AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Davinci resolve studio 14 dual gpu9/2/2023 ![]() ![]() He said on a fresh windows install, it's not possible to play HEVC 10bit, but I believe he also said on a non fresh windows install he had access to the free version does play back certain HEVC 10BIT files, with a possible explanation being Windows HEVC extension made it possible. I'm grateful that several people bothered to answer the question at all.ĬougerJoe wrote:He didn't say that. I don't really want to know everything about the differences between the coding in both versions. If I had Studio, I would render the same timeline in both versions to see if it made any difference. I really did think it was a simple question. Chalk it up to an ignorant noob asking a dumb question. If my question is unanswerable, then forgive me for asking it. Don't take that in an insulting way, because that is not at all what I mean. I have Nvidia, but I can't use their encoder? I'm not sure what that means.and I'm not sure if I need to or want to. You don't have to explain, but I'm not sure I understand part of your answer. Maybe you can go deep into manual and find every GPU code word and check.Īlex, please understand that I am both a noob with DR and I don't understand a lot of the technical aspects that go into video editing, hardware or software. PS: it is clear that we can't answer your question saying this have acceleration this don't have in each version. In Studio you have the Nvidia encoder available. For example in mp4 you are restricted to DaVinci H.264 and H.265 encoder free, even if you have a Nvidia you can't use their encoder. Yes, for a start you have access to many more encoders. I'd love to know if you only changed whether you are using free or Studio, would you see any difference in render speed? The difference might be that the Studio could make use of multiple gpus. The code for hardware acceleration in the free version is essentially the same in the Studio version. What I think I'm hearing is the answer is a resounding no. One more time: I'd love to know if you only changed whether you are using free or Studio, would you see any difference in render speed? If you added more complexity to the timeline (but only with what you can do in both versions), would there be any difference in render times (which I equate with efficiency in hardware acceleration)? I did not make that explicit, so you can ding me for that. But from my perspective you might as well since I don't have deep pockets AND what was implied in my question was "if you don't change the hardware" will you see a difference. ![]() In fact, if you have deep pockets and can afford multiple high-end GPUs, you will definitely see an increase in performance for some workflows (since Studio supports multiple GPUs). Steve Alexander wrote:I didn't say 'not at all'. Of course, you wouldn't get any of the additional features of Studio, but it sounds like you don't need those. If you don't use 10-bit 4:2:2 H265 footage (such as from a Canon R6 in CLog3), then in your case and with your hardware, you probably wouldn't experience any performance gains from moving to Studio. Mostly, I'm just curious about what kind of performance (rendering) would happen if anyone upgraded to Studio now that hardware acceleration is included in the free version. I want to buy it, cause it would be my new shiny toy, but I can't imagine my times would be cut in half. I'm not sure that I can justify $300 for Studio. It would take 45 to 50 minutes to render an hour long clip with two or three fusion transitions, a 60 second intro with green screen background. This was substantially beefier than my earlier rig. Rg3inAZ wrote:I have upgraded my machine for relatively cheap. ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |