GPU support for Apple MacBook? Distributed processing?

ATOWAPaul · Post by **ATOWAPaul** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:18 pm

Hi all,

I have recently discovered Neat Video and am very happy, I often have to shoot under low light circumstances and improvement is dramatic. I know there is a thread already, but I have 2 issues:
1. Is GPU support for Macs with AMD/ATI video cards imminent? I understand that the NV team is working on it. Any progress, that you would like to share with us?
2. I now own both an iMac late 2009 with i7 (2,8 GHz) processor and a MacBook Pro with the newest i7 (2,2 GHz) begin 2011. Both have maximum RAM (16GB resp 8GB), both run Lion. I used Motion 5 on both Macs and processed the same clip of 18m 24 sec on both machines (not simultaneously). The time difference is dramatic. The newer MacBook took some 5 hours (GPU support would highly be appreciated), but the older iMac took almost 19 hours!
Can somebody explain this? It beats me; is it only due to improved architecture and/or higher RAM speed (1067MHz versus 1333MHz) in the newer machine? Can performance of the older iMac be improved?
Any experience with distributed processing with Neat Video?

Any ideas on both issues would be highly appreciated.
ATOWAPaul

Post by **NVTeam** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:54 pm

Regarding your first question, we are evaluating all available technologies and may support ATI cards at some point.

About the speed difference between iMac and MBP, please run Optimize (Neat Video's menu Tools > Preferences > Performance > Optimize) on both computers and post the measurement logs here. This will help to directly compare the filter speed on both computers.

Thank you,
Vlad

ATOWAPaul · Post by **ATOWAPaul** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:35 pm

Hi Vlad,

Thanks for coming back to me real swift. I have found the requested details for you. Please find them below.

Optimizing performance settings for iMac
Frame: 1920x1080 progressive, 32 bits per channel, Radius: 1 frame
Running the test data set on up to 8 CPU cores

1 core: 1.29 frames/sec
2 cores: 2.43 frames/sec
3 cores: 3.15 frames/sec
4 cores: 3.77 frames/sec
5 cores: 3.75 frames/sec
6 cores: 3.61 frames/sec
7 cores: 3.45 frames/sec
8 cores: 3.22 frames/sec

Best combination: 4 cores

Optimizing performance settings for MBP
Frame: 1920x1080 progressive, 32 bits per channel, Radius: 3 frames
Running the test data set on up to 8 CPU cores

1 core: 1.07 frames/sec
2 cores: 2.05 frames/sec
3 cores: 2.86 frames/sec
4 cores: 3.22 frames/sec
5 cores: 3.09 frames/sec
6 cores: 2.84 frames/sec
7 cores: 2.67 frames/sec
8 cores: 2.56 frames/sec

Best combination: 4 cores

I hadnt yet made the comparison. To me it looks like the iMac should go faster. Could e.g. Lion Server slow down the iMac? Please share your thoughts with me.
Thanks in advance,
Paul

ATOWAPaul · Post by **ATOWAPaul** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:48 pm

Of course bothe setting should be equal, that's why I rerun the optimizing schedule:

Optimizing performance settings for iMac
Frame: 1920x1080 progressive, 32 bits per channel, Radius: 3 frames
Running the test data set on up to 8 CPU cores

1 core: 0.967 frames/sec
2 cores: 1.83 frames/sec
3 cores: 2.38 frames/sec
4 cores: 2.75 frames/sec
5 cores: 2.75 frames/sec
6 cores: 2.63 frames/sec
7 cores: 2.48 frames/sec
8 cores: 2.28 frames/sec

Best combination: 4 cores

Optimizing performance settings for MBP
Frame: 1920x1080 progressive, 32 bits per channel, Radius: 3 frames
Running the test data set on up to 8 CPU cores

1 core: 1.07 frames/sec
2 cores: 2.05 frames/sec
3 cores: 2.86 frames/sec
4 cores: 3.22 frames/sec
5 cores: 3.09 frames/sec
6 cores: 2.84 frames/sec
7 cores: 2.67 frames/sec
8 cores: 2.56 frames/sec

Best combination: 4 cores

Now the iMac is slower. 0.47 times 27.600 Frames = 12972 seconds = 3.6 hours (if I'm correct). Thats explains it partially, but not all. Do you agree?

BTW thanks for working on GPU support, we customers want it all and computers are just too slow when you're waiting. But you can always wish whatever you want, right? (':lol:')

Post by **NVTeam** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:58 pm

The tests show that your iMac and MBP are almost equal when it comes to Neat Video processing alone. However, there may be a difference in other parts of the rendering process such as the host application, codecs, other filters. If some of them run slower on one computer and faster on another then you can get a significant difference in render times. FCP often works slower when processing certain clip formats, especially non-QuickTime ones.

I would set up a simple test project and run it on both computers for direct comparison. When everything is about equal, there must not be a large difference in render times.

Vlad

ATOWAPaul · Post by **ATOWAPaul** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:19 am

Hi Vlad,

Thanks again for a swift reaction. The testing so far seems to establish, that I mainly have to look elsewhere, not in the hardware's responsiveness. I am not much of a scientific tester, but I will try my best. I will come back if something pops up. Meanwhile, it looks more like an individual issue, not interesting for other forum members.

Perhaps we better close this thread and continue directly with support.

One more thing: please keep up the work on GPU assistance for the ones that chose AMD/ATI video cards (Apple MBP owners).

Thanks in advance,
Paul

Post by **NVTeam** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:38 am

Sure, lets do like you say. You are welcome to e-mail us at support [at] neatvideo.com.

And we will certainly continue our work on better support for different GPUs.

Thank you,
Vlad

Neat Video & Neat Image community