FORUMS: list search recent posts

new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Andre van Berlo
new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on Apr 30, 2014 at 9:09:54 pm

Hi everyone,

I'm hoping there is a logical explanation for this: Rendering a 9 minute 1080p timeline is taking forever...

in activity monitor:
- "protranscodertool not responding"
- idle cores 78%
- only 18GB of RAM is used (out of total 32GB)


This is my situation:
- 6 core mac pro D700 32GB RAM
- Caldigit T3 Raid 0 (500MB read&write)
- FCPX 10.1.1
- I've imported the clips as "shortcuts" (forgot the real name)
- The folder containing the original files is also on the T3 raid
- 1080p timeline with 9 minutes of footage from GH3 (not optimised, .mov files straight from camera)
- neat video & c2 lock n load applied to all clips in timeline
- I have fxfactory plugin from ripple.com: callouts. It was always a slow plugin when I used it in the timeline but isn't used here.

What is going on? People are showing of 4K and 6K stuff on 6 core machines, this should be peanuts... Do I need to reinstall fcpx?


Return to posts index

Michael Garber
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on Apr 30, 2014 at 10:09:31 pm

Try optimizing and then re-render. I remember reading somewhere that Neat Video worked better with i-frame footage than long-gop or camera-orig h264s. The slowdown is almost certainly neat video. But keep in mind, even after transcoding, your renders could still be slow. Neat Video is great but just, ya know, just a little slow. Lock 'n' load shouldn't be a slow render. I find it to be very fast even on my iMac.

Michael Garber
5th Wall - a post production company
Blog: GARBERSHOP
My Moviola Webinar on Color Correcting in FCP X
My Moviola Webinar on Cutting News in FCP X


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on Apr 30, 2014 at 11:28:33 pm

I've got a similar setup to yours except a Promise Pegasus 2 instead of your RAID.

That render (even with unoptimized footage, and no 3rd party plugins; currently for me, AVCHD) should only take a couple of minutes.

You might want to test the same render without the 3rd party plugins.


Return to posts index


Marcus Moore
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 12:10:42 am

Yeah, it's Neat Video. Great plugin, but a pig for rendering, and probably not optimized for the MacPro yet.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 1:38:49 am

If you contact the Neat video guys they have an unreleased beta that works with the cards in the nMP. It works great after that.

In case you didn't know, go into the hidden optimization settings to enable the GPUs.


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 7:21:44 am

hi Darren,

you were correct about optimization settings not being enabled. However, it didn't make much difference. Even after enabling both D700's and all 6 cores the render was as slow as you could get.

Digging in I found that each time when I use neat video I see "protranscodertool not responding" in my activity monitor.

After enabling my gpu's in optimization settings, still slow renders and stil the "protranscodertool not responding"(25%).

Then I exported a simple project without neat video and it exported fine and "protranscodertool" was working great.

Then applied neat video to a clip within that project and export went bad again, "protranscodertool not responding".

I just send them an email asking about that beta. There is something about neatvideo that is messing up this "protranscodertool".

Thanks for letting me know of its existence :-)

André


Return to posts index


Andre van Berlo
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 9:06:17 am

Hey Darren,

I got this message back from neat video guys:

"protranscodertool is not part of Neat Video, so its behaviour
should not be affected by any adjustments in Neat Video
settings.

protranscodertool is a part of FCPX and I can see other people
reported a similar problem on Apple support website:
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5808115?start=0&tstart=0"

Personally I'm not convinced that neat video isn't causing the protranscodertool not responding. Whenever it is enabled fcpx turns into a snail, when I remove it the render is done in a minute...


Return to posts index

Keith Koby
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 2:39:31 pm

[Andre van Berlo] "I got this message back from neat video guys:

"protranscodertool is not part of Neat Video, so its behaviour
should not be affected by any adjustments in Neat Video
settings.

protranscodertool is a part of FCPX and I can see other people
reported a similar problem on Apple support website:
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5808115?start=0&tstart=0""


Hey Andre,

Be aware that sometimes when a process is "not responding" in activity monitor, it just means, the process is too busy to be bothered to respond to activity monitor's badgering it to give a status. It might not mean that something has crashed or is not working. I would bet that Neat is making the protranscodertool so busy that it just can't reply. Hopefully a new release will fix that.

Keith


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 4:40:10 pm

Hi Keith,

thanks for your reply. You could be right, I did notice that the mac pro was getting very very warm on the outside I just couldn't imagine that it would take so long to render with all that horsepower in the new mac...


Return to posts index


tony west
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 2:55:31 pm

[Marcus Moore] "Yeah, it's Neat Video. Great plugin, but a pig for rendering,"

Just wanted to double this...

I love what the program can do but it's so slow I hesitate to use it. I hope they are able to improve it in the future.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 2:58:50 pm

Really, you should only need to use something like this over an entire timeline when something has gone horribly wrong on set.

If the client complains about rendering time, then tell them to get a better shooter next time! Unless you're also the shooter, then it's your mistake. ;)


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 3:39:02 pm

[Marcus Moore] "Really, you should only need to use something like this over an entire timeline when something has gone horribly wrong on set."

I have never used it over an entire timeline myself, (I don't know if you were responding to the OP or me)

I have only used it on small sections and it's slow on that. I couldn't imagine using it on an entire timeline


Return to posts index


Marcus Moore
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 3:53:10 pm

Sorry, yes, in reply to OP.


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 4:54:19 pm

Haha, well you caught me there... these are all videos I shot of our daughter when she was just born. Everything was shot early in the morning at home with only very dim light to light the "scene" or "set". So unfortunately I have a lot of footage like this.

Then again there is no client bothering me about render time so I can have the mac render this stuff over night. But as I only just bought the mac recently I was kind of baffled after seeing all the video's with the 4k and 6k stuff that my mac is choking on simple HD footage...

I also noticed neat video is 32bit, I guess the plugin would improve quite a bit if they would make it 64bit...


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 6:43:47 pm

[Andre van Berlo] "I also noticed neat video is 32bit, I guess the plugin would improve quite a bit if they would make it 64bit..."

64-bit is not automatically faster than 32-bit. The primary difference between 32-bit and 64-bit apps is how high they can count, and that impacts how much RAM they can address.

A 32-bit app can address 4,294,967,296 bytes of data (4 gigabytes).

A 64-bit app can address 18,446,744,073,709,600,000 bytes of data (16 exbibytes). That's a lot of commas.

A 4K RGBA frame at 32bpc is about 194 MB. You can fit about 84 of those frames inside 4 GB, which is way more than you'd need even for temporal smoothing.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index


Andre van Berlo
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 2, 2014 at 6:30:30 am

:-) That shows how little I know about these things! I always thought more would be better. But I guess that doesn't even go with a CPU where more cores with some applications will make the application slower than having a CPU with less cores (but higher clockspeed)...

Thank for that bit of knowledge, that is exactly why I'm regularly hangin' around the cow.


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 4:41:10 pm

Actually I'm happy to read that everyone is experiencing that neat video is slow, it means I don't have to worry about the hardware...


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 6:03:52 am

Thanks Michael Garber, James Culbertson, Marcus Moore, and Darren Roark!

I'll get that beta for neat video and redo the render.

"In case you didn't know, go into the hidden optimization settings to enable the GPUs."

I assume the hidden optimization settings are in neat video right?

In any case I'm going to do the above and report back here. I was pretty scared seeing that beachball time and time again, hopefully we've found our culprit... Thanks again!

André


Return to posts index

Neil Sadwelkar
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 1, 2014 at 6:31:00 pm

I used Neat video in FCP 7 on an old (film-based) feature 3 hrs long. There was a lot of grain in the telecine which we couldn't redo as the neg wasn't accessible. Neat video took about 26 hrs to render the 3 hr long timeline in FCP 7.

-----------------------------------
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 2, 2014 at 6:34:53 am

26 hours is a very very long render, but it was a 3 hour timeline, mine was only 9 minutes and it already took hours(don't know how many hours, I went to bed after a while). I do think that having a sharpening effect and stabilizing effect on there at the same time might have been a bit too much to handle at the same time.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 2, 2014 at 9:59:18 pm

I've worked before with large amounts of video that was cleaned up by neat video. We worked with the noisy stuff on the edit, while another system cleaned up all the source. At the end we replaced the noisy vids with the clean sources.

Certainly helped if you have an extra machine lying around.


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: new mac pro & fcpx = slow?!
on May 3, 2014 at 6:09:44 am

Actually i do have an extra machine but I don't think the 2 core imac is going to pull it offin a somewhat timely fashion :-) For now I just let the nMP crunch those numbers in the night and I'm not going to apply all effects at once.

In fact, when I have neat video and stabilisation applied only neat video is processed...


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]