12 Replies Latest reply on Jan 20, 2011 7:14 AM by davidbeisner2010

    AME Batch Encoding stupid slow

    FuelMe Level 1

      This questions has been asked before here but there has not been any satisfactory answer to it yet as far as I can tell.

      The issue is that some of us (not Harm, I know) see extremely slow export speeds using AME CS5 versus exporting directly out of Premiere.

       

      In my case this is true regardless of what format I encode to.

      All source files are AVCHD. Regardless if I try to batch encode to WMV, Blu Ray H.264, or MPEG2-DVD, export times are at least 3 times slower than if I just export directly out of PPro. This defeats the purpose of having a batch encoder in the first place.

       

      This is the case on ALL My workstations, including this one:

       

      1) Intel 980X; Win7 Pro; 24Gig Ram, 128Gb SSD boot + 450Gb VelRaptor + 640Gb WD Cav Black + 1TB Cav Black (to spread media, scratches,etc. etc. around); 1Gb NVIDIA GTX 285; nothing but production software, no antivirus or anything else. Mercury Playback Engine is always activated. No non-GPU accelerated effects are used.

       

      I played around with the Windows task manager priority settings and that didn't help.

       

      So if there is ANYONE who has a solution to this, that would be wonderful.

       

      Thanks

        • 1. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
          davidbeisner2010 Level 3

          My speeds out of AME are slower than directly out of export on PPro, but not significantly so... Think maybe 1.5x slower.

           

          function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

          FuelMe wrote:

           

          This defeats the purpose of having a batch encoder in the first place.

           

          I actually disagree with you here. I think the biggest reason for batch encoding (and certainly the best reason, IMHO) is that you can set things up and let them run overnight, while you're off in a meeting, over the weekend, etc. That, to me, is the strong point of AME now being standalone and allowing batch encoding. If I'm in the middle of work and I need something encoded before I can take the next step, I use export directly from Premiere, get up, go to the bathroom, grab my fifth cup of coffee, rag on my graphic designer for using a Mac, etc... then come back and keep working when it's done. If I don't need it right away, I'll set it up to batch encode and start it before I leave work at the end of the day.

           

          As for an explanation for AME being slower than direct export, IIRC it has something to do with the CUDA support being available from within PrPro and not from within AME. BUT... I'm so foggy on that, I'm not going to commit to that being the right answer!

          • 2. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
            Jim_Simon Level 8

            I believe CUDA will accelerate from AME if the Project setting for it was on when the sequence was queued.  Otherwise the PPBM5 would not be able to tell the difference between on and off.

             

            I kind of agree that ideally there should be no difference in export times whichever method is used.  Something here isn't right.

            • 3. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
              FuelMe Level 1

              It depends on how much stuff you have to get done. For example, I need to convert 30 movies into DVD format ASAP.

              Each one takes about 30 minutes to encode directly out or PPro.

              If I use AME it takes 1.5hours and longer.

              Do this 30 times and "letting it run overnight" isn't going to fly.

               

              I expect more from a professional solution.

              • 4. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
                FuelMe Level 1

                Not entirely sure what you mean by that but I have the Project open, make sure I select the proper timeline/sequence, then go to Export and put it in queue.

                BTW, there is no difference in speed if I leave PPro open or close it while AME is running.

                • 5. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
                  Jim_Simon Level 8

                  There wouldn't be.  PP and AME are different apps.


                  • 6. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
                    FuelMe Level 1

                    Oh of course, I was just pointing this out to whoever else is reading this to make it clear that it's not just a performance or system resource issue either.

                    • 7. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
                      Stan Jones Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                      I haven't done large batch jobs yet: dynamic link is replacing what I thought would be more frequent batches.

                       

                      So I'm following along for when I need to understand the speed difference.

                       

                      What do you mean by exporting from PP vs AME?  AME is what does the encoding in either case, right?  The difference you are describing is a single export, then immediately encoded in ame vs a batch of two or more?

                      • 8. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
                        FuelMe Level 1

                        Direct export: File > Export > Media > EXPORT

                         

                        AME in this case means: File > Export > Media > QUEUE

                         

                        If I put stuff in the queue and let AME batch encode, it takes around 3 times as long. Hope this makes sense?

                        • 9. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
                          davidbeisner2010 Level 3

                          That's correct...

                           

                          Stan, though the AME engine handles the encoding work directly from PrPro, it is also now a standalone program that you can run without ever having to open PrPro (you can even import projects into it and select sequences from it, negating the need to open PrPro in the first place, once editing is complete).

                           

                          Fuel, you say you expect more from a professional solution... can you give an example of an encoder that works faster? I'm not familiar with any other encoders out there that are 64-bit, work seemlessly with the editing program, and that can take advantage of CUDA support.

                           

                          Though you've attempted to demonstrate that its not a resources issue, I would encourage you to visit www.ppbm5.com and download and run the benchmarking stuff and post your results. I've only seen two or three reports of such a drastic difference in speed between AME and PrPro (usually it's just a few percentage points) and every other time I've seen it, though the configured system sounded great, the benchmarking app showed they were suffering. The thread covering those other folks was sometime early last fall, I believe. You may be able to find it if you search for you.

                           

                          I can guarantee you that if this product was truly "stupid slow" there would be a lot more folks out there complaining about it, and you wouldn't find the huge group of professionals that you have here using it on a daily basis. They'd be going out to find something faster. The fact that they're still using it tells me that it's got a lot going for it. Just something for you to think about...

                          • 10. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
                            Stan Jones Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                            Direct export: File > Export > Media > EXPORT

                             

                            AME in this case means: File > Export > Media > QUEUE

                            Duh.  CS5 change over CS4.  I have nothing to add; not doing AVCHD and have no hardware acceleration.  I did a quick test just to see the export window.  My 10 minute bars and tones (in an AVCHD sequence) was taking 30 minutes in a direct export.  took 1 1/2 minutes added to queue.

                             

                            Pardon my intrusion....

                            • 11. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
                              Stan Jones Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                              though the AME engine handles the encoding work directly from PrPro, it is also now a standalone program that you can run without ever having to open PrPro (you can even import projects into it and select sequences from it, negating the need to open PrPro in the first place, once editing is complete).

                              That aspect of ame was added with CS4.  The very nice modification in CS5 is a direct export (I assume it is ame) from PR without the ame window opening, etc.

                              • 12. Re: AME Batch Encoding stupid slow
                                davidbeisner2010 Level 3

                                Thanks for the correction, Stan... I had CS4 for a very short time... went almost directly from CS3 to CS5...