FORUMS: list search recent posts

Performance tips for FCP7?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy

<< PREVIOUS   •   FAQ   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Rob Ainscough
Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 27, 2011 at 2:01:29 am

I'm trying to keep my older MacPro going with FCP7 ... it's a 2006 (1.1) model with 2X2 CPUs (4 total) and 8GB RAM, SSD drives, and ATI 5770.

I working in 1080 using ProRes 422 HQ, but renders are horribly slow, even for just a small 8 second segment.

I have some Animation and hence why I'm using 422 HQ.

Tried using RGB video processing instead of 10bit YUV but that made no difference, maybe even a tad slower.

Hints, tips, anything to speed up this old MacPro?


Return to posts index

Philipp Hampl
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 27, 2011 at 11:36:54 am

Have you tried Sequence settings: prores (not hq), sequence rendering prores and 8bit.


Return to posts index

Tony Brittan
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 27, 2011 at 1:01:17 pm

HQ is overkill and will only make things miserable most of the time. It's intended for RED (or other) types...2k-4k...of footage.

Just use plain ol Prores. It's awesome. If you're worried about graphics, it handles them perfectly. Your render times will always be high if you export graphics as the animation codec and then put them into an FCP timeline that doesn't match. Try exporting them as Prores so that they match your sequence. If you're using transparency in them, you'll wanna use Prores 4444 or whatever it's so that you can keep the alpha channel you'll have to render those but it willbe much quicker than animation codec.


Return to posts index


Jerry Hofmann
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 27, 2011 at 1:13:16 pm

The animation likely will look the same in any flavor of ProRes other than Proxy... so turn those into ProRes 422 or even try LT (might look just fine actually). But judge it externally for sure. The only thing that HQ improves is fast action shots, where the camera is moving a lot or the subject is. Otherwise it's just a larger file. LT is broadcast quality video BTW... That would speed things up a lot if you can use it, but even going to ProRes 4:2:2 would speed things up. Animations are usually easier to compress because they don't have all that much detail in them typically.

Jerry

Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog: http://blogs.creativecow.net/Jerry-Hofmann

Current DVD:
http://store.creativecow.net/p/81/jerry_hofmanns_final_cut_system_setup

8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17" MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX - Cinema Displays I have a 22" that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.


Return to posts index

Joseph Hung
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 27, 2011 at 8:34:54 pm

I agree with everyone here. Animation codec is so hugely cumbersome. It's antiquated, use ProRes 4444 if you can. Dropping to ProRes 422 should speed things up too. Another factor could be the scratch disk. Are you working directly off your SSDs within the tower? That could be the problem too. If you can, an external RAID5 array via high speeed interfaces, meaning a hardware RAID card could really help. Striping internally via Disk Utility means it's a software based RAID and that eats up alot of your CPU power. A hardware RAID card takes alot of computing off of your computer CPU and does it on the card, and will likely speed things up a little bit. But of course, our computers can only be pushed so far.
If your scratch where you keep all of your files is external, but connected eSATA or FW800, still may not be the most optimal. I was able to stretch out my MacPro power by building a DIY RAID 5 via Mini SAS and a RocketRaid card. Works incredibly well for me so far, under heavy loads, for real time editing. I think it definitely sped things up a little bit in the rendering department, but rendering still falls alot onto the MP CPUs. Eventually I'm going to upgrade to a much faster MP, as long as Apple doesn't kill it altogether.

Mac 2.66 GHz Quad Intel Xeon
OSX 10.6.8
FCS2
CS5
8GB RAM
ProAvio 8TB RAID 5 Dual Mini-SAS
Blackmagic Intensity Pro
ATI Radeon X1900
RocketRAID 4322 via dual MiniSAS
Panasonic Lumix GH2, Panasonic HVX200A, Panasonic DVX100A, Canon 5DMKII, 7D


Return to posts index

Rob Ainscough
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 27, 2011 at 9:38:15 pm

Thanks for the posts all.

Ran some testing: when from ProRes 422 HQ to ProRes 422 LT and (RGB and 10bit YUV) here are my results (timed on with stopwatch)

22 second sequence (min:secs)
ProRes 422 LT = 13:12.7
ProRes 422 LT RGB = 13:09.5
ProRes 422 HQ = 13.24.2
ProRes 422 HQ RGB = 13.19.6

5 second sequence
ProRes 422 LT = 6:04.9
ProRes 422 LT RGB = 6:03.1
ProRes 422 HQ = 6:08.3
ProRes 422 HQ RGB = 6:06.2

Test sequence has 24 video tracks. It might be that I need to move this sequence over to Motion and do it from there ... but I'm not sure Motion will do it any faster and it adds a layer in my workflow.

As far as RAID -- I ran the same 5 second sequence tests onto SSD, software RAID HD's, and a single standard HD and the difference across them was 1-2% variance ... so obviously the rendering isn't HD dependent, seems to be purely CPU dependent.

Future of the MacPro line is definitely "in doubt" and hence why I'm trying to push thru with what I have right now, but it's painfully slow (especially when compared to Adobe on a my Windows 7 box running on a i7 4 core processor). Can't really "wait until spring" for a "possible" new MacPro lineup from Apple or lack there of a MacPro lineup -- I know how Apple operate when it comes to providing future information ... someone needs to give the Apple execs a hint that their paranoia is NOT what made them return to success ;)

Rob


Return to posts index


Jerry Hofmann
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 27, 2011 at 10:28:43 pm

Hang in there, and thanks for the test results!

24 layers of video isn't going render faster in much of any codec... LOL... Motion is likely not a ton faster, but maybe...

Render time depends on what filters/compositing we're talking about using which codec. I see it doesn't matter much with file size when it comes to ProRes. Thanks for that info. But I don't think that any other codec will render faster than ProRes most likely...

Jerry

Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog: http://blogs.creativecow.net/Jerry-Hofmann

Current DVD:
http://store.creativecow.net/p/81/jerry_hofmanns_final_cut_system_setup

8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17" MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX - Cinema Displays I have a 22" that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.


Return to posts index

Rob Ainscough
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 27, 2011 at 11:56:18 pm

Hi Jerry,

Thanks for response. I have a Matrox HD H.264 card installed and a Black Magic Intensity card installed. If I select the Matrox H.264 as the codec and try to render it just flashes an error and returns me to the timeline ... the Matrox H.264 seems to only work on Exporting of sequence.

However, if I select the Black Magic 10bit RGB for codec I get 22 second sequence down to 8:05, about a 25% improvement. However output is not as good but can live with it and then switch to final codec once the sequence is complete.

Oh yeah, nothing to fancy, Boris Vector Shape and Boris Title 3D, some 3D world animation done in Cinema 4D imported as QT and some basic transitions.

Rob


Return to posts index

Jerry Hofmann
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 28, 2011 at 2:17:10 am

It's amazing the render time difference between X and FCP 7. Even on a fast machine X smokes 7... background rendering isn't all the story either don't think. I believe it actually renders about twice as fast.

That said, you're plan looks like it will get you through even though the render times are painful.

Jerry

Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog: http://blogs.creativecow.net/Jerry-Hofmann

Current DVD:
http://store.creativecow.net/p/81/jerry_hofmanns_final_cut_system_setup

8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17" MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX - Cinema Displays I have a 22" that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.


Return to posts index


Rob Ainscough
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 28, 2011 at 3:34:09 am

Twice as fast is still too slow for me ... at least compared to Adobe on a Windows 7 box anyway. Does FCPX support any 3rd party accelerators when it comes to rendering on the timeline?

I'll certainly keep and eye on FCPX and what Apple do with their MacPro line ... I like how FCP 7 flows, sure there are some features I'd like that are missing ... good example is being able to change parameters on a video generator that is used in several clips by selecting those clips and open in editor so that changing an Opacity value will be reflected on all the selected clips not just what is determine to be the "current" one.

Also seems like my ATI 5770 is being under utilized ... it has a lot of processing power sitting idle. Does FCPX support nVidia CUDA or ATI Stream?

I'm not trying to sound Pro Adobe/Windows either, it's just that similar projects render considerably faster and in some cases I don't have to render. But I suppose on the plus side I can surf the web while I wait ;)


Return to posts index

Joseph Hung
Re: Performance tips for FCP7?
on Nov 27, 2011 at 10:46:38 pm

Software RAID control is still being administered by the computer's CPUs. A hardware based card will have it's own CPU to administer the RAID control and throughput, so in my case, I think it sped things up a little in rendering (I keep everything on the scratch, render files, capture, etc, and the project file on my startup disk), but I never tested it, just noticing the difference through usage.
I think if you moved your scratch externally and connecting via card and high speed interface you might see an improvement. Of course this costs $$$ to do, and based on a hunch? I don't have hard numbers, I just have observations.
The difference in times seems negligible, and something you might just have to live with. My only question is why 22 video tracks? Not sure if this would make a difference, but maybe collapsing down to as few video tracks as possible? Coupled with codec change, and there might be a bigger difference? The more video tracks being used also dictates throughput and real time editing.
In the end, faster CPUs, cores, etc is the answer I think. I'm toying with the plan of upgrading to the fastest tower that I can afford and let that ride for as long as possible. My current setup is dependent on compatibility, and I'm afraid that I'll have to rebuild the RAID, cards, etc. if anything changes with the MP, whether it be form factor rumors or a complete halt to the line. I'm hoping that I can hold out with the rumored "last" MP compatible with my current setup and by the time I need to upgrade I'll be in a position to do a complete hardware rebuild.

Mac 2.66 GHz Quad Intel Xeon
OSX 10.6.8
FCS2
CS5
8GB RAM
ProAvio 8TB RAID 5 Dual Mini-SAS
Blackmagic Intensity Pro
ATI Radeon X1900
RocketRAID 4322 via dual MiniSAS
Panasonic Lumix GH2, Canon 5DMKII, 7D, Panasonic HVX200A, Panasonic DVX100A


Return to posts index

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