1 Reply Latest reply on Sep 22, 2013 10:09 AM by Todd_Kopriva

    What is the recommendations on rendering>?

    fastnoc Level 1

      I've just really gotten going on using AE, and i got frustrated pretty quickly. Mostly with render times, and overall performance.


      I had a GeForce GTX 560 Ti and while it did ok, if I rendered anything that i used a heavy plugin, like Particular, it would take a tremendous amount of time to render.

       

      After researching a little, and squeezing the wallet, I just couldn't afford one of those billion dollar cards you guys use, so i bought a GTX 770 SC.

       

      I read that the program says it's not supported yet, but will be in October. i changed the file in the system to recognize my card, and that worked. So iit is definitely using the card.


      But one issue I'm struggling with as a newbie is understanding rendering. I have been, up until tonight, dropping my projects into Adobe Media Encoder. Tonight, when i installed this new card, I put a GPU meter on my desktop so i could monitor it's use. I noticed when i put the project in media encoder it was barely touching the graphics card. I guess it's trying to render everything from the CPU. Which i don't undetrstand because the 770has the actual architecture for h264 encoding right?

       

      So i put the same file in the render queue of AE and it immediately pegged the card, so i'm confident it's using it. I did the tweaks i see recommended and set it to use th max cpu etc.


      What i don't quite get i guess is why i should render in the program. I mean, i assumed the media queue would be the best. Why would there be a dedicted app for it? The other reason, is using the regular render machine I don't see options for the h264 so i never really knew how to configure it. whereas the encoder puts out a perfect result for 1080p upload to YouTube. The same file it renders and gives me at 50m will be 3g if I render directly to an avi.


      So I guess my point is, what is the best way to render? is there a reason I can't get the encoder program itself to utilize the GPU? What i will end up doing is rendering this as a goliath file, then bringing it back into the encorder to crunch it up and reduce the file size to leave me a fair quality that's reaasonable to upload.


      I'm eger for any suggestions. i don't mind using the AE queue at all, I just don't know which is the best option.


      Thanks everyone.


      p.s. i did change the prefes for simultaneous frames, etc, and raised the allocation to the max. So i think i'm good there.

       

      I'm running a test on a very heavy encoding project now. This is what my 'stuff' is doing. This looks about right to me, no?

      stuff.jpg

      By the way, the picture is slighly decieving. The GPU pegs to 100% then cycles down then back up.  the SS shows it in the middle.

        • 1. Re: What is the recommendations on rendering>?
          Todd_Kopriva Level 8

          > I had a GeForce GTX 560 Ti and while it did ok, if I rendered anything that i used a heavy plugin, like Particular, it would take a tremendous amount of time to render.

           

          After researching a little, and squeezing the wallet, I just couldn't afford one of those billion dollar cards you guys use, so i bought a GTX 770 SC.

           

          ...

           

          is there a reason I can't get the encoder program itself to utilize the GPU?

           

          The GPU has very little to do with the speed of processing in After Effects, and it has nothing to do with the speed of processing in Adobe Media Encoder. The CPU, RAM, and disk setup are all much more important.

           

          See this page for details of the few things that the GPU is used for:

          http://adobe.ly/AE_CUDA_OpenGL_GPU

           

          See this page for resources about making After Effects work faster: http://adobe.ly/eV2zE7

           

          See this page for information about hardware for After Effects: http://adobe.ly/pRYOuk