Some of the reasons for potential slowdowns while rendering may be:
- Output Module settings (codecs/encoding/multiple output modules, multiple resolutions)
- Drive Speed
- Network BUS Speed
- Memory and Multi-processing settings
Can you provide more info about your queued render items? How about your system set up? That info may help yield better results on this end. If you're using multiprocessing, you may want to try to disable it for a test render and see what your results are. Also, you should check out this FAQ.
1080p to FotoJPEG (QT) or CineForm, doesn't matter :/
I thought about that. But honestly, how is this possible? The full video is about 100mb, not a big thing.
Also, I tested it with my SSD, no Difference there.
->Network BUS Speed
How is this related?
These are my Multi-Processoring settings:
I only queue one Item at a time.
What else you need to know about my setup?
It looks like you're likely starving your cores of RAM, which is in turn slowing down ther render. Each core should have 2GB of RAM for background processing. You're allocating .75GB. Way too little. Either try disabling "Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously", or increase the allocated RAM/Core, or decrease the number of used cores, and adjust RAM allocation accordingly.
The Network BUS might have mattered if your doing a lot of Read/Write over the wire of major frame sizes and significant compression/decompression. Same for Disk Speed, however, I don't think either of these is the culprit. I think it's your memory settings.
I read several tests where giving the cores more RAM didn't brought any big effect. Also, before I formatted my PC lately, it worked fine that way
Decreasing the Cores is kinda stupid I think, I don't have 16cores to not using them or do I get this wrong?
I'll try that, just rendering somethin so I can have a comparsion!
something strange happend:
I started the render (with the Settings from above) and all cores were working hard. Now after 8 minutes, only 12% CPU is used...?
1 person found this helpful
it may not be so "stupid" to use less cores if it means their access to RAM is inadequate. Adobe recommends 2G minimum for AFX. As TR pointed out you're basically starving them by allocating so little.
You say you didn't notice any difference with MP turned off? That is very surprising.
It'll take some tweaking but start with (at least) 2G per CPU and go from there. You have a lot of options with 24G available. Maybe increase AFX's total by lowering the amount you're saving for other apps?
I have 24G as well and I rarely save more than 6G for PS, PP etc. You kinda want AFX to have as much RAM as possible...
One nice is thing is you can do your tweaking on the fly. Good luck with it! Let us know how you're progressing...
Thansk TR - the links are helpful to me too as I was wrong to make a blanket statement saying "Adobe recommends 2G per CPU."
To quote Adobe:
"For a typical standard-definition television project, at least 1 GB per background process is recommended. For a typical project with HDTV-sized compositions, at least 2 GB per background process is recommended for optimum performance."
Funny, I read some Tests where the Size of RAM for each Core didn't matter. You'll never learn enough
I didn't meant w/o MP it's the same speed, I meant that less RAM was same then large RAM/core. But I see now this is wrong.
For know, I made every core 1,5GB, so I can use 11 cores. When I'm using too much RAM, Windwos tells me the System wouldn't have enough Memory and then AE makes failures, even if 4-5 GB are always available. Till I now how to avoid this, I'll leave it 1,5GB/Core.