CS4 playback very slow

I'm having a problem which may be simular as well.  I have noticed weak playback when I upgraded from 2.0 to cs4 as well.  Only it's with sd footage.  My gear is fast enough to run full HD.  Footage played perfectly in 2.0.  Which is just as frustrating for me since isn't CS4 supposed to run faster on my 64 bit system?  If anyone has an answer for us than please let us know??

Hey Joelgrange,

Are you having any problem in CS4 reading rendered files that you had made before you closed and after you opened it back up again?  If not than I'm having problems with CS4 reading old rendered files and not creating new cache files every time I open it back up.  Read my post when you get the chance.

FX Knight

Usually slow playback is caused in order of importance by:

1. CPU (which one do you have?)

2. Memory

3. Disk setup

4. Processes and services running

5. Lack of tuning

...

...

10. Video card

The impact of these factors is heavily dependent on the source material and sequence settings. Red 2K or AVCHD require much more muscle than HDV of DV. I have no experience with QT Animation so I do not know how that impacts your setup, but if you can give more details, maybe we can find what is causing it.

1. Dual Quad Core - does that mean 2 CPU's, each a Intel Xeon Quad Core?  Which ones? Type number please, like E5420

Which motherboard? Which version of Win7?

2. OK.

3. How many physical disks, what size and speed, what interface, what space available on each?

4. That is not possible, you have at least 20+ running even on a highly tuned system, but possibly more than 60.

5. Indexing on or off, pagefile size and location, Windows managed or fixed, services turned off or stopped, etcetera?

6. OK.

Maybe have a look at the second link included here and report back with the results of DXDIAG and Process Explorer at least. Some suggestions

Joel,

RE: #4, this ARTICLE might give you tips on cleaning up some running programs or Processes.

Good luck,

Hunt

Joel,

At least for the folders, and or HDD's, that are NOT pure .DOC, .TXT, etc., I'd suggest that you turn Windows Indexing OFF. It really cannot get the info that it seeks from your AV, or working files, and WILL slow things down, or even stop them, when it "locks" one of the big files.

Good luck,

Hunt

Regarding Apple QT, many Adobe users (a lot of programs) have had issues with some of the recent versions, 7.6.2 & 7.6.2. Am not sure what they are up to. Judging from the reports on the fora, the "last known good" version was 7.5.5. Prior to that, it was 7.3.5. It seems that most of the 7.4.x series also shut down many Adobe programs. FWIW - I have 7.5.5 Pro and have zero issues with a ton of Adobe programs.

Might be worth looking into.

Good luck,

Hunt

Any other advices would be great.

Don't use Quicktime.

Jim,

Many, you included, get by with that advice. Others do need to use it, from time to time. Myself included.

Still, with the issues, I cannot argue with you. Just glad that 7.5.5 works for me.

Hunt

PS - that is you, isn't it Jim?

Joel,

Have a look here: http://www.blackviper.com/Windows_7/servicecfg.htm

There are some services that are notorious for the burden on the system, even on a very powerful system like yours. However, instead of Disabling a number of services, just stop them and turn them to manual. You can then check whether they are needed or not, if needed they will start.

Antivirus and disk defraggers can cause a relatively large overhead too. During editing you can turn them off.

With the pagefile on C and the source material on C, the question remains where is the media cache, where is the project file and where are your scratch files? The more you spread disk activities among different physical disks, the better for performance. On a system as powerful as yours it may be that your disk setup is the limiting factor, so maybe it would be a good idea to get another disk. You can check your performance by running the PPBM benchmark http://ppbm4.com and sending the results to Bill. That will show how your system performs in comparison to others.

Others do need to use it

Granted, those who HAVE to use it won't be able to follow my advice. But it was intended more for those who don't have to, but still do anyway.  I offered it just in case the poster was in the latter category.