Which file format renders the fastest?

[johnbonicorpuz]

I'm a student and I'm editing variety of file formats and codecs like .wmv, .mp4 (h.264/aac), .mpeg, .mov, and others...

What project settings should I use to render or export these videos fast?

Or, if that is not possible...

What file format should I convert all the videos before editing?

(Like if you are using Final Cut Pro, you convert it to Apple ProRes422 first before you edit)

Thanks guys!

[John T Smith]

The answer is you export to the file format that matches what you are going to DO with the video

You need to tell everyone what you are going to do, then maybe someone will have an idea of a "best" codec to use for your output

[johnbonicorpuz]

Hi,

Thanks for the reply!

What I meant was...

What file format renders (both playback or export) the fastest in Premiere CS5?

I know Premiere CS5 considers a lot of format "native" but I noticed render speed is different with different file formats...

[Todd_Kopriva]

> (Like if you are using Final Cut Pro, you convert it to Apple ProRes422 first before you edit)

I think that you're missing an important point. One of the advantages of Premiere Pro is that you don't have to do that. There's no need to transcode to a separate format for editing. You can just edit using the native file formats.

[johnbonicorpuz]

Sir,

That ProRess422 was just an example...

Here is the real scenario

If my project setting is...

Destop Editing

720x480

29.97fps

Progressive

but I use multiple file types/codecs for that project...

- mov

- wmv (wmv-11)

- mp4 (h.264/aac)

- mpeg (mpeg/mp3)

- FLV

I noticed that...

- the wmv part renders significantly faster than the mp4

- the mov part renders significantly slower than the mpeg

- etc...

[Bill_Gehrke]

Welcome aboard the forum.  Now it will be necessary to know what your hardware system is like.  This can make a big difference.  Do you have a nVidia GPU and is MPE enabled?  What CPU, how much memory?  How many disk drives?

Also when you say "render" are you referring to Rendering the Timeline or are you referring to encoding and then what output format?

[johnbonicorpuz]

Hi,

First of all, I'm a student and I'm using a laptop for Premiere CS5.

Specs:

Intel Core i5-460M

ATI Radeon 5730

4GB RAM

Seagate Momentus XT

I don't have the option to use MPE because I'm using an ATI Radeon GPU...

And oh, about the rendering thing, I'm referring to both (rendering the timeline AND exporting to what format)

Thanks!

[Bill_Gehrke]

Now I can clearly see why you need faster rendering and encoding.  Also with that laptop you probably only have the one disk drive (most likely 5400 rpm), where Adobe's minimum system requirements for CS5 are for a second full speed 7200 rpm drive.  If you take a look at our PPBM5 (Premiere Pro BenchMark) results you will see way down the list with a total score of 1409 a test of a very similar system to yours.  Do you by any chance have access to a faster desktop to use for your encoding runs?

[DoctorBongo]

We have two i5 laptops. I ran some tests with intermediate CODECs (Cineform and Matrox).  In the case of HD footage it didn't help improve workflow or playback quality at all.  The bottleneck is the architecture of a laptop - they just can't move the data around fast enough.  CPU wasn't under much strain, GPU (Nvidia in our case) wasn't being taxed and 8GB of RAM should be plenty for basic editing.  Ours fly editing DV and do OK with HDV but full HD is just beyond reach for more than a couple of streams or any kind of keying.  We do have MXO2 Max units and also eSATA drives attached - the 1st gen i5 systems with Nvidia GPUs are plenty powerful for SD and simple HD jobs.  Encoding the Matrox is fast to H.264 - which is great for BD, Vimeo, iPad etc.  The reason you see variations in decoding and transcoding speed is that codecs vary in complexity. Many are designed for distribution rather than editing OR in the case of AVCHD (and other Mpeg4 variants) highly compressed to save space/bandwidth. As such they need a lot of computing grunt to decode them.  Laptops definitely have limited architecture compared to most desktops. Think of them as having a good engine and tyres but a lousy gearbox.

[johnbonicorpuz]

Thank you, that was insightful...

Given that answer, what is the most 'non-complex' (and-yet-can-still-output-good-quality) codec that I can use in editing?

Thank you!

[Bill_Gehrke]

I think your question was answered above

"Ours fly editing DV and do OK with HDV but full HD is just beyond reach for more than a couple of streams or any kind of keying.   and also eSATA drives attached"

[johnbonicorpuz]

I'm using a Seagate Momentus XT HDD (it's 7200rpm)

Actually it is a Solid State Hybrid Drive...
I don't think the drive is the problem though..

No, I'm not planning to buy a desktop (yet)...
I am saving for a Canon 550D + Lenses...
My cousin uses a Mac Pro so sometimes I edit there using FCP.

[Harm_Millaard]

I'm using a Seagate Momentus XT HDD (it's 7200rpm)

Actually it is a Solid State Hybrid Drive...
I don't think the drive is the problem though..

Sorry, but that is EXACTLY where your problem is. It does not meet minimum requirements.

Minimum requirements are a DEDICATED 7200 RPM SATA disk, next to the OS disk.. To make it worse, that Seagate Momentus is pretty slow by itsself.

For the rest, it is underspecced as well. Slower than molasses in winter.

[Stanley Arthur]

I want to point you back to what John asked. What you are outputting FOR determines what file type you'll output TO. Faster or slower is irrelevant. If you simply go with what renders fastest on your particular workstation, then you may suffer a quality loss for your intended audience.

[Stanley Arthur]

I also would like to add that if your export is for online video hosts (youtube, vimeo, etc.) then H.264 is hands-down the best quality for file size that you can get. H.264 also seems to be the best choice because it just transcodes to Flash better than anything else I've seen. And that's what all those sites do (transcode to Flash).

Now if what you want is blistering H.264 rendering, then raise $850 and get Matrox MXO 2 Mini MAX. It renders H.264 up to 500% faster than real-time.

[johnbonicorpuz]

I do 2 major outputs - for DVD and for Vimeo...

I edit for my film-making organization in my school...
We produce virals and also DVDs for students!

Yes, I usually output my videos in mp4 (H.264 video, AAC audio)...

All I wanna do is output my files with best quality in the fastest time.

And no, I can't afford 850USD just for a Matrox MXO2 Mini Max.

[REALTVONE]

I down loaded a Free program called Freemake then in Adobe  I use the 264 codec or MP4 both work fine on my lap top, I then just drag them into Free make and it converts them to any Media you need Very Fast, I found these to Codecs render fast in Adobe and Freemake is Very Fast no matter what Codec you need.I should mention this is for use wth a PC