- Posts: 20
- Thank you received: 0
3 Post Moderation Rule for New Boarders (25 Jan 2021)
New boarders will have their posts moderated - Don't worry if you cannot see your post immediately.
Choppy Playback with4k all-i 400 Mbps
I thought once it was rendered , it would be fine, but that is not the case, the choppyness is still there. Even when I change to "better performance"
I am editing on a IMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2015).
The timeline settings do seem to matter, if I edit on a 1080 timeline after rendering the choppyness is gone.
Any help here would be greatly appreciated.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
If it is slow when rendered this implies a possible hard disk or I/O limitation. If the timeline is rendered, all the compute-intensive work is done. The render files are ProRes 422 so it's just a matter of pulling them off the disk and displaying them in the NLE.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
however I just installed 10.4.7 and now it is playing back much better,
I should have done that 1st
Thanks again.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Or better yet: don't record in all-i. According to many tests performed by others, there is not only no advantage in terms of playback, it's also not superior in quality over Long-GOP.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Axel wrote: If it's GH5/GH5s, this was discussed elsewhere. It seems that contrary to theory, this is not more edit-friendly in FCPX. Optimize.
Or better yet: don't record in all-i. According to many tests performed by others, there is not only no advantage in terms of playback, it's also not superior in quality over Long-GOP.
I don't have the GH5 but I know FCPX can make use of Intel's Quick Sync. Some video codecs will playback and render better than others depending on the NLE. Blackmagic RAW seems to playback easier in DaVinci Resolve than Premiere Pro. I don't doubt the Apple Pro Res codecs playback better using FCPX than Premiere Pro.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
However recent versions have been improved, initially for encode (export), then later for decode (ie playback). Resolve and FCPX are still generally faster, especially on playback. However there were some narrow edge cases where recent versions of Premiere were faster at encoding to H.264 than FCPX 10.4.6 on certain hardware. I haven't re-tested on 10.4.7, but that has some significant performance upgrades, esp. for built-in effects but also for H.264 encoding on certain platforms.
The last time I tested it, Premiere was much faster than FCPX for 10-bit HEVC encoding on both iMac Pro and 2017 iMac 27, but that's a single case.
The OP reported 10.4.7 made an improvement for 4k GH5 400 mbps All-Intra material, and that was on a 2015 iMac, not the 2017 and later that have improved Quick Sync hardware. That is something to keep in mind if anyone is using that codec.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
FCPX.guru wrote: Davinci and FCPX both have better performance overall thant PPro due to the optimization of the coding. PPro is not known for its performance.
It depends on the video codec and computer. FCXP has an advantage over Premiere Pro when using H.264 on a computer without a dedicated GPU. On an inexpensive laptop FCPX has an advantage but not so much on a desktop computer. I can playback multiple layers of any 4K video codec using Premiere Pro at full resolution with High Quality Enabled. High Quality and full resolution are not the same thing. If I dropped down to 1/4 restitution I could probably playback 25 layers of any 4K video codec. What more could you expect?
Please Log in to join the conversation.
It sounds like you have used Premiere Pro. I think you and many others will find my video link below very informative. I can playback multiple layers of 4K Pro Res, H.264 and even R3D files at full resolution with high quality playback enabled. FCPX does not have a high quality playback option like Premiere Pro. Full resolution and high quality playback are not the same thing. High quality playback can clean up the image but it takes a real toll on the GPU. For some reason when using the Blackmagic RAW video codec it takes a toll on CPU as well as the Mercury Transmit playback. I don't doubt an iMac with FCPX can make use of benchmarks to see what is going on with different codecs.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
We still make proxy so that we can edit with as much buttery smoothness as possible across all computers.
I would suspect that the increased playback you're seeing is from the improvements in fcpx 10.4.7 in regards to the Metal 2 improvements apple has made. (looking forward to when we can update to 10.4.7)
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Is there anyway you could allow us to test out a few sample clips from your camera? Maybe four or five twenty second long clips?
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Thier wrote: Does anyone know why I would be getting choppy playback from footage that was shot with a GH5 at 4k 400 Mbps 23.98 ...
I just tested this exact codec on FCPX 10.4.6, FCPX 10.4.7, Resolve Studio 16.1.0.055 and Premiere Pro 13.1.5 on a 10-core Vega 64 iMac Pro running macOS Mojave 10.14.6. Media was on a 4-drive RAID-0 SSD Thunderbolt 2 array. The FCPX viewer was on "better quality", Resolve was at default, and Premiere Pro was at 1/4 resolution using Metal playback.
Results: FCPX 10.4.7 has a much better viewer update rate vs. 10.4.6 using this codec on an iMac Pro. Objectively the frame update rate is "only" 42% faster but subjectively the difference is much greater since 10.4.6 was halting and uneven. It would update 3-4 frames pretty fast than a lag between the next frames. On 10.4.7 it was not only faster but more consistent. It was not as fast as the latest version of Resolve, but once you reach 20 frame/sec update rate, they both feel very responsive.
This was also mirrored by the latency between varying JKL input and playhead response, IOW response lag when switching between forward and reverse. Both FCPX 10.4.7 and Resolve Studio 16.1 were both very responsive on this "difficult" codec.
Shooting the playback screen at 240 fps enabled measuring the viewer update rate when each NLE was requested to fast forward at 4x speed, IOW 3 clicks on the L key. The results were:
Resolve: 28 frames/sec
FCPX 10.4.7: 20 frames/sec
FCPX 10.4.6: 14 frames/sec (but uneven)
Premiere: 2 frames/sec
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Could you upload a few sample clips? I would like to test it out on my system. It might prove to be interesting.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
arc wrote: Joema,
Could you upload a few sample clips? I would like to test it out on my system. It might prove to be interesting.
Here is a short clip. I don't have much of this material since my documentary team rarely uses it and most of what we have can't be released.
Note since this is an FCPX forum, performance issues (regardless of NLE) should generally be evaluated on a Mac, else there is no reason to discuss it here.
www.dropbox.com/s/3dz4ez4zp4ee1eq/P1111368_35275.MOV?dl=0
Please Log in to join the conversation.
joema wrote:
Here is a short clip. I don't have much of this material since my documentary team rarely uses it and most of what we have can't be released.
Note since this is an FCPX forum, performance issues (regardless of NLE) should generally be evaluated on a Mac, else there is no reason to discuss it here.
Thank you for the link. All video codecs take a hit on the CPU and GPU differently. Having said that if the video file plays back OK on a Windows system using Premiere Pro everyone will be more knowledgeable don't you think?
Please Log in to join the conversation.
I think you may have uploaded the wrong video file. The video clip you provided a link for plays back super easy on my system. I can play it back with multiple layers at full resolution with high quality enabled and also apply a couple of cc filters. It does not drop frames or even max out the CPU or GPU. One thing I noticed is that when I check the video clip's properties it is listed as H.264 but it does not work my IGPU at all. In other words it is not making use of Intel's Quick sync on my computer system. Having said that it still plays back really easy so I am thinking the wrong video file was uploaded. Just so you now the video has a lizard in it. It is hand held so that is why it might seem a little choppy for playback. Other people might want to test it out as well. I just don't think it is the correct video file. Having said that thanks for uploading it none the less because I do find it odd that the video codec is listed as H.264 but it is not using Intel's Quikc Sync on my system.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
arc wrote: Joema,
I think you may have uploaded the wrong video file. The video clip you provided a link for plays back super easy on my system. ....
It was the right codec, but it appears Premiere does optimization on very short "test-type" timelines which lessens the lag problem. It can't do this on longer real-world clips, but those are difficult to upload if 4k All-Intra at 400 mbps.
I found another method that reproduces the problem, at least on my 10-core iMac Pro. I'm uploading a 24 sec clip using the same 4k GH5 10-bit 4:2:2 All-Intra codec, file suffix 35269. If you append this clip to itself 10 times in a Premiere timeline then do JKL forward at 4x followed by rapid reverse it becomes very sluggish and laggy, at least on an iMac Pro or 2017 i7 iMac running Premiere 13.1.5 and Mojave 10.14.6, 1/4 res and Metal playback, but not if using FCPX 10.4.7 or Resolve Studio 16.1 on the same machines and test file.
24 sec clip, file ID 35269, GH5 4k H.264 All-Intra 23.98 fps, 10- bit 4:2:2, 400 mbps: www.dropbox.com/s/r0brvv6ktj4vuye/p1111362_35269.mov?dl=0
To stay on track of the OP question, it does seem this codec was slower on FCPX 10.4.6 than on 10.4.7. On both iMac Pro and 2017 i7 iMac I tested, it is significantly faster on 10.4.7 (both on Mojave).
The viewer update rate of Resolve 16.1 is a bit faster than FCPX on the same Mac hardware using that codec, which shows there is no Apple secret or inside trick to getting good NLE performance on a Mac. A well written app can obtain good performance on a Mac platform, whether written by Apple or any other developer.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
The second video clip is much harder to playback using Premiere Pro. Does FCPX behave the same way?
Please Log in to join the conversation.




