing at all here. just because i dont have the money like others go out a buy 2,500 dollars cpu i am glad you can. And I understand that you and other dont like AMD but thats not what we are talking about this forms are suppose to help you not sit and fan boy about Intel or AMD. I've also reinstalled. CC2017 of adobe premeire pro and i can tell you that works with Hardware acceleration just fine and dont take me 5/8 Hours to exporting/encoding a video in HDR.

[R Neil Haugen]

Apparently you didn't read my post. Nothing in your latest post has anything to do with anything I've ever written here.

I've never owned a rig with a CPU over like $400. I have never suggested anyone buy such a rig. I said as I have frequently that I'm thrilled AMD is coming along and there are some good editing rigs I've heard of built on AMD.

I've noted that the PrPro team has improved their use of AMD hardware and suggested anyone interested post requests on the PrPro UserVoice system for more efforts there. Repeatedly on this forum.

And you reply I'm an Intel fanboy suggesting people buy $2500 CPUs.

Wow.

Neil

[Ann Bens]

FAQ: Why is my GPU not available for Mercury Pl... |Adobe Community

[megacinn]

@ billh...

things with the acceleration have dramtically changed in 2018.

I just made an in depth investigation about this issue, since I got very vague ..sometimes missleading answers especially from high adobe officials.

fact is :

since 2018 / premiere 12.1.0 we are talking about 2 different accelerations.

1st .. the former "mercury playback -CUDA / Metal / OpenCL" ...should be the same as before, but in fact is not working the same as before.

2nd.. the new "hardware acceleration" you can select in the export settings.

this one is based solely on the internal graphics-cards of Intel-CPU's like I7 (from 6th gen and up).

Depending on the generation of your I7, there is more support for H264 / H265 /decoding and encoding ...the newer the series ...the more capabilities.

more information look on Intels Ark-site ...look for "Intel-Quicksync"

That means, depending on your exportsettings , and what premiere indicates as capable from the hardware (CPU) , you can select this option, or it is greyed out. (in case of an AMD ...no quicksync ...no option)

Now it becomes confusing....going one step further , by opening the MediaEncoderwindow, you will notice the selection of "mercuryPlayback-cuda (openCL)....").

Very misleading from adobe, it suggests that we are talking about the same .

But In fact , if you could select "hardware..." in the previous window, all encoding tasks are handled to the CPU/IntelGraphics only.

If you were'nt able to select "hardware.." then everything can be processed by the GPU. (your case)

additional:

the former mercuryplayback /GPU supports many codecs and accelerates them.

the new "hardwaresupport by IntelCPU" is only capable to accelerate H264/H265  ( see IntelQuickSyncVideo).

and worst of all .... it does not function properly at the moment

so, finally ...AMD users should have quite the same GPU support as before , but cannot make use of the new "hardware"-feature

Professionals with very expensive and powerfull workstations have always XEON's built in.

From those, only a handfull are equipped with the necessary graphics-option. These are only the smallest ones (4 -6 cores).

[NightsGamingHD01]

yea i seen the new encoder that is for I7 and the I9 as well this was working on the 2017 version and no i am not talking about the playback with "mercury playback -CUDA / Metal / OpenCL" ... that is only for seeing the file not exporting it to like 4K hdr or anything like that which that does work. now for exporting i am trying to figure out why i am always in software mode which is not good overload the cpu to 100% and that is not something i like at all which i should be able to use my evga gtx 1060 ssc and i am not able to

[NightsGamingHD01]

oh megacinn i am not running I7 or I9 i am ryzen I could not build a intel this time around so might what to look at my specs again that wrote. because i am on a RYZEN 1600X cpu and EVGA GTX 1060 SSC WITH 16GIGS of RAM DDR4