Which graphics accelerator actually works with VS?

[Jan Germany]

Hello

having gone through all the posts on here concerning the "hardware decoder" option I find that seemingly nobody really gets results by checking the boxes in the settings tab.
On the one hand, I am happy because I am not the only one realizing that checking the box does not change anything (even though the program says that it may take some time to "optimize"); on the other hand I would really like to know if anyone has got a list of graphics accelerators which can actually work with VS?

I remember that on this same computer, end of 2016, the program was REALLY fast rendering, but it crashed after a few minutes of rendering, so I never saw the final results.
Then, after a lot of back-and-forth with the Corel support (and even someone with a remote connection to my computer) Corel made an update, and suddenly the program worked without crashing, but slower from then on.
My guess is that Corel has fixed a problem they had by cutting off the better part of the whole "optimization", but who knows?

Btw: I realized that PowerDirector, too, does not make much use of the graphics acceleration.

I do not expect anyone to actually know how to make the optimization work (except for Corel staff ...) but just some technical explanation why that is - and of course, if anyone does have a list of compatible chips ... very welcome.

Kind regards
Jan

[aljimenez]

i think the problem with rendering is all the filters, transitions, overlays, titles, music, and other edits that a project ends up having. Way too many software sections that can't easily be optimized to use hardware acceleration. I could see software sections that handle un-edited video clip sections could be optimized to use hardware acceleration.

I think Corel needs to devote resources to improve this but I have only seen slight focus on this area.

[bifer]

That's the problem I saw with all Corel products I use. ASP3 included ...

But Corel doesn't seem to be alone with it.

When see in my facebook groups what people write what they use ... then 75% of them are happy with Final Cut Pro X. As always Apple did focus on optimizing their programs on their hardware. All other fail, even Adobe Premier. And if I look on the HW requirements of Resolve I better book space in a data center ... at least my graphic card dies in Resolve after just clicking around in the program.

I just don't want to change to Apple. I have Windows at home, I use Linux I have Android, Synology Disk Station (with Linux), I just don't want another platform ...

So for majority I stil stick to VS2018 even it is not the best and fastest.

[TonyP]

bifer, we use what we are comfortable with. Apple can optimize their software to their hardware because it's a "closed" ecosystem. Think about the almost infinite number of possibilities of soft/hardware configurations in the PC world. Impossible to program software that will be 100% on every build. Even in your post, there are 25% of people that aren't quite happy with their "Apple".

VS isn't the fastest or most feature filled, nor perfect. But it has some outstanding features and benefits in ease of use that can get people up and editing quickly. That gets people excited. Seeing their first projects that they have created. Instead of going through a lot of reading and a lot of tutorial watching to learn how to just do the basic things. And as they experiment, there is so much more under the "hood" of VS to keep them busy.

Do I wish it would make use of my hardware? Yes. Hopefully in the future.