Issues with rendering and timeline playback.

[BobbyC101st]

I am so glad that helped on your system "Myromance123", I was thrilled when it worked on my system too.

I had Microsoft Office 2000 at the time when I had XP. When I upgraded to Windows 7 64bit, the Photodraw 2 part of Office 2000 would not work properly and I read forums about the problem and someone suggested copying a particular dll into the SysWow64 folder. The Syswow64 folder is actually for dll's for a 32bit program.....it runs a windows within windows on a 64bit operating system.

So I remembered that event and tried it with the only dll with cuda in its name in the "Corel VideoStudio Pro X" folder......great!

Glad I could help sharing the mysteries of computers ha ha ha.

[myromance123]

I'm definitely grateful for you sharing it

I purchased a new CPU today, the Core i7-4770 but with the 327 drivers the option was still greyed out. So, I returned to the 314.22 drivers, and enabled the Encoder Acceleration in VideoStudio X6 Ultimate and started rendering one of the older video projects I have to see what would happen.

Lo and behold! My GPU is actually being heavily utilised! Whether that's a good thing or not remains to be seen (in terms of rendering times), but as I type this GPU-Z is showing the load reach 66%. Looks like on top of using your workaround, by adding an Intel CPU into the mix and returning to an older driver things seem to work out now.



On the right you can see the GPU load hitting 50%, and this really reduces the load on the CPU which can be seen on the left.

[Cypherdude]

I'm definitely grateful for you sharing it

I purchased a new CPU today, the Core i7-4770 but with the 327 drivers the option was still greyed out. So, I returned to the 314.22 drivers, and enabled the Encoder Acceleration in VideoStudio X6 Ultimate and started rendering one of the older video projects I have to see what would happen.

Lo and behold! My GPU is actually being heavily utilised! Whether that's a good thing or not remains to be seen (in terms of rendering times), but as I type this GPU-Z is showing the load reach 66%. Looks like on top of using your workaround, by adding an Intel CPU into the mix and returning to an older driver things seem to work out now.

On the right you can see the GPU load hitting 50%, and this really reduces the load on the CPU which can be seen on the left.

myromance,
did you install the CUDA 5.5 PRODUCTION RELEASE to get your GPU to work?

[myromance123]

did you install the CUDA 5.5 PRODUCTION RELEASE to get your GPU to work?

No, I did not. I previously tried using that, but it did not work so I uninstalled it. I am using the CUDA driver that is installed with the 314.22 Nvidia WHQL driver.

[Cypherdude]

did you install the CUDA 5.5 PRODUCTION RELEASE to get your GPU to work?

No, I did not. I previously tried using that, but it did not work so I uninstalled it. I am using the CUDA driver that is installed with the 314.22 Nvidia WHQL driver.

I uninstalled the 296.10 drivers and installed the 314.22 drivers but there is no change. The funny thing is that FireFox 23 uses the GPU but VideoStudio does not. Why can't Corel fix their bugs?

WHAT is wrong with VideoStudio now? WHY doesn't it use CUDA. So let's go through this. I have placed the CuDAC32.dll file in the C:\Windows\SysWOW64 folder. I have upgraded to v314.22. I have set the nVidia Control Panel to only use CUDA for my GTX 460 SE GPU. I have upgraded VideoStudio from X3 to X4 to X5 and now X6. I have paid all the way. WHY doesn't VideoStudio X6 USE CUDA. I have spent a lot of time and money on this.

DOES VideoStudio use CUDA for WMV files? Is that the problem?

If VideoStudio doesn't use CUDA for certain systems, they should say so.

[Cypherdude]

Hello,
VideoStudio X6 does not use CUDA on my system. Is the problem that I have trying to render WMV with "pre-processing". Is that the problem?

[Cypherdude]

Hello,
VideoStudio X6 does not use CUDA on my system. Is the problem that I have trying to render VBR WMV's. Is that the problem?

Is someone at Corel going to fix this problem? This has been going on for years now.

[lata]

Hi Cypherdude

Sorry you are having problems but if you expect Corel to read this post then don’t hold your breath.
The forum is manned by people just link you, Video Studio users, we are all volunteers none of us work for Corel.

If you want then to hear your issues contact them via Corel Support.
They also use Facebook, not used it myself but have heard that they do actually reply, and its free.

Converting Mov to WMV.
You don’t give any details of the Mov files, type of compression used etc…
WMV as far as I know uses Frame Based and not Variable Bit Rate (VBR), maybe thats just a typo
But certainly what you are converting from and to does influence the time taken, and if the program cannot read the files easily then render will be slow irrespective of the accelerations you may try to apply.

If you can make a Mov available for upload others could use that to render to WMV and indeed compare render times, I don’t mind giving it a go but would expect slower times, more like real time rendering.

But as I say Facebook may be the best option

[Cypherdude]

Hi Cypherdude

Sorry you are having problems but if you expect Corel to read this post then don’t hold your breath.
The forum is manned by people just link you, Video Studio users, we are all volunteers none of us work for Corel.

If you want then to hear your issues contact them via Corel Support.
They also use Facebook, not used it myself but have heard that they do actually reply, and its free.

Converting Mov to WMV.
You don’t give any details of the Mov files, type of compression used etc…
WMV as far as I know uses Frame Based and not Variable Bit Rate (VBR), maybe thats just a typo
But certainly what you are converting from and to does influence the time taken, and if the program cannot read the files easily then render will be slow irrespective of the accelerations you may try to apply.

If you can make a Mov available for upload others could use that to render to WMV and indeed compare render times, I don’t mind giving it a go but would expect slower times, more like real time rendering.

But as I say Facebook may be the best option

Last night I upgraded from nVidia drivers 296.10 to 314.22 the way myromance123 did. I installed TechPowerUp GPU-Z. I also copied CuDAC32.dll to several different places.

VS X6 is still not using CUDA.

myromance123 has a later Intel i7-4770 and Asus nVidia GTX 680.

In 3/2011 I had to buy a new 2009 model Asus P7P55 Pro mobo. From 3/2011 to 5/2011, Intel stopped making their current model mobo's because of their SATA problems. In 3/2011 I also bought a GTX 460SE and an Quadro NVS 450. This is probably why CUDA doesn't work. I have 4 year old mobo technology with 2 different kinds of video cards on my system. Corel claims VS X6 uses CUDA but this is false, not true even. Corel's CUDA only works on later model systems. Corel's CUDA does not work on older or mixed video card systems.

Corel's CUDA only works on a limited number of different systems.

Corel's VS X6 CUDA only seems to work on CUDA v3.0 and later. My GTX 460SE uses CUDA v2.1.

Today, I put my Win7-64 into sleep mode. When I tried to revive it, it froze for the first time I can remember. If it happens again, I will have to downgrade back to nVidia drivers 296.10.

Corel has always been lackadaisical (sloppy) with their programming. Even their WordPerfect X5 has problems with their onscreen Quick-tips feature on multiple monitors. After I upgraded to nVidia drivers 314.22 and changed the nVidia Control Panel CUDA and performance settings for vstudio.exe, this is what VS X6 "Ultimate" looks like when I start it. Enjoy, LOL

[lata]

Hi

As for the Corel Guide displaying like that, I believe Corel may be working in the server. Over the past few days all versions of video studio have had problems displaying the Corel Guide

I have just tried X6 and it seems to display ok, for now.


But as I say you really need to be telling Corel as it is extremely unlikely that any employees of Corel are gonna read your posts.

[Cypherdude]

Hi

As for the Corel Guide displaying like that, I believe Corel may be working in the server. Over the past few days all versions of video studio have had problems displaying the Corel Guide

I have just tried X6 and it seems to display ok, for now.

But as I say you really need to be telling Corel as it is extremely unlikely that any employees of Corel are gonna read your posts.

I just tried VS X6 and the Corel Guide stills looks like my pic. It hasn't changed. Tomorrow is a holiday for them in Canada. If the problem is corrected, it'll probably be on Tuesday.

As for VS X6 and CUDA, I think they already know about it. I doubt it would make any difference. Do you really think contacting Corel's Technical Support would make any difference? It's like what myromance123 said before. All they'll tell me is I have to pay a fee and then they'll tell me to reinstall. No thanks. That won't solve the problem.

The only way to fix Corel's bug is to fax their CEO Tom Berquist in OTTAWA, Ontario, Canada: (613) 759-8748.

Then MAYBE Corel would fix this problem but I doubt it.

I believe Corel decided to only implement CUDA on a limited number of systems because of cost. Corel is a small company with limited funds. They are simply unable to have CUDA work on most nVidia systems because it's just too expensive for them. So they decided to only have CUDA work on the simplest and latest Intel and nVidia systems. If you look at the Supported GPUs table, chances are VS X6 only works with CUDA with later Intel systems which have CUDA v3.0 and later. That means you must have a later Intel system with an nVidia GTX 650 or later. My guess is, if you have an AMD system or an earlier nVidia card, you're SOL. If anyone can tell me otherwise, please do so. If anyone here has an AMD system or especially a v2.0 nVidia card where VS X6 uses CUDA, please post the GPU-Z or Sysinternals Process Explorer pic with the GPU working here. I'd be very interested in learning this.

It's a shame I cannot fully use my nVidia GTX 460SE. The GTX 460 SE actually has a powerful processor, capable of processing at 748.8 GFLOP's per second. Oh well. If I installed 2 GTX 680's, MAYBE I could get VS X6 to work. If I was sure VS X6 would work with 2 GTX 680's, I would buy and install them. The GTX 680 has 3090 GFLOP's per second processing capability.

As I mentioned before, I have an "older" circa 2009 Lynnfield era motherboard. I would be gambling as to whether VS X6 would use CUDA. As with myromance123, I might also be forced to buy a Haswell CPU. That's a lot of trouble just because Corel won't implement CUDA on 4 year old systems which are Intel CPU's I might add. I would also have to buy a new motherboard and reinstall everything. I cannot do that. I don't have time for that. That would take 2 weeks. I have other projects and I must use my PC.

[Cypherdude]

I looked at the CUDA options for upgrading my video cards. Assuming my 2009 era Asus P7P55D-E Pro motherboard with the Intel i7 870 Lynnfield CPU is supported by Corel, and that's a big assumption, here is my assessment:

The nVidia GTX 680 processor will soon be discontinued. The best options are the GTX 770 or the GTX 780. Because I use my desktop for my business, which is not video related, I prefer the quietest system possible. I have taken great lengths to make my desktop as quiet as possible yet also as cool as possible. Therefore, I would not buy overclocked video cards. I prefer eVGA video cards over all others. Here are my choices. I do not prefer Newegg over Amazon. However, because Newegg does not allow returns for the GTX 780, I prefer Amazon if the GTX 780 is purchased. I am assuming both the GTX 770 and GTX 780 video cards allow a minimum of 3 or 4, with the HDMI connection, monitors to be run simultaneously:
EVGA 02G-P4-2770-KR GeForce GTX 770 2GB
Newegg's page
Amazon's page

EVGA 03G-P4-2781-KR GeForce GTX 780 3GB
Newegg's page
Amazon's page

Here are my calculations in Single Precision GFLOP's based on the WikiPedia's Comparison of Nvidia graphics processing units page for the GTX 770 and 780:
GTX 780 @ 3977
---------------------- x Cost of $400 GTX 770 = Comparison to $650 GTX 780
GTX 770 @ 3213

1.23778 x Cost of $400 GTX 770 = Comparison to $650 GTX 780

$495 Single Precision GFLOP's Cost Comparison of GTX 770 to $650 Cost Comparison of GTX 780

The $400 GTX 770 is a better buy than the $650 GTX 780 in terms of Single Precision GFLOP's. Because the newest AMD R9 290X cards are arriving soon, wait until the AMD R9 290X arrives and the nVidia GTX 770 makers drop their prices. AMD Radeon GPU's do not support CUDA.