10 Replies Latest reply on Mar 10, 2012 3:46 PM by RjL190365

    9 Hour Render Time?


      Well, I cannot find anything on the internet about why this is happening.

      Earlier, my friend and I recorded some things on the computer, not too hard, right?

      Well, we recorded the footage in 1920x1080 (1080p) for the best looking picture, still following?

      Now, here's what I don't understand, and, keep in mind these are only maxing out at like 18 minute videos. It took about 9 hours for the video to render with the H.264 codec! (On maximum detail, all that jazz)

      If this IS what's supposed to happen, it'd be very helpful to know that, otherwise, some assistance would be nice .


      Computer Specs:

      Windows 7 Ultimate x64

      10 GB DDR2 RAM

      2 TB HDD/120 GB SSD

      Nvidia GeForce GTX 9800+



      Thanks once again for the help!


        • 1. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
          taz291819 Level 1

          Two things:


          1.  With a GTX 9800+, you're not using any CUDA cores, so no GPU help.


          2.  You didn't mention what CPU you're using.


          With my laptop, i7 and a GTX460M, I can get better than real-time encoding with H.264 set at CBR 30Mbps (19min video encodes in about 14min).  Setting it to VBR 2-pass (40Mbps Max, 30Mbps Target), it takes about 2x the length.  Meaning, a 19min video would take about 38min to encode.

          1 person found this helpful
          • 2. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
            Powered by Design Level 4

            You also forgot to mention what version of Premiere your running.


            If you want to test your computer to see how it handles Premiere you can run the PPBM test.


            Just guessing but from those speeds it sounds like a pentium processor.






            1 person found this helpful
            • 3. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
              Christop406 Level 1

              I am using a Core 2 Duo E8500 @ 3.16GHz and Premiere Pro CS5.5, thanks!

              If this helps: Capture.PNG


              And one more thing, I've rendered in Sony Vegas before, and it NEVER took this long to render, just thought that'd be a good thing to say, it may only take about 2x the original amount of time the video was in (19:00 --> 38:00) But it didn't look nearly as good :/

              • 4. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
                Christop406 Level 1

                Also, I've read on the nVidia site that my card does take advantage of CUDA, is this not what you meant?

                • 5. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
                  taz291819 Level 1

                  First, your CPU is a major bottle-neck.  Regarding your GPU, read this and follow the instructions, I bet it will help:



                  1 person found this helpful
                  • 6. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
                    Harm Millaard Level 7

                    Such a system is around 60 times slower than a fast system. That means a fast system would need less than 10 minutes for the encoding and that makes perfect sense. So, your 9 hours is about to be expected. See Benchmark Results

                    • 7. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
                      Christop406 Level 1

                      Thank you all for your help, I guess I'll just be upgrading my computer soon

                      • 8. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
                        taz291819 Level 1

                        If you follow the instructions in that link I posted, it should help with rendering times until you can update your system.

                        • 9. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
                          Christop406 Level 1

                          Ok, I'll try it, but I think I may be able to upgrade either way in a couple months, but yeah, I'll look back over that guide and see what I can do. Thanks again!

                          • 10. Re: 9 Hour Render Time?
                            RjL190365 Level 4

                            Well, yes and no. If your 9800 GTX+ has only 512MB of VRAM, then you cannot use MPE GPU acceleration at all (and thus you're permanently stuck in MPE software-only mode) because MPE GPU acceleration requires at least 765MB of free, unused VRAM in order to work at all. And 768MB cards cannot enable MPE GPU acceleration because the Windows GUI itself eats up more than 15MB of VRAM. As such, the CUDA hack has no effect whatsoever if your particular 9800 GTX+ has only 512MB of VRAM. So, only those rare 9800 GTX+ cards with 1GB of VRAM can use MPE GPU acceleration at all.


                            And in any case, you will see a rather significant improvement in performance in CS5.5 when you upgrade to at least a GTX 560 Ti (even the standard one with 384 CUDA cores): That 9800 GTX+ card is an old design that has only 128 CUDA cores and has only 256-bit access to its DDR3 VRAM. If that card is a 1GB variant, it would still be slower than even a GTS 450 (or Quadro 2000) due to the limitations I described earlier in this paragraph (the GTS 450 and Quadro 2000 both have 192 CUDA cores).