Final Cut Pro 7 and Avid Media Composer 6 rendering issues on 24 core system...

[PunkNugget]

Hi All,

I'm now FINALLY using FCP 7 on my setup (check my sig) and I wanted to find out why is it not rendering at full speed? I get done with a sequence and then go to Sequence > Render > Both (to render both audio and video files). But unlike my single processor machine that is OC'd it would render my file at full tilt (iStat would report 600% to 700+%), the SR-2 is only rendering around 12% - 25%? Why? Is there something in the BIOS that I haven't checked off or is there something in the preferences in FCP 7 that I need to select to enable full speed rendering? Also, when I do see any type of rendering I only see 12 threads being used and not all 24. But even with 12 threads, this thing should be cookin' through these files... Whatever help you can give would be very helpful...

Hey PunkNugs, what codec are you rendering to and what codec is your source media? Final Cut has always had a major preference for ProRes for obvious reasons. If you are using h.264 native Canon 5D material or XDCAM long GOP material maybe there's a bottleneck with the codec?

Also I don't think Final Cut 7 was ever 64bit, not sure what sort of impact this has though.

I have a bunch of different media on my machine at the moment, I might do some tests and see how the different codecs behave.

Ok I've done a bit of testing and research.

Final Cut Pro 7 was never built to fully utilise multiple cores and was a big sore point for the FCP community.
This is why I think they had to completely rebuild the app for Final Cut X. It seems the FCP 7 32bit limitation also limited the amount of RAM available to 4GB.

Now, my second finding, through practical tests is that use of multi-core rendering is very specific to the specific task within the app, not the app itself overall.

Rendering 5D h.264 media in a ProRes 422HQ sequence only saw FCP use 270-300% in the activity monitor.

GoPro AVC media in the same sequence was far less consistent, using anywhere between 150-290% and jumped around greatly.

Use of non-realtime effects like the Radial Blur (on ProRes media in a matched ProRes timeline) consitently stayed at about 230%.

Note that I barely saw the total user% of CPU power break 10%...

I think the processor use varies depending on the effect used, I'm not going to test all of them though!

I did enable Apple Qmaster, which is designed for multiprocessor distribution in Compressor. I did see process instances appear in the Activity Monitor, however they didn't seem to be doing any work for Final Cut. I think it's built for Compressor only.

Now just for comparison I did some tests in Avid Media Composer 6.

Importing 5D media to DNX HD 185 MXF format still only used about 130%.
Radial Blur only used 120%
3D Ball used ~300%

HOWEVER
Scaling a clip with 3D Warp - 1700%+
Rendering a colour correction with the hue wheels - 1700%+
Safe colour limiter - 600-1300%
These last three tests were using up to 80% of the total user CPU%.

Now when you stack a Radial Blur on top of a Colour correction and Safe Colour Limit effect, it processes the entire clip at the speed of the slowest effect.

So now we can see, even in an app which is designed for multi-processors, there are still limitations depending on the tasks!

I can only tell you I never had rendering issues with my Gigabyte UD7 mobo and W3680 using FCP 7. A ten min. vid would take no more than 15 min to render, sometimes even less. Now the same exact file that I transferred to test on my SR-2 system is now taking 7 to 8 hours. I had to stop the test after 1/2 hour; thinking that it wasn't going to take that long and that it would have been done within 10 min at least. Well, it wasn't and I was only 3% into my rendering the 10 min file.

I'm importing .MTS to .MOV - now FCP7 won't do it anymore on my SR-2, but still will on my UD7 setup. Now I use a conversion app to make that happen to convert it to a .MOV file so I can import it into FCP7 and it works finally. But again, I want to use my SR-2/2 x X5690 setup and not my UD7/W3680 setup

Your problem is a bit different to what I went through in my reply, but my best recommendation would be to find an encoding program that you know uses all your processors, then encode there before editing. That way you're footage matches your sequence settings, FCP loves this.

I'm moving more into shorter form motion graphics so long imports and transcodes of video media are getting fewer and fewer for me these days. So I'm not sure which app handles this best, sorry!

It is very strange how you are getting vastly different results between two hack machines though!!!

My tests are done on an Sr-2 with X5679 CPUs @ stock 3.2GHz

I hope my info helps, let me know how you go!

Best regards,
Danny

Let me know what you can about some kind of encoding app that can work with FCP7 or Avid Media Composer 6 (or 6.5). I just purchased AMC 6 and I'm having issues with just the video NOT playing after importing. Here's the link to what I posted so you can read it:

Now this is using AMC 6.0.1, 6.0.3
http://community.avid.com/forums/t/113440.aspx

Now with AMC 6.5 this is happening:
http://community.avid.com/forums/t/113457.aspx

but then after googling the actual statement I found this link on Avid's forum site:
http://community.avid.com/forums/t/64626.aspx?PageIndex=1

Seems that this has been an issue since 2008 to present day. I'm upset because I tried the trial and the video was playing the .MTS files directly from my Canon Vixia HFS-100 natively with no importing and now when I purchase the actual copy it DOES NOT PLAY AT ALL; even when I install the specific Canon plugin that makes the video show up in the bin so recognized by the system.

This is another form of frustration. I look forward to any help at all as I'm needing to produce more vids here in the next week and don't know what to do. Thanks...

Well, after looking at my limitations with all these vid editing apps, I found this link to a 3 min vid on Adobe Premiere 6.0 (AP6) here:

http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere.html#nerolimedia_split_pp-chilipeppers_708x398-1300.mp4

I saw this vid and how this vid producer shared his jump from Avid to FCP and his disappointment with FCP (I'm sure he was talking about FCPX). He's now using AP6 and things just work. Well, I just tried it today as I have AP5 (not AP6 yet) and imported an .MTS file and it just works... So now I'm wondering if I should just stick with AP5 and upgrade to AP6 later on sometime. If there is anyone who can share more on this topic of their experience and what they think that would be great. Thanks for taking the time to read this post and look forward to your replies... Later...

 

[LethalWolfe]

FCP 7 doesn't really leverage multiple cores very much nor does it leverage the GFX card very much and it can only access 3 or 4 gigs of RAM. The core code is from the late 90's hence the total rebuild under the hood in FCPX.

PPro 6 has gotten a lot of good reviews but I wouldn't put a lot of faith in a video from a company saying how awesome its own products are.

The COW and the official Avid forums are probably the best places to ask technical questions so I would keep an eye on the threads you already started in those forums.

With all that being said, you are running an unsupported system and that specter is always going to hang over any trouble shooting discussions.

 

[PunkNugget]

FCP 7 doesn't really leverage multiple cores very much nor does it leverage the GFX card very much and it can only access 3 or 4 gigs of RAM. The core code is from the late 90's hence the total rebuild under the hood in FCPX.

PPro 6 has gotten a lot of good reviews but I wouldn't put a lot of faith in a video from a company saying how awesome its own products are.

The COW and the official Avid forums are probably the best places to ask technical questions so I would keep an eye on the threads you already started in those forums.

With all that being said, you are running an unsupported system and that specter is always going to hang over any trouble shooting discussions.

I hear ya'. I just put AP5 to the test and was able to use iStat to see what cores were being used. From what I could see 12 cores were being fully used while the other 12 cores were at 25% usage, so at least all 24 cores were being put to use (for the most part). Plus from a one min vid sample, it only took about 15 sec. to render. To me that's not bad and the percentage of total use of the CPU's was up to 750%+, which is what was being used on the other system when I was using FCP7 (actually it was using up to 699% on my Xeon W3680).

I'm ecstatic that AP5 is working the way it is. What I'm not happy about, is that I shelled out $$$ for ACM6. Well, I hope I can sell it on eBay one day or hold onto it if an upgrade comes that will work with my setup later. For now I'm going to use AP5 and upgrade to AP6 after I try it out first and do some actual rendering tests to see if there are any improvements on how the cores are being used.

Now about what you said about an "unsupported" system. I know that I'm going to face some issues with others saying stuff about it, but the fact remains that aside from it being PC parts (which is what a Mac Pro is anyway), it really is a moot point because in reality they're one in the same. It's how the OS and apps work together that became the issue in my case (at least that's what I'm now seeing through my tests with AP5). Seems like Adobe is doing what they can (for now) to support the written code for Mac OS X. All I know for now is it's working whereas it's not for the other apps.

 

[MrPlayer66]

Do research

I hear ya'. I just put AP5 to the test and was able to use iStat to see what cores were being used. From what I could see 12 cores were being fully used while the other 12 cores were at 25% usage, so at least all 24 cores were being put to use (for the most part). Plus from a one min vid sample, it only took about 15 sec. to render. To me that's not bad and the percentage of total use of the CPU's was up to 750%+, which is what was being used on the other system when I was using FCP7 (actually it was using up to 699% on my Xeon W3680).

I'm ecstatic that AP5 is working the way it is. What I'm not happy about, is that I shelled out $$$ for ACM6. Well, I hope I can sell it on eBay one day or hold onto it if an upgrade comes that will work with my setup later. For now I'm going to use AP5 and upgrade to AP6 after I try it out first and do some actual rendering tests to see if there are any improvements on how the cores are being used.

Now about what you said about an "unsupported" system. I know that I'm going to face some issues with others saying stuff about it, but the fact remains that aside from it being PC parts (which is what a Mac Pro is anyway), it really is a moot point because in reality they're one in the same. It's how the OS and apps work together that became the issue in my case (at least that's what I'm now seeing through my tests with AP5). Seems like Adobe is doing what they can (for now) to support the written code for Mac OS X. All I know for now is it's working whereas it's not for the other apps.

You're definitely way above me when it come sto this technical stuff, while I've never been intimidated or scared by any of this you definitely know more haha, anyway I want to tell you that before you spend money on Premiere Pro CS6 you should do some research and reading on it first, there's been TONS of complains about it, random crashes or not reading certain files types etc...PP 5.5 and 6.0 can do GPU acceleration with OpenCL or Cuda but apparently this has also brought some issues. Personally I was trying to do a very simple project on PP CS6, it consisted of very short AVCHD clips that were put together next to each other on the time line with tittles in between them, and every ten minutes or so PP would encounter a "serious error" and crashed, I gave up on it because I couldn't believe I couldn't even do such a simple thing on a program that is supposed to be way better than its predecessors. This morning I did the latest Nvidia CUDA update and tried to do the project once again and this time it finally didn't crash, other people feel that PP 5.5 is a lot more stable but everyone has had different experiences.

http://forums.adobe.com/community/premiere/premierepro_current?view=discussions That's the link to the Premiere Pro forum, all versions.

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1016670?tstart=60 and here's the Mac CS6 "serious error" thread.

Good luck with everything!

 

[PunkNugget]

You're definitely way above me when it come sto this technical stuff, while I've never been intimidated or scared by any of this you definitely know more haha, anyway I want to tell you that before you spend money on Premiere Pro CS6 you should do some research and reading on it first, there's been TONS of complains about it, random crashes or not reading certain files types etc...PP 5.5 and 6.0 can do GPU acceleration with OpenCL or Cuda but apparently this has also brought some issues. Personally I was trying to do a very simple project on PP CS6, it consisted of very short AVCHD clips that were put together next to each other on the time line with tittles in between them, and every ten minutes or so PP would encounter a "serious error" and crashed, I gave up on it because I couldn't believe I couldn't even do such a simple thing on a program that is supposed to be way better than its predecessors. This morning I did the latest Nvidia CUDA update and tried to do the project once again and this time it finally didn't crash, other people feel that PP 5.5 is a lot more stable but everyone has had different experiences.

http://forums.adobe.com/community/premiere/premierepro_current?view=discussions That's the link to the Premiere Pro forum, all versions.

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1016670?tstart=60 and here's the Mac CS6 "serious error" thread.

Good luck with everything!

Well, hearing this I might just stay with AP5 and avoid AP5.5 and 6.0. Two questions though:

1) Is there anything really different in the interface that I need to be aware of?
2) Or is it just a few things they added to make it CUDA/Mercury and OpenCL enabled?

Because if that's the case I don't really need it (as I'm using a XFX Radeon 6870 2GB GPU) and I will stick with AP5 as it's working so far with no issues...

I tell you the expensive lessons you have to learn to find out what works and what doesn't...

 

[MrPlayer66]

Well, hearing this I might just stay with AP5 and avoid AP5.5 and 6.0. Two questions though:

1) Is there anything really different in the interface that I need to be aware of?
2) Or is it just a few things they added to make it CUDA/Mercury and OpenCL enabled?

Because if that's the case I don't really need it (as I'm using a XFX Radeon 6870 2GB GPU) and I will stick with AP5 as it's working so far with no issues...

I tell you the expensive lessons you have to learn to find out what works and what doesn't...

there's virtually no difference between CS5 and CS5.5 in terms on UI, in CS5.5 they added a few features such as the OpeCL acceleration and the ability to merge clips such as when you have video and audio recorded separately (this is a handy feature that was way over due in Premiere Pro) in CS6 the UI was redesigned, it was streamlined if you've used premiere pro then it would be familiar to you, there's other features that they added that I can't remember remember right now but if you do a little research you'll find them. Your machine sounds like a beast so I don't know how much you would benefit from the GPU acceleration. All editing equipment can get quite expensive I tell ya!

 

[DJenkins]

If your having problems with the "segmentation fault in main thread 0x0" thing I have come across that many times. All on different OS versions, iMacs, Mac Pros, difference AMC versions.

I think there are a variety of triggers for this error, disk permissions, installation procedure etc.

Not that I know exactly how/why it happens but just to put you at ease I have seen this happen on real mac pros, I too have an SR-2 setup and it's working 100% fine in my case, I've never seen the error on my machine.

Most frequently I saw this happen on a mac pro with the old 'unsupported' mojo SDI interface, without the device attached there were no errors. But I do know that other have the same issue without any hardware attached.

If Premiere is working for you, absolutely use it. No editing system is perfect for every single job. I really like the Avid colour correction, multicam and media managment system, but there are definitely jobs I will still do with FCP 7 and Premiere Pro. I haven't kept up with Premiere all that much in the last few releases so it probably does some things even better now.

I do know that Adobe recommend in After Effects assigning multi processor rendering to physical cores only. So even though it looks like you are only using half your machines power, it actually runs faster because not every core is 100% choked up. Perhaps it's the same with Premiere, which is why you're not seeing it maxed out, but I wouldn't worry.

It just seems that even though all this software claims multi-core ability, not all plugins, effects or specific tasks have been written to take full advantage of it yet.

At least Maxon have their stuff sorted, I think Adobe should take a look at how Cinema 4D and Net Render work together!!!

----------

MrPlayer66 you are damn right about the expense of this stuff... I tell you what we are lucky this hackintosh thing is around for the at home/freelancer guys. You would have no problems blowing $200k on a coupe of HP certified Avid workstations, an Avid fibre storage array, some decent monitors etc...

 

[MrPlayer66]

If your having problems with the "segmentation fault in main thread 0x0" thing I have come across that many times. All on different OS versions, iMacs, Mac Pros, difference AMC versions.

I think there are a variety of triggers for this error, disk permissions, installation procedure etc.

Not that I know exactly how/why it happens but just to put you at ease I have seen this happen on real mac pros, I too have an SR-2 setup and it's working 100% fine in my case, I've never seen the error on my machine.

Most frequently I saw this happen on a mac pro with the old 'unsupported' mojo SDI interface, without the device attached there were no errors. But I do know that other have the same issue without any hardware attached.

If Premiere is working for you, absolutely use it. No editing system is perfect for every single job. I really like the Avid colour correction, multicam and media managment system, but there are definitely jobs I will still do with FCP 7 and Premiere Pro. I haven't kept up with Premiere all that much in the last few releases so it probably does some things even better now.

I do know that Adobe recommend in After Effects assigning multi processor rendering to physical cores only. So even though it looks like you are only using half your machines power, it actually runs faster because not every core is 100% choked up. Perhaps it's the same with Premiere, which is why you're not seeing it maxed out, but I wouldn't worry.

It just seems that even though all this software claims multi-core ability, not all plugins, effects or specific tasks have been written to take full advantage of it yet.

At least Maxon have their stuff sorted, I think Adobe should take a look at how Cinema 4D and Net Render work together!!!

----------

MrPlayer66 you are damn right about the expense of this stuff... I tell you what we are lucky this hackintosh thing is around for the at home/freelancer guys. You would have no problems blowing $200k on a coupe of HP certified Avid workstations, an Avid fibre storage array, some decent monitors etc...

Damn I know! I've only started using Avid in the last 6 months and I've been reading more and more about and the more it scares me with all these crazy set ups! I've always been interested on a Hackingtosh It's amazing value for the money, so far all my projects have been editing student films or music videos so I haven't had the need for a crazy machine, but I can only imagine the benefits of having a fast computer.

 

[PunkNugget]

I guess companies like http://www.digitaljuice.com (DJ.com) seems like they've completely moved away from FCP7 and X. They don't even consider ACM6.5 and are almost soley focusing on all their efforts on Adobe apps (i.e.; AP6, AE6). BTW DJ.com is an amazing resource of information when it comes to what they offer as well as tutorials. Step by step stuff and its FREEE. I was also told to go here for other effects training from another person I know - http://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials. What's amazing to me is that sites like these used to cost hundreds, if not thousands of dollars to get this kind of training back in the day...

BTW, DJenkins I was told by "wookie25" from here:
http://community.avid.com/forums/p/113457/656841.aspx#656841

to go here:
http://community.avid.com/forums/t/101235.aspx

He didn't comment on anything; just gave me the link. I gather he thought that would help. Well, that didn't help either for ACM6.5 as all my SSD's and HD's are Read and Write already. I'm guessing that sticking with AP5 (and trying AP6 later) will be the way to go as it seems more and more people are moving toward that anyway as it's more suitable for Mac OS X.

To MrPlayer66,

I went here to check the comparisons of all the AP versions and they have an extensive chart:

http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere/buying-guide-version-comparison.html?PID=2159997

I just don't know how advantageous the improvements are really going to be since you gave me those other two links with all the issues that are popping up with AP6. Those seem the be the exact issues that I'm already facing with FCP7 and ACM6 and 6.5. The thing that ticks me off is that a ton of people have been using AVCHD cams pretty heavy for the last 3 years. I'm still surprised that importing all the various .MTS type files is STILL and issue, but so far not for AP5.

Lastily, when I check my prefs I see that I have 45GB of RAM allocated to AP5 and 3GB for my system. That's set up by default. That's good. I just hope it continues to go well with using AP5 over time. Well, time to get acclimated to using this AP5...

 

[mediacomposer]

Face Palm

You are you using a hackintosh ... problem solved.

Use it on an approved system.

 

[PunkNugget]

You are you using a hackintosh ... problem solved.

Use it on an approved system.

You see (as mentioned before in Post #3), I knew I was going to get some "smart" comment about my system setup. As I said before it has nothing to do with that, but explaining this to you (or anybody else that thinks they know what they're talking about who doesn't fully understand the breakdown of how PC parts work with OS's) is a pointless effort since, well... you have a Mac.

Case in point; are you using a Mac?... problem NOT solved. Go here:

http://community.avid.com/forums/t/64626.aspx

I'm not the ONLY one who has gone through this problem, as this has been a recurring issue with many others since 2008 and they ALL... own Macs... an "approved" system, go figure...

 

[MrPlayer66]

I guess companies like http://www.digitaljuice.com (DJ.com) seems like they've completely moved away from FCP7 and X. They don't even consider ACM6.5 and are almost soley focusing on all their efforts on Adobe apps (i.e.; AP6, AE6). BTW DJ.com is an amazing resource of information when it comes to what they offer as well as tutorials. Step by step stuff and its FREEE. I was also told to go here for other effects training from another person I know - http://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials. What's amazing to me is that sites like these used to cost hundreds, if not thousands of dollars to get this kind of training back in the day...

BTW, DJenkins I was told by "wookie25" from here:
http://community.avid.com/forums/p/113457/656841.aspx#656841

to go here:
http://community.avid.com/forums/t/101235.aspx

He didn't comment on anything; just gave me the link. I gather he thought that would help. Well, that didn't help either for ACM6.5 as all my SSD's and HD's are Read and Write already. I'm guessing that sticking with AP5 (and trying AP6 later) will be the way to go as it seems more and more people are moving toward that anyway as it's more suitable for Mac OS X.

To MrPlayer66,

I went here to check the comparisons of all the AP versions and they have an extensive chart:

http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere/buying-guide-version-comparison.html?PID=2159997

I just don't know how advantageous the improvements are really going to be since you gave me those other two links with all the issues that are popping up with AP6. Those seem the be the exact issues that I'm already facing with FCP7 and ACM6 and 6.5. The thing that ticks me off is that a ton of people have been using AVCHD cams pretty heavy for the last 3 years. I'm still surprised that importing all the various .MTS type files is STILL and issue, but so far not for AP5.

Lastily, when I check my prefs I see that I have 45GB of RAM allocated to AP5 and 3GB for my system. That's set up by default. That's good. I just hope it continues to go well with using AP5 over time. Well, time to get acclimated to using this AP5...

Thanks! That was a handy link. It's disappointing that as common as the AVCHD cameras have become we still have plenty of issues dealing with the footage.

 

[PunkNugget]

Hey Guys,

I just googled: "import fcp7 projects into premiere pro 5" and found this youtube vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C01Q6GDLLEA

and did exactly with that person instructed and EVERYTHING IMPORTED. Of course all the sound track adjustments that I made SoundTrack Pro didn't come in (and I'm sure there's a workaround on that one too). Then I double clicked not he Sequence it brought everything in !!! Then I rendered the selection to test it and look at the percentage of use my machine was able to produce this 10 min file?



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I couldn't believe it got up to 2095% !!! - LOOK AT THE PIC !!! - LOL !!! It actually got a notch up to 2096% but I wasn't fast enough to take that pic. Just amazing !!! This time it used ALL 24 CORES in my Pre-Render within the app !!! It only took about 4 min. to render. I'm shocked. Well, I guess I'm stickin' with AP5 until I try out AP6 later... I can't get over how fast this thing is. This was my first actual render test on this EVGA SR-2/2 x X5690's using Mac OS X 10.7.2. Man, I'm grateful it's just working, but get the speed along with it is just - WOW !!!

 

[DJenkins]

That's amazing, great to hear there's progress.

That link you were given before is only one possible cause of the segmentation error and doesn't seem to apply in your case.

Are you able to use Media Composer at all or is it only breaking when you try and use MTS files? Are you trying to import the MTS files or use the link to AMA feature?

I have found Avid's AMA feature extremely sluggish and you would be far better off with FCP 7 or Premiere if you don't want Avid to convert your media on import.

 

[PunkNugget]

That's amazing, great to hear there's progress.

That link you were given before is only one possible cause of the segmentation error and doesn't seem to apply in your case.

Are you able to use Media Composer at all or is it only breaking when you try and use MTS files? Are you trying to import the MTS files or use the link to AMA feature?

I have found Avid's AMA feature extremely sluggish and you would be far better off with FCP 7 or Premiere if you don't want Avid to convert your media on import.

Well, using AMC6 initially was great as it played my AVCHD .MTS files directly from my cam. In fact when I plugged in the USB to my system it automatically put it in a bin as a Link to AMA type feature (the way the little icons looked on each .MTS file). When I exported to render that 1 min vid, it did it rather quickly. Then I tried it again and that's when the problems happened.

I tried directly importing it, then linking to AMA... nothing worked. Sure the vid shows up in the screen, but when pressing the play button, it just didn't play. So I don't know what's up? Right now I'm just trying to figure out how to use AP5. I'm tired now and need a break. Will start again tomorrow. I hope AP6 works if I decide to get it.

I'm still blown away by the rendering speed of AP5 and even though it doesn't have Mercury playback available (as I'm using a 6870 GPU), I'm okay with pre-rendering the vid for playback during my edits, as that just takes about 30 sec for a 10 min vid and not many minutes (like it did with FCP7). So when I'm finally done with editing the shot I can export to a hi-res vid in less than 4 min. To me that's what makes it worth having THE HACKINBEAST. Again, I'm grateful for this beast. What's even more amazing is that these Dual X5690's are Underclocked which makes it even faster and more powerful than OC'ing.

 

[Kevin Monahan]

there's virtually no difference between CS5 and CS5.5 in terms on UI, in CS5.5 they added a few features such as the OpeCL acceleration

FYI: OpenCL support didn't arrive until Premiere Pro CS6.
More info here: http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotraining/2012/05/opencl-and-premiere-pro-cs6.html

----------

...in CS6 the UI was redesigned, it was streamlined if you've used premiere pro then it would be familiar to you, there's other features that they added that I can't remember remember right now but if you do a little research you'll find them.

Here's an article describing what's new in Premiere Pro CS6: http://helpx.adobe.com/content/help/en/premiere-pro/using/whats-new-cs6.html

 

[PunkNugget]

FYI: OpenCL support didn't arrive until Premiere Pro CS6.
More info here: http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotraining/2012/05/opencl-and-premiere-pro-cs6.html

----------



Here's an article describing what's new in Premiere Pro CS6: http://helpx.adobe.com/content/help/en/premiere-pro/using/whats-new-cs6.html

Thank you Kevin. I do have to say that I'm becomming more and more impressed with AP5 and want to try AP6 but want to make sure that I'm not going to run into any issues when it comes to the links that were given to me here (from MrPlayer66):

http://forums.adobe.com/community/pr...ew=discussions That's the link to the Premiere Pro forum, all versions.

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1016670?tstart=60 and here's the Mac CS6 "serious error" thread.

The reason why I immediately like AP5 is because it can use ALL 24 Cores (from the pic I provided in Post #13). I just now found out that Avid Media Composer ONLY uses 12 Streams (1/2) - NOT GOOD. So I'm disappointed with that purchase. Plus, it's extremely glitchy for Mac OS X 10.7.2 and I'm using version 6.0.3. 6.5 won't even start up at all.

Anyhoo, what can you say about CS6 that would be more advantageous for my current setup? Will it perform better using AP6 over AP5 (or even AP5.5)? Like I said before I only have AP5. Please let me know what you can. I also PM'd you this info and look forward to your reply. I truly want the best that I can use for my Mac OS X Lion 10.7.2 and don't want to upgrade to Mountain Lion 10.8.X as other apps that I have read about have been glitchy. That's why I want to stay with 10.7.2. Thanks for whatever you can let me know...

 

[mBox]

Hackintosh or not, Avid MC/Symphony even on a tight down approved system crashes with a plethora of errors e.g. Segmentation blah blah blah and AMPI blah blah blah.
Yes its usually stupid perm issues but even if you dont touch anything outside of Avid, the freakin app just starts to hate its surroundings
Currently dealing with Avid tech issues in the last two weeks in regards to exporting

 

[PunkNugget]

Hackintosh or not, Avid MC/Symphony even on a tight down approved system crashes with a plethora of errors e.g. Segmentation blah blah blah and AMPI blah blah blah.
Yes its usually stupid perm issues but even if you dont touch anything outside of Avid, the freakin app just starts to hate its surroundings
Currently dealing with Avid tech issues in the last two weeks in regards to exporting

No disagreeing with you there. I just had a tech guy take over my system today, and FINALLY the video is playing back. Of course he didn't do anything different than what I did and that (of course) made me look foolish. Now the reoccurring issue that I'm facing is that the two pane video playback/editing section keeps smalling itself up and does not keep the size that I have it set at. I'll resize it to my liking, then when I start playing or positioning the cursor it goes to it's smallest screen size (while all the other menus stay the same size). Then it won't let me resize it. Very frustrating. I'm very disappointed in Avid and the money that went into this app... So I'm totally with you on how it's not liking it's surroundings and does what it wants to do... Very confusing...

 

[mBox]

No disagreeing with you there. I just had a tech guy take over my system today...

Been there
cant really resize the viewers, its been like that since even before Meridien days.

 

[PunkNugget]

Been there
cant really resize the viewers, its been like that since even before Meridien days.

Yeah, I'm using a 30" Dell monitor at 2560 x 1600 and the dual pane viewers won't go any bigger than 2 inches each in size. AWESOME...

 

[mBox]

Yeah, I'm using a 30" Dell monitor at 2560 x 1600 and the dual pane viewers won't go any bigger than 2 inches each in size. AWESOME...

Yep Dual Apple 30s here as well but I can get a larger view on 2560x1600 almost across one screen with maybe 3 inches to spare on the side.

 

[PunkNugget]

Yep Dual Apple 30s here as well but I can get a larger view on 2560x1600 almost across one screen with maybe 3 inches to spare on the side.

That's great, but if you're in my situation it becomes even more frustrating because you can't enlarge your Dual Pane Video Playback window (DPVP), more than 2 inches - LOL !!! Now you have all this space that was meant to be used for, but CAN'T USE IT - It's just retarded !!!

What bothers me even more is that AMC6 costs a whopping $1,500 and it ONLY uses (max) 12 Cores ?!?!?! That's really sad. Here's Proof of what I'm talking about:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This company should be ASHAMED of themselves !!! What gets me even more is that (from the pic) it's using every other core; which means it's using one CPU AND only 70% to 80% of that CPUs power at best (again, look at the pic). Now compare the 2000% performance usage strength from AP5 OVER the 500% of CPU usage from ACM6. That 3 TIMES MORE RENDERING POWER !!! And they're charging folks $1,500 for that ?!?! This app shouldn't be any more than what Apple is charging FCPX for - $300. Again, this is shameful...

Again, it looks like I'm just going to stick with AP5. I'm going to be working with AP6 here soon and hope I don't face any issues with that. We'll see though...

 

[PunkNugget]

BTW, I just downloaded and purchased CS6 (the whole package) and tested out a 10 min vid file and this is what I got:

This how it initially started:

Then during the middle of the render it went to doing this:

Then toward the end of the render it went back to the initial pic of around 1980+%.

During that rendering session this was my average temps (as a result of Uncderclocking):

Averaging all the CPU cores together it came out to 44.5C. Which to me is fantastic for this machine. So although it's not at the same speed as CS5, it's a much more robust application that is still using all 24 Cores. So for that I'm very satisfied. Lastly, AP6 was able to bring in ALL my files from my last multi-layered project with ease. Even though it didn't bring in the audio adjustments that I made in SoundTrack Pro, and I have to readjust the text, it still was able to bring in the audio and everything else like I did the whole project in FCP7. AP5 however still was able to bring in the FCP7 project in, but any audio adjustments that I did in SoundTrack Pro, came in at full static, not so good. I'm glad that AP6 made improvements in their app to make things work with ease.

Quite honestly, I feel like I'm working in FCP7. It just works BUT FAR BETTER AND FASTER !!! And take a look at the Pre-Rendered file that I just did within AP6:

Close to about the same in AP5. All in all AP6 (and CS6 in general) is just FANTASTIC !!! Can't wait to use the other apps within CS6...

 

[PaulDoFish]

glad you figured out your problem! but I think I should help clarify something for you..

You don't have 24 cores. You have 12 cores that are hyper threaded, which is why the OS sees 24 cores.

If a single threaded CPU core is given a task and is done in less time than of the clock cycle, it sits idle for the remainder of that cycle. Hyperthreading allows it to fill that space with another task, thus that core is performing two tasks in one clock cycle. This is a particularly helpful feature if you plan on using this server as a file server, since the server will be handling many small tasks at once.

Although for big tasks like video rendering, hyperthreading gives virtually none to marginal performance increase, and some say that it can even hurt performance under certain circumstances.


You say cs5 seems faster than cs6 even when only using 12 of your 24 available threads. This is probably why