Camtasia 9: Are you going to utilize the GPU for rendering or not?

  • 2
  • Problem
  • Updated 7 months ago
  • (Edited)
Like the ESPN NFL segment...."C'MON, MAN!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuqmGta_r-w

What is the deal with GPU acceleration? I've been waiting on Camtasia to finally make use of the beast I have in my machine (GTX 1070). In CS 8, there is supposed to be some GPU utilization for rendering, but it is rather weak in it's implementation as GPU-Z shows there is only 12-24% GPU load when rendering.

In Camtasia 9, there is no option for GPU ENcoding in the Preferences panel, whatsoever. C'MON MAN! Let us get the most out of our hardware, rather than have to go on a lunch break waiting for our render to finish.
Photo of dnashj33

dnashj33

  • 68 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
  • frustrated

Posted 3 years ago

  • 2
Photo of Joe Morgan

Joe Morgan

  • 6996 Posts
  • 3822 Reply Likes
GPU's are primarily used during the editing process.A powerful GPU aids in the smooth playback of videos while you are editing them.Especially when you are using special effects, color grading and things of this nature. During those times the GPU can be your best friend indeed.

However, when it comes to rendering most videos. The CPU generally does all the heavy lifting.
Yes, the GPU can help to varying degrees but in most cases it's not utilized all that much.

If you're frustrated by slow rendering times. The best thing you can do to improve performance is get a more powerful CPU.If you already own one of the best available. You could go with a computer that supports multiple CPU's. 

Regards,Joe
(Edited)
Photo of brian.brooklyn.ny

brian.brooklyn.ny

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Joe

You really boosted the CPU utilisation with Camtasia 9.0, but when I encode/render videos with Camtasia 8.6 my R9 290 i maxed out, and the encoding process is significantly faster than with Camtasia 9.0.

I'm putting Camtasia 9.0 aside for now and hope you will bring an update to the table that enables GPU encoding/rendering.

Best regards, Brian
Photo of dnashj33

dnashj33

  • 68 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
GPU's are primarily used during the editing process.A powerful GPU aids in the smooth playback of videos while you are editing them.Especially when you are using special effects, color grading and things of this nature. During those times the GPU can be your best friend indeed.

However, when it comes to rendering most videos. The CPU generally does all the heavy lifting.
Yes, the GPU can help to varying degrees but in most cases it's not utilized all that much.

If you're frustrated by slow rendering times. The best thing you can do to improve performance is get a more powerful CPU.If you already own one of the best available. You could go with a computer that supports multiple CPU's. 

Regards,Joe
COME AGAIN?! Premiere Pro utilizes the GPU to great effect in RENDERING.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRUcOTej900

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnWXxDIJkhM

You can see starting at roughly the 20min mark, a comparison between CPU only RENDERING (not just smooth display). It's not even close. Do you want me to do a direct comparison myself, to further prove the point?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PQxpk_6ZPQ
(Edited)
Photo of Joe Morgan

Joe Morgan

  • 6996 Posts
  • 3822 Reply Likes
However, when it comes to rendering "most" videos. The CPU generally does all the heavy lifting.
Yes, the GPU can help to varying degrees but in most cases it's not utilized all that much.

That's the important take away here.

I could  show you scenarios with faster rendering times when using a GPU.
All I gotta do is throw a lot of effects into the mix.  But that's not a typical video in my opinion.
   
Photo of dnashj33

dnashj33

  • 68 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
It isn't just with a lot of effects. Even though most people have transitions and other effects applied. Did you watch any of the videos I linked to. MOST video formats wasn't the topic of discussion. MOST people don't use MOST video codecs. Instead they use just a few common standards like H.264.
(Edited)
Photo of dnashj33

dnashj33

  • 68 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
CPU vs GPU rendering in Sony Vegas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x4-sIp8vFM
Photo of Bob Lewis

Bob Lewis

  • 360 Posts
  • 184 Reply Likes
I watched all the videos and in "How Adobe Premiere utilizes the GPU" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PQxpk_6ZPQ ) at around 21 minutes
he states that the GPU helps but "the CPU is the most important component to upgrade".

I think both of you, dnashj33 and  Joe Morgan have valid points,
the GPU does seem to help AND the CPU does most of the heavy lifting.

I appreciate both of your comments.  I take from each, as the last video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x4-sIp8vFM )  stated,
that "we need the best GPU and the best CPU" that we can afford for each play a roll.
Photo of Dave O'Rourke

Dave O'Rourke, Senior Software Engineer

  • 1443 Posts
  • 411 Reply Likes
Official Response
Pushing frames to the GPU is fast.  Pulling frames back off the GPU is slow.  For that reason, Camtasia 9 uses the GPU (by default) for preview on the canvas, and the CPU for rendering during production to file.  If we used the GPU for rendering during production, you'd see a higher % utilization on the GPU, but it would take longer to complete the render.

But even this is an over-simplification.  You have to look at the whole render pipeline to determine where the bottleneck is.  This analysis is project and machine dependent.  It's the slowest link in the pipeline that determines the max render throughput.  For production, that's usually the encoder, which is CPU bound right now.  But it can also be disk read/write times if your disk is slow, or if you've sourced files from a network drive or thumb drive (don't do this, please).  Some effects are expensive, and though the GPU is usually faster, there are some effects that are rendered faster on the CPU.  The dimensions of the source files and canvas matter too, with smaller dimensions able to render faster.  Scaling of images and video is done 30x for each sec of video on the timeline, so that needs to be fast.  Decoding 60fps sources can be slow.  Then there's the number of stacked tracks at a given time.  Etc.  So it's complicated.

We continue to look for ways to leverage the hardware to the fullest extent, and we do try not to be worse than in previous versions, whenever possible.  But it's a complicated optimization problem, with many variables, across many different hardware systems.  If you're seeing lags in performance, we do want to know, as there may be something we can tweak to eek out some more performance in future versions.
Photo of kurrykid

kurrykid, Champion

  • 759 Posts
  • 131 Reply Likes
Great explanation Dave...thanks.
Photo of Evan Sveum

Evan Sveum

  • 1 Post
  • 2 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Liking Camtasia Studio Less and Less....

Rending video (Encoding) is still a chore with Camtasia Studio 9.  I have a GPU that is enormous, but... Camtasia still doesn't allow me to use it.  How difficult is it to add this feature?  As with anything, I will not complain for long.  I will find another product that does the job and utilizes the power of my GPU.  Come on Camtasia!
Photo of brian.brooklyn.ny

brian.brooklyn.ny

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Copy that!
Photo of burkeym

burkeym

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I thought I had read in the advertising material that Camtasia 9 was going to finally use the GPU.  I was about to buy it because of that. I am glad I saw this, TechSmith just lost another sale. We all know what all those CUDA cores are designed to do, and I have 2,048 of them. I guess I'll give my money to AMD for a Ryzen instead of giving money to TechSmith.
Photo of dnashj33

dnashj33

  • 68 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
I recently had a 40 minute video in Premiere Pro, with only a handful of cuts...nothing excessive at all...and for some reason the rendering time was like way over 30min (i7 970 6core/12 threads and 32GB RAM). I was like what's up with that? I thought surely the GPU acceleration would have shortened it dramatically.

So, after it rendered, I went back into the settings and somehow, GPU acceleration was turned off. Not sure why. But I enabled it (Mercury Engine), and when I rendered again (H.264) it was lightning fast (GTX 1070 is a beast of a graphics card). Only took about 5min. Thanks Tech Smith...for making excuses why GPU doesn't help when it damn sure did/does in Premiere Pro.
(Edited)
Photo of s2

s2

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm trying to figure out configuration for a new PC for video editing (I'm a new Camtasia user).

I found this article very helpful and it seems in alignment with Dave O'Rourke's (TechSmith's) post, updated just last week.  Thought I would share for others looking to understand optimal hardware configuration for video editing.

Highlights:
  • GPUs still don’t have a huge impact on any kind of Performance improvement when Editing Videos.
  • Almost always, the CPU will be responsible for the performance in encoding your Frames.
To summarize the Video Rendering Process and the Hardware that is mainly responsible:
  • Read Footage (SSD)
  • Calculate / Apply Effects in your Timeline (CPU, GPU)
  • Store the Frames in RAM (RAM)
  • Read Frames from RAM (RAM)
  • Encode Frames (CPU)
  • Pack frames and Audio into a Video Container (CPU)
  • Save Video Result on Disc (SSD)