Beiträge von Joe24

Zitat von iAvoe

You really should point my fault out.

Do I have to? Okay, this is not productive or constructive for anybody, but here we go....

First of all, with a $200 budget and an 8000-series Intel processor, the OP is not a high-powered user. He's looking for hardware encoding and some light effects, by the sounds of it.

I explained the different generations of Nvidia cards, and why Ampere is a waste of money for encoding, and Lovelace (while somewhat better for encoding) is obviously way out of his price range. I suggested a card (2060S) at the price point he was looking for, and with what should be very good specs for his purposes.

You came in with a misinformed wall of text touting every high-powered card you'd ever heard of. Despite the facts that: this clearly wasn't what he was looking for, encoding wouldn't benefit from these cards (as I'd already explained), Vegas editing wouldn't benefit much from these cards, and they were also significantly out of his price range (a Quadro, when the guy asked about $200 cards? Really?).

Zitat von iAvoe

I did not provide a bad answer compared to yours.

I answered his question, based on my own experience trying to improve Vegas' performance. You shouted me down by copy and pasting half the Internet, which didn't really apply to his situation or to Vegas.

Zitat von iAvoe

... gluing humilation with context.

I don't speak whatever language this is.

Zitat von iAvoe

You are actually recommending 40-series cards, which are NOT older than mine recommendation.

If you actually read what i wrote above, you'll see i was not recommending Lovelace cards to this gentleman. Quite the opposite. They do have better onboard NVENC encoders supposedly, but are significantly out of his price range and are not a good fit for him.

Nor is it simply a matter of card age. Which i explained (Pascal vs Turing vs Ampere). For instance, a 2060 Super has the same NVENC module and 24% more memory bandwidth than a 3060.

I will say that you were right on one thing: Faster processors make everything better, including Vegas. But the OP's rig isn't that bad for what it seems like he's doing, and on a $200 budget he's certainly not going to buy an entirely new platform and a 13900K or 7950X.

Vegas is notorious for not benefiting from hot graphics card hardware. Which you'd know if you had any experience with it. I've been working with Vegas for over a decade, on over a dozen different graphics cards.

I'm here to share what I know, because somebody asked. I didn't come here to waste time arguing with somebody who has no experience with Vegas and who clearly doesn't know what they're talking about.

Zitat von iAvoe

"I haven't used Vegas Pro so I could only guess."

Regarding dedicated graphics card for encoding, low-end Nvidia Turing (except GTX 1630 and GTX 1650) cards are best at the moment. Any Nvidia card from 1650 Super and up.

Turing cards (16/20-series) encode notably better h.264/h.265 picture quality for the same bitrate vs. Pascal cards (10-series). Difference to me looks about the same as decreasing the Constant Quantizer setting by 1, but with the same filesize.

Ampere cards (30-series) use the same NVENC module as Turing. The NVDEC decoder has a slight improvement, but not the encoder.

Lovelace cards (40-series) have better NVENC modules, but are outside your $200 range at the moment.

Worth noting too that a higher-end card won't gain you much encoding performance. Turing and Ampere cards all have the same NVENC encode module, which has nothing to do with how big the GPU is, how many CUDA cores etc. Separate module. (If you're doing effects or filters etc. where you also use CUDA, that's different...) The only encoder difference between a 1650 Super and a 3090 Ti is memory bus width/speed; they both have the same NVENC module.

The RTX 2060 Super has a 256-bit memory bus with 14 Gbps GDDR6. Might be close to the sweet spot for you.

Nvidia NVENC - Wikipedia

List of Nvidia graphics processing units - Wikipedia

Glad it works!

Ignore what i said earlier about there being a problem with the resolution. I was exceeding the max resolution of my target output format. Duh!

It's something to do with your resolution. I tried a known working project on my rig (VP15, 3060Ti, Voukoder 13.0.2, Nvidia driver v531.29DCH patched with keylase), and I can make it choke by changing either of the resolution values (width or height) to your values. Tried 2400x3600, 1920x3600, 2400x1080. In all 3 cases, I get the following error in the log when ffmpeg is being initialized:

FFmpeg: InitializeEncoder failed: invalid param (8): Invalid Level.

When setting resolution back to 1920x1080, everything works again.

According to the documentation, NVENC resolution limit for everything from Pascal to Lovelace is 8192x8192, so it shouldn't be an NVENC problem. Either FFmpeg doesn't like your resolution, or it's not receiving the correct syntax from Voukoder.

You could test for an FFmpeg limitation by CPU-rendering a small test file in Vegas and then trying to re-encode the file using FFmpeg and the NVENC encoder directly from command line.

There might be more than one problem with your settings. Is this log from before or after you changed to progressive video?

Newer NVENC cards (starting with Turing) also can't encode interlaced video, which you have enabled in your first screenshot (the Field Order option). Try progressive video instead.

Log file might shed some light.

What's your project audio bit depth? 16 or 24-bit? Try 48 kHz 16-bit, see if it helps.

Enable advanced logging in Voukoder, then try rendering again and check the log file.

No point stumbling around in the dark trying to find the problem when you can ask the program itself what it's crabby about!

So it's not viable for VP to use the x264/x265 libraries ONLY if they are present in the FFmpeg build? (Which would only happen if the user has chosen to download and compile their own version of FFmpeg, manually enabling these encoders.)

Is there a way to have the user download/install ffmpeg separately for free? This might remove the requirement for you to buy commercial licenses.

IIRC, Handbrake has an "update ffmpeg" function in it somewhere.

Zitat von dasdas

[20:05:24] Interlaced: Top first

...

[20:05:24] FFmpeg: Interlaced encoding is not supported. Supported level: 0

Do you understand what INTERLACED video is? Go look it up.

You need to render as PROGRESSIVE video in order to use NVENC.

Select your template, hit Customize Template, and hit the X button (Delete Template) next to the Save button.

I'm in love, dude.

Is this just a concept drawing to show how the program would behave, or is this what you intend the UI to look like? That's some serious heavy-hitter stuff, either way!

The CCFS CuminCode FrameServer schmuck is happy to charge for his crap programming skills and lousy work ethic. Voukoder works several times faster, and is so much easier to use. Voukoder has no equal that I'm aware of. And believe me, I've looked! Especially if multiple streams and filters will soon be supported . . . Your program is vastly better and worth AT LEAST what he's charging ($15). Possibly 2-3+ times as much.

Keeping in mind that most of us paid for the NLE suites that we use Voukoder on.

One thing I would add is that a trial period of 1 week is NOT long enough. That's what CCFS is currently doing, and it did not make me happy. I've got other things in my life that need attention too, and I can't take a week off just to learn a new program. In my experience as a consumer, 1 month is a comfortable time period to figure out if a program will actually do what you need. I needed a couple solid weeks of working with TMPGEnc before deciding to buy it.

P.S., I decided not to buy CCFS. Total garbage.

Awesome! Very much looking forward to it!

Here's how to check in TAW6 whether your source file is compatible or not :

Note that TAW6 uses fields, not frames, to indicate it's max GOP size. Voukoder "48 frames" = TAW6 "96 fields".