What about your comp settings? Ray-traced rendering enabled? Size of the comp? What happens if you delete your preferences and use the default settings?
The settings for the comps are usually 1280x720 in 25p.
I don´t use several filters or fx.
I can not enable the raytracing because AE does´t recognize my graphic card, so I can not use the CUDA.
Things were even worse when settings were as default.
I have the new mac pro with this settings:
3 GHz 8-Core Intel Xeon E5
64 GB 1867 MHz DDR3 ECC
AMD FirePro D700 6144 MB
Software OS X 10.9.2
And the AE performs slower than in my old mac pro.
What were the specs of your old Mac Pro?
What (exact, down to the decimal points) version of AE are you using on the old machine and the new machine?
What are your old machine's memory and multiprocessing settings?
Are you using the exact same project in both to compare?
When you say it "performs slower", what do you mean? The interface, creating a RAM preview, rendering, etc.?
These were my settings on the old machine
Quad-Core Intel Xeon
16 GB de RAM a 1066 MHZ
8 MB de caché
When I say it perfoms slower, I mean it takes a lot to render a project (even to start rendering). Much more than in the old one. The version of the software is the last one.
One reason that it's going to take longer to begin rendering is that you have 12 CPUs that are being used for background rendering, each with its own separate instance of the After Effects application, and each of those needing to load the project. If you have a large project, then loading it into 12 different instances of an application can take a long time. The overhead of Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously is only worth it in some cases; it doesn't always make the overall time to get a final output shorter.
BTW, your RAM reserved for other applications is much too low. It should be a minimum of 1/4 of your installed RAM.
So, Todd, the "Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously" should, generally, be deactivated?
I don't have my new MacPro, couple of months yet, but perhaps reserving about half the CPUs for other applications would help speed up multiframe rendering?
So, Todd, the "Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously" should, generally, be deactivated?
It depends on the kind of work you do. For me, I keep it on most of the time. I know others who leave it off the majority of the time. The reason Adobe gives us the option to change it, is that it's different for different folks.
There's no single answer to that question. Some compositions benefit from this feature; some don't. It depends on the composition, the footage, the computer...
In very general terms, the compositions that benefit most from the Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously multiprocessing feature are those for which the time to render a single frame is very large, so the benefit of processing those frames in parallel outweighs the disadvantage of needing to load the whole project multiple times and do many simultaneous reads from the same footage item(s).
It's a feature that requires a little bit of experimentation to use well. Render a bit of a composition with it and bit without it, and see which is faster.
I go into quite a lot of detail about the relevant factors in the articles linked to from this FAQ entry:
I don't understand why it's even up to the user to figure out what settings are best. Isn't the application in a vastly superior position to know what its resource constraints are at any given moment? Instead I have to try rendering a couple of comps, kill the render, fix the render queue since AE STILL doesn't offer a graceful way to quit and resume renders.
I have to say that one of the attributes of AE that consistently disappoints me is multiprocessing and its accompanying memory management policies. I regularly produce hundreds of network graphics at a go, and I can never reap any benefit from multiprocessing, because AE has to load the entire project into each core, instead of just loading the comps it needs to render at any given time. Similarly, a project that requires 400 heavily-automated versions (a regular occurrence for some of my Latin America clients, where graphics have to be versioned for multiple feeds and languages) can simply choke AE. If it could load this stuff into memory on-the-fly (or at least offload some of it when memory gets tight), this wouldn't be a problem, and I sincerely doubt the performance would be worse than it is now. This is on a previous-gen Mac Pro with 48 GB RAM, so, while not strictly state-of-the-art, it's no slouch.
Heck, even opening some of these projects just to browse their contents is a painful 30-minute process, as AE apparently has to not only load everything into memory before I can even do anything, but, judging by how it hangs for many minutes at 99% on the progress bar, it also seems to be evaluating all the expressions in all the hundreds of comps (presumably so it can render the project thumbnails). And yes, I've tried splitting the projects up, but this leads to its own complications, particularly when revisions come in a week or two later.
I don't want any of this to sound overly negative, since I know AE has a small team and this sort of stuff isn't trivial to implement. I do appreciate this application and all it does, particularly for me creatively and professionally. I just get a bit tired of seeing new releases come every year and this stuff seems to go unaddressed.
We agree that the Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously multiprocessing feature is a mess. That's why we currently have nearly the entire After Effects team working on some infrastructure changes right now to create the foundation for something better.
I can't tell you how happy that makes me. Is memory management a part of the infrastructure in question?
1 person found this helpful
You'll provide details when you can?? talk about non-commital
I read this thread and find I am disgusted with adobe AE's slow performance. I just spent $10k beefing up the fastest Mac Pro I could get for the sole purpose of VFX compositing using AE.... I fresh load the software and run my latest AE comp and there is no noticeable difference in the render times.. I would expect this machine to blow through some of these renders. but making a pre comp from one layer gives me the beach ball of death while I wait.. Crazy.. WTF? That's serious code and memory mismanagement .. by the way, I'm a programmer too. I'm sure it might be a few seconds or even minutes faster, but that just won't cut it.. I've used After Effects since it was in Beta with Cosa.. so needless to say I'm a power user and an expert.. Yet I know that Nodal compositing is a more efficient way to composite. So this may be just the push I need to get into Nuke because this type of sloppy program maintenance is just unacceptable. I've noticed a slow down since CS5.5 or CS6.. but I thought it was my computer, (almost 10 years old mac) I guess not.. You almost had us fooled. Shame on you Adobe. AE is 20 years old.. I guess we're not celebrating are we..... AE still holds a great deal of the VFX compositing work in the industry, but this new mac pro will point out that you're still compositing in the stone age if you're using AE.
I thought Nuke died years ago, that's how completely out of tune I am.
Cost for the basic Nuke package seems to be around US$5,000 so you either have capital to spend or you think (or know) that the gains in efficiency/speed will more than offset your investments in new software and the required learning curve.
AE obviously is no longer a useful tool for your productions, I hope Nuke works for you. Please come back and let us know how it's going.
No Shake died years ago. Nuke is going strong.
I did spend US$10,000 on a computer.. so.. I'll probably spend US$8,000 on NukeX. And yes, I wasted so much time just waiting for previews in AE. I think it's time to move on.
Adobe has done something quite monumental here... if you think about it.. for as many years as I can remember, the computer was the slow link in the chain. We used to long for faster hardware so we could render faster and save time, but here we are in the 21st century, and Adobe has gone and flipped the script. They neglected their software so much, that the hardware became faster. That's a monumental blunder. As a programmer myself.. that's not an easy thing to do. I'd venture to say, the render engine probably hasn't been updated in 15 years if at all. For the hardware to actually be waiting for the software?? That doesn't even compute.
AE is only useful to me because I've used it for 20 years and I know it oh so well.. Even though, as I said, Nodal based compositing is the more efficient way to work. I just needed a kick out of the nest.
Was just about to author a very similar post in the interest of find out what settings will allow me to make the most of my new 2013 Mac Pro? Rendering and refresh shouldn't only be marginally better than a 2011 Quad-Core with a 16GB RAM, single 1.3Gig Nvidia GTX570.
Currently running 2014.0.2 (126.96.36.199), on a 3.5ghz 6-Core, with 32GB of RAM and the dual D500s. All the media is being pulled in off a 12TB Thunderbolt 2 RAID 5.
Let's push this machine as far as it can go! I want flames coming out the top, right now I probably couldn't keep my coffee warm
Very interested to see the next update, cheers!
I'm having a similar experience. I just upgraded to a new Mac Pro and AE CC is just running really slow in general. I am using a plug-ins like Particular and Plexus 2 in a project that I had been working on with my old computer and on the Mac Pro I get the Mac spinning beach ball even if I just want to move a solid. I have not changed my settings. Final rendering seems fine. It's just working on my project is so slow! I even have lag when I scroll up and down my timeline.
Wow... I am also experiencing marginal improvements on the new Mac Pro in AE. Other software, either optimized for OpenCL or better optimized for multiple threads really sees DRAMATIC improvement. But for AE it is such a disappointment.
It's comforting, while also a bit disturbing, to know that I'm not the only one experiencing these issues. But there's that sinking feeling you get after throwing $4k down on a machine and seeing hardly an improvement on the software you use day-to-day.
@Todd_Kopriva, until recently I've always considered AE to be a rockstar, and I know that's because you have a great team over there. So If there are any opportunities to hand off some updates you are working on to the "power users" so we can put it through some real world testing, I'd be pleased to jump on some pre-release software and do some side-by-side comparisons. Hopefully something constructive can come from all this feedback...
Without wanting to sound condescending, because I genuinely understand your complaints, I must point out here that some of the onus here belongs to the hardware purchaser. How carefully did you assess the purchase of the Mac Pro?
In my own facility, we were torn about which hardware to purchase this year. After lots of research of available benchmarks, and assessment of what hardware After Effects relies on, we decided not to buy Mac Pros just yet, and bought a bunch of fully specced out iMacs for now.
The thinking for this:
• All the benchmarks we found showed AE performance didn't get a significant enough bump to justify Mac Pro expense. If you're a FCPX editor, Mac Pros are a no brainer - FCPX is optimised for this hardware. But AE is not.
• A significant part of a Mac Pro's cost is in GPUs, which are irrelevant to our main AE use.
• The cost of one reasonably specced Mac Pro workstation was about equal to two fully specced iMac 27" i7 workstations, with 1TB SSDs and 32GB of RAM.
• Any new generation tech is fraught with danger. We decided the 2nd Generation Mac Pro will be a much safer bet, especially since they are manufacturing in an entirely new facility, and the machine itself is a major new design.
Personally all our Macs are on lease. Our IT department automatically upgrades us about once every two years. I guess shame on our IT department for trusting a software company as tiny and unknown as Adobe to make software where they considered some of their Pro users preferred hardware choices?
Still having this problem with my MacPro.
[link removed... Mod]
Any response from the Adobe team on this? Or is it still a non-issue, no priority? Waiting a month or two for a fix is one thing, but this issue is almost a year old.
It's safe to say based on public statements here and on their blog that this issue is a priority or the AE team, but it is also pretty clear that they have their work cut out for them, so I, for one, don't expect immediate results. I am very excited about what I have heard from them on this topic, both publicly and privately, and I genuinely get the sense that they are listening to feedback here and taking it to heart. I know that doesn't really help folks who need results right now, but I think it's the best answer you can possibly hope to get for now.
Sorry, a year old problem that has not been a priority is not the same as being impatient and asking for an "immediate solution."
Besides when using Cineware, my new lab of Mac Pros seem to be running AE CC 2014 incredibly fast. We have the 6-core running Mavericks and so far so good, sans Cineware.
BUMP! Some comment from Adobe would be helpful to assure us Mac pro users that AE and Premiere will utilise the full potential of our work tools in the near future please.
As I'm sure most of you do, I almost always have Ae and premiere running simultaneously and have noticed that AE seems to be the reason why things (mainly rendering previews in the timeline) tend to grind to a halt. It seems like things work as expected for around 10mins, after which I notice that the CPU starts refusing to do any work. See my screen grab - I tried rendering a preview of a short AE comp (in premiere) and noticed that the CPU remained at 98% idle. After closing AE and rendering the same comp (after deleting the preview files) things flew along and I let a smile creep onto my face!
That said, this is obviously not the best workaround! Can anyone shed any light onto why this is happening?
Media is on an External LACIE (RAID0) over thunderbolt
writing previews to my internal SSD (writing previews to an external Lacie SSD proved dramatically slower!)
Mac Pro (late 2013)
3Ghz 8 core
Dual AMD D700s
Thanks in advance!
Thanks a lot for your response.
I was thinking on purchasing an external disc for the video files and disc caché...can you tell me how did you set up AE? any recommendation regarding external disks?
Sooo... new to AE... and the entire [CC] suite, though I've been a photoshop/indesign/DW user for years.
And... frankly... I'm stunned at how sloooowwwww AE is. I've been trying to render about 15 seconds of AE effects, and it's now been processing for 43 minutes... with an estimated 33 minutes to go. (It's said estimated 33 minutes since it started)
I haven't gone in and tweaked things... I decided to search for "AE slow on Mac Pro"... and ended up here.
Like the other posted said... a YEAR of waiting for this problem to be resolved is not asking too much.
As others noted: Quad nMP with 32gb ram and the dual 300's. (Seems it doesn't matter what graphic card you use at this point.) Throwing my hat in the pool to say "Get on it Adobe! WTH?"
Just installed 13.2 - realized I haven't kept up as to whether multi-processing has finally been improved. Last I had read, it was being "overhauled significantly". Has anyone been using it with great success? It should would be nice to be able to really leverage the 6 processors I have running right now...
That overhaul hasn't been released yet. It's still in the works.
At least Adobe's telling people they're working on fixes -- it's more than you get from Apple.
You really should have done your homework before wasting your money on the new Mac Pros for AE work.
The performance issues of AE have been talked about on here for years. If AE doesn't use the power of a 2010 Mac Pro what chance do you have?
So although you are justified in your questions of Adobe's seemingly pathetic focus in this area, they have explained they are working really hard to address it. We like others on here opted for the Nvidia equipped IMacs as a stop gap.
So fingers crossed in a year or so you may get a usable version of AE. Going on recent experiences of the complete lack of quality control on AE releases you might be better looking else where. The man hours we are wasting keeping up with the constant issues is beyond a joke!
Same problem here.
Bought a late 2013 Mac Pro (3.5 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon e5 // 32 GB DDR3 // 500 GB SSD // Dual 3 GB AMD D500) and hardly notice a difference from my
mid 2011 iMac (3.4 GHz i7 // 16 GB DDR3 // 256 GB SSD). Even my late 2013 MacBook Pro seems faster (2.3 GHz i7 // 16GB DDR3 // 500 GB SSD // NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB).
I should have done my research first.
I can't stand the long render times in After Effects, and am trying to figure out what I should do. Should I hang with the Mac Pro and wait for Adobe to release better software? Or should
I quit Mac altogether () and build a custom PC with Nvidia video cards that my Adobe programs can actually use? Or should I ditch AE in favor of Nuke? I work frequently with raw video files
(r3d and dng) at resolutions that vary from 1920 x 1080 to 4k. Additionally, I'm getting more and more into some 3D work (C4D and Element).
Any experience, insight, or advice would be appreciated.
And Adobe, thanks for putting up with us fast-paced consumers being impatient when your software won't work well with our new hardware. Though, I am curious if you're working on stuff, and how far out it is.
Get the PC. Let us know what changes.
I have the same MacPro, maybe a bit earlier so a bit less oomph than yours.
I do not run Premiere, I use FCPX. I prefer AE to Apple's Motion because I've used AE for 15-20 years (and someday soon I might figure it out). I can't say my newer machine renders AE projects any more slowly than my previous giant aluminum box MacPro because I have forgotten everything about that machine. But I do not get the feeling that AE is sluggish or unstable at all.
Every time Apple gives us a new machine (to spend our money on), Adobe tries to get the most out of it. But the two companies don't work together when planning the future. I think Adobe catches up when it can.
Every time Apple gives us a new Mac, some of us try to get some benchmarks together, a set of standardized test renders. The project never seems to work out. But someone MUST have a series of reliable benchmarks for AE running on various platforms. Gotta be out there, maybe. If you post a benchmark project file someplace where I can get to it form behind my corporate firewall, I'll run it for you.
Has there been any movement on this performance issue? Does anyone know when the next AE/Prem update might be coming from Adobe + if it will address these issues?