HUGE difference in render times

I'm running AE CS5.5 and created a 12 second animation. I made one small change, but the rendering time has gone from less than a minute to over half an hour and I'm hoping someone can give me an idea why.
Here's what I changed: The phrase "What's Your Value?" to "Where's Our Value?" It's just text, not a graphic, with a fade animation (which is the same as the first version).
That's it. Everything else is the same. I'm saving it as a H.264 file to the same location on my hard drive. The only other difference is that I rendered the first version yesterday.
Thanks

Without watching over your shoulder or knowing your level of experience, we're just speculating. There are only a few factors that affect rendring speed out of After Effects and your project may not actually have any of them, I can't tell from here; they may be system or drive related or you might have unknowingly cached 99% of the original so all AE had to do was encode from frame-based to compressed codecs.
You're only going to know if you run some simple, but tedious, experiments.

Similar Messages

HUGE difference in battery time since 3.0

Title pretty much says it all. I'm not using the iPhone anymore than in previous times, but I've only got like a little over half the time. Hope they update soon since there is no way that I know of to go back to previous versions of iPhone software.

Just thought that I would update this problem for any/all that might be experiencing the same thing.
I recently received a replacement iPhone that seems to have taken care of the battery problem I was having. Prior to receiving the replacement, I couldn't even go a full day without having to plug in the iPhone to charge it. My normal use wasn't much of anything either, so it wasn't that. In fact, I'm now using it the exact same way and I've had it unplugged for 2 days now (with normal use) and I still have over half the battery charge left. This could be related to 3.0 and SOME iPhones, and maybe it's not, but I do know that BOTH the email problem and the battery problem started at the EXACT same time, after updating to 3.0 firmware.

Huge difference in Execution time in same Query with different Parameter

Hi Experts,
We are facing an unique problem once we are executing the query in HANA SQL prompt. This Query was generated from BObj and executing in HANA system. Once this query running with following condition, it is taking almost 7-00 minute to execute and returning around 924 rows.
<< WHERE
Table__1."LOGSYS" IN ('RKGCLNT102')
AND
Table__1."CompanyCode" IN ('7240','7245')
AND
Table__1."Plant" IN ……………… >
However if we run the same query with some different plant, It is taking only 2 second. Please find the Query here.
<< WHERE
Table__1."LOGSYS" IN ('RKGCLNT102')
AND
Table__1."CompanyCode" IN ('7245','7600')
AND
Table__1."Plant" IN ……………… >
This is really an unexpected behavior and we are not able to get the actual reason why it is behaving like this.
Could anyone please help to analyze this issue to fine the root cause.
Thanks in Advance.
Regards
Satrajit.

Hi there
Unfortunately you provided too few information to analyze the issue.
Maybe the underlying tables have very skew data and the first select has to read a larger share of the base tables.
Maybe the columns had been unloaded before and the first query had to load them into memory first.
Is the runtime always bad with the one and always good with the other set of parameters?
Have you checked the PlanViz for both versions? How do these differ?
- Lars

Macbook Pro 2012 vs Retina Render time difference

Just purchased the 13-inch: 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 regular macbook pro.
With my budget of a $1700, should I get the 13-inch: 2.6GHz with Retina display Intel Core i5
instead for render work like After Effects? how big of a difference is render time??

Just purchased the 13-inch: 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 regular macbook pro.
With my budget of a $1700, should I get the 13-inch: 2.6GHz with Retina display Intel Core i5
instead for render work like After Effects? how big of a difference is render time??

Help with configuring Qmaster for optimal render times.

I have a 6 machine Qmaster cluster. All machines in the cluster are PowerPC based and I have set up the cluster manually through Qadministrator. I personally like to have everything set up manually so no changes can be made for any reason to this cluster. I have processed a 2.5GB video in the cluster and in an Intel based Mac Pro.
Using Compressor, my output for the file is H.264 for iPod video and iPhone 640x480. The source was placed on an external Firewire 800 drive and destination is to the local disk on the Intel machine.
For the cluster, the source, also from the external Firewire 800 drive, is connected to the cluster controller, which has full read write access to all nodes in the cluster and is not a node in the cluster itself, just set to be the cluster controller. ( I saw this setup on a Qmaster setup page here, http://www.eventdv.net/Articles/News/Feature/Distributed-Network-Encoding-with-A pple-Compressor-37923.htm ) Also, I am using the same output settings, H.264 for iPod video and iPhone 640x480, and output is being written to the cluster controller local disk.
Once the batch is completed, it takes 23 minutes to render the video in the cluster as opposed to 25 minutes on the Intel machine. Not the difference in render time that I hoped for.
Here are the specs for the machines,
Cluster nodes:
1.6 Ghz Powerpc g5 1.25 GB
1.8 Ghz PowerPC G5 4GB
Quad 2.5 Ghz PowerPC G5 2.5 GB RAM
Dual 2.0 Ghz PowerPC G5 2.5 GB RAM
Dual 2.0 Ghz PowerPC G5 6 GB RAM
Dual 2.7 Ghz PowerPC G5 2.5 GB RAM
Cluster Controller:
Dual 2.0 Ghz PowerPC G5 2.5 GB RAM
Intel Machine:
2 x 2.26 quad core Intel Xeon 6GB RAM
Now I know these machines in the cluster are old but all machines, except for the cluster controller, have gotten fresh installs of Leopard 10.5.8, all relevant updates applied and fresh installs of FCP6, Qmaster and Compressor. I still cannot figure out how to speed up rendering. Is there something in this setup that I am doing wrong or is it the limitations of the old hardware. In theory, it should break up this video into segments across all machines in the cluster but it doesn't. The chunk of segments are sent to the Quad G5 and yes I have enabled multiple cores in the Qmaster prefs pane. So I figured i'd only enable 2 instances on the quad core machine and then it started to send segments to other machines but render time is still slow.
Also, even though all machines had read/write access to each other, I would scroll through the log files and see that it could not read the segment from the source media, but I could clearly see the activity light flickering.
After all of this trial and error, I still cant get the render time under 23 mins for this video.
If there's anyone out there with some advice, it would be much appreciated. Also, I forgot to save a copy of the log file, so my fault on that one but I will post once I get a chance to get back to working on that cluster.
Thanks.

Update:
So I have been able to get the cluster working. I've used Compressor and have the source media located in the shared folder that the controller mounts as cluster storage on all of the machines. The problem that I can't figure out now is why the cluster won't read the source media from any other location. I've read through Qmaster documentation and the permissions are supposed to be bypassed when you are using Qmaster.
I have both the mac HD and clusterstorage drives mounted for each machine, on each machine. Still, the cluster won't transcode the file unless I drop the media into the shared folder first. Every sharing option I could think of has been enabled. I have enabled file sharing, appletalk, set read & write permissions for each drive in each machine for all users and It still won't work any other way.
It just seems impractical to have to first copy the source media to the shared folder mounted by the controller since all locations on each machine have been totally opened up.
If anyone has some advice about this issue, it would be greatly appreciated.

Consolidating FX generators for better render time?

"There were no places results found for render time"
Wow. OK.
I have used a generator to create a collection of photos-- I used the same genertaor affect about 6 times in a row in end credits
And it seems this has created a render time of an additional 4 hours.
Overnight render time wasnormal-- BEFORE i added seveal of these photo generators in 40 min documentary.
Can anyone advise as to whether consolidating those generators will save on render time?
Also, it would be nice to not have to wait a day each time I want to se a rendered version of my work, in case anyone has created a list of pointers beyond the obvious stuff. I am on a macpro w 16 gigs RAM.
I have many event folders (15 ish). If I consolidate all of these (as advised on youtube tutorials), will their be a big difference in render time?
Event folders are spread out on 3 different drives. Is thgis truely adding to render times... or not? I do not want to risk loss of data or a technical nightmare after 6 mos of work.
I do not want to make any changes that jeoporodize my project. Havn't upgraded to 10.1 yet, as every slight change seems to bring with it more troubleshooting and tutorials to review.
In some disucssions, I am warned about the additional procesing power required by consolidated files. But if my render time is suddenly double after adding therse generators, I have to wonder if consolidating them would be the answer. I do NOT have another 24 hours to get simple answers to questions via test renders. Sometimes after an overnight render, I get a render failure error message, etc.
Thanks.
I am using Event Manager x

I am aware I am pushing this to the edge of it's dsign abilities. I get spinning ball for a few seconds when I do just about anything. Even ther simplest thing. Like chnaging location in timeline. I am on 10.7.5-- partly due to reason relating to my Avid Pro Tools HD recording setup.
The generator that seesm to be a processing hog is Prowall plugin by Pixel Films FX.
and I'll show you the way the plugins look (orange)-- about 6 generators back to back.Each holding about 8 pics. I found that even with consolidating, it still is a very slow render--- I attempted render only the 1 minute portion where the 6 generators happen (after consdolidating!) and after an hr it showed only 8% progress. So that little test would cost me a full work day. Argghhh!
Thanks for any advice you can offer!

PNGs + Video Thumbnails = HUGE render times

Dear Users,
I've always used Tiffs before as my export option from Photoshop, but just learned recently that I should be using PNGs. However, now when I use those PNGs in a timeline with custom sized video thumbnails, the render times are LONG. I'm used to rendering cause I'm on a 1st generation 17" MBP, but I'm talking an hour to render a 24-second sequence. The timeline consists of 5 PNG layers and 5 240x180 (Multimedia Small 4:3) 29.97 videos using DV/DVCPRO - NTSC as the Compressor and quality set to 50%. When I drop one of the video files into a new timeline, FCP6 asks me if I want to conform the timeline to meet the clip settings, and I choose yes, but as soon as I put any of the PNGs over the video, I get the orange Unlimited render bar. Any ideas as far as what's causing the Long times beside me being on a laptop? I figure it's gotta be something I'm doing wrong, just like I wasn't using PNGs before. This is for a DVD's Scene selection menu, hence the small videos acting as previews of each scene.
Thank you all,
-Brian

Found the problem. The key was where I said "from Motion." The movie came in with Animation as the compressor type, so when I dropped it onto a new timeline, FCP asked me if I wanted to conform the sequence to match the clip, and when I chose OK, it changed the video rendering from YUV to RGB and the compressor from DV/DVCPRO to Animation. Now for the science of what I found and who I tested it all: PSD = 18 layers, 2.4MB TIF = "layered" Tif, 2.5MB PNG = 540KB
In a brand new timeline, the video and .psd were Unlimited and need rendering to play back smoothly. The tif and png were both fine to play back.
With the conformed timeline settings, the video then played fine, but the psd, tif, and png were all red "Needs Render."
Now as for the rendering itself, the video was a 7 second, 14 frame Animation clip. Still images were placed 3 seconds from the end of the video then rendered. PSD = 18 seconds, TIF = 5 seconds, PNG = 5 seconds to render.
• Both the TIF and PNG could be freely moved around, including over the whole video without requiring another render. The .psd would loose it's render when layered over the video.
In a second brand new NTSC timeline, video captured from DVCAM tape was fine, along with the tif and png again. The psd yet again had the orange render bar even when layered over nothing.
So there's my unscientific tests. I've hated working with the PSDs natively, and those numbers show why. I'll continue to use PNGs because they're both small file sized, nice quality, and fast rendering.
As for my original problem, it was the Animation compression that was causing the problems.
What do you all do for your Photoshop workflows?
-Brian

Premiere-After Effects Dynamic Link render times vary wildly after minimal composition changes

Here is something strange that happens a lot to me.
I'll have a sequence in Premiere Pro CC 2014 that is entirely or largely an AE comp that I have dynamically linked. I'll use a specific case as an example, but it's happened with various projects.
In this most recent one the visual (but not audio) of my Premiere sequence is one AE dynamically linked comp of about 90 seconds. It's more or less a fancy slide show- some photos with moves, some text, motion blur, masking, maybe a few filters. Fairly basic stuff as far as After Effects goes.
Anyhow, I like to render the sequence in Premiere and then watch it down with music to see if the timing works and make adjustments from there. That's my usual workflow. The strange thing is that when I render, the render times can vary tremendously. With this particular project, one time rendered in about 2 minutes in Premiere. I watched it down and I noticed a spelling error, which I fixed. Just changing one word of text in AE. This, of course, causes the entire linked comp to need to be rendered again in Premiere. This time when I go to render, it took about 20 minutes and it only got about 70% of the way through. A huge difference and all I changed was a couple letters, which shouldn't impact how intensive of a render is needed. What I usually do is cancel the render when it takes that long, then quit Premiere, reopen, and render right away after I open. When I do this, after the application restart, the sequence will then render in the faster approximately 2 minute duration. Almost invariably this is true.
So I end up quitting and restarting Premiere a lot to get the faster render times. But of course that's annoying.
What is going on here?
I know that some might have critiques of the workflow and watching in Premiere and the fact that one letter change forces the entire sequence re-render. I know I could break it up and there are ways around that. But I am not interested in such critiques. My work flow actually is quite efficient when the 2 minute render time happens. Just not when it takes 10x more than that for the same thing. Why are there these huge render time swings?
My guess is that some cache gets filled up, so when the application is just started, and the cache is empty, the render works much better. But I really do not know.
Help please.

There is currently a bug that causes Dynamic Link performance to be poor when the main After Effects application is running. (The underlying issue is that the main After Effects application is sending many more messages during Dynamic Link than it needs to.)
The easy workaround is to quit the main After Effects application when using Premiere Pro to process a dynamically linked After Effects composition.
This bug is fixed in an update due to be released in less than two weeks.

Slow render times with large jpegs - complete system lag

In a project i'm working on I have two large jpegs with a small zoom scaling effect. Going from 100 to 103 percent.
I've noticed that both Adobe Media Encoder and Premiere Pro experience a heavy slow down in render time as soon as the jpegs have to be rendered.
Not only does the render speed almost come to a halt, the complete system lags very heavy, even the mouse cursor won't respond well.
This happens when i have GPU acceleration enabled and when i do a 2 pass H264 encoding.
When I have the GPU acceleration disabled the render goes very smooth, and doesn't seem to slow down...
The jpeg is 4023 x 2677, and 6,97 MB large.
Scaling the jpeg down to about 1920x1080 in Photoshop and put that one in the timeline made the render go a lot faster.
I understand that a large picture takes a bit more time to be rendered, but we're talking about a 10minute render whit the large jpeg file and a 2 minute render with the jpeg resized.
The total time of the two jpegs in the video is 5 seconds in a 3 minutes video.
So, that made me think that the render times are exponentially long.
In the timeline everything runs really smooth.
Is this considered normal, I can't remember having such big differences in CS5. It's not a major thing, but I wanted to share anyway.
My system:
Premiere Pro CC (latest)
i7 4930K
32 GB RAM
2xGTX480
Footage and project on a Raid0 disk
Previews/Cache on a Raid0 disk
System and Premiere on SSD
Render to a single 7200 rpm drive.

>wanted to share
Yes... known issue... I think some of the below is about P-Elements, but the same ideas
Photo Scaling for Video http://forums.adobe.com/thread/450798
-HiRes Pictures to DVD http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1187937?tstart=0
-PPro Crash http://forums.adobe.com/thread/879967

Render time Issues with 5.0 project in CC 12.1

This is actually a copy of a post I had in a different discussion entitled "render time" but this now
I did some extensive testing to try and see why my render times in CC were so much slower that 5.5 and I found some very interesting results.
The original project was created in 5.0 and opened in 5.5 and rendered, it contained video footage and graphics. When it was render in 5.5 it rendered in 4:27. When I opened it in 12.1 and rendered it was 18:00. I then started turning off layers and my render times shot up. basically layer 12 had two animated masks on colored solid. With this off it took 8:30
I then imported the project into 12.1 and saved it, reopened it and with layer 12 off it took 5:11. So importing and saving the project made a difference. Now I recreated layer 12 in 12.1 from scratch and turned it on and my rendered time was 6:50.
So there is something going on with projects being converted from earlier versions - Now to really test this theory I would need to recreate the project from scratch and compare to the 5.5 times.
To further test this we did the same sort of testing with a different comp and found similar results - the render times were different if it was imported vs. just opened. But the big thing we found with this comp was a layer where we were moving large stills with some z space. It looks like the 3d from 5.0 was causing a major slow down in CC on layers that has AE 3d applied.
I think the major take away is if your comp was created in 5.0 and you need to modify it, then make changes in 5.5 or 5.0 or be prepared to recreate any layers with more than simple key frames.
Just to also answer some other questions - in rendering to prores vs. animation or dvcprohd the times were almost the same. The animation was slightly longer but that makes sense cause the file was much bigger.
I also found that with 32 gigs of ram my magic number was 11 reserved for other apps ...
Hope someone can jump in and add some light to this
This was all done on a 2010 mac pro 2.66 w 12 cores 36 megs ram running 10.8.4 - I have 5.5 and CC and the 12. 1 updates are installed and the video card is an NVidia 575. Mulit threading was on and in 5.5 - 9 Megs is reserved and in 12.1 - 10 is reserved

I've experienced similar problem with Java Web Start twice.
Also using JRE version 1.5.0_06 Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM and Browser Internet Explorer 6.0.2800.1106 on Windows XP (Problem was the same with Java 1.4.2)
My application was signed and launched via JNLP. The security warning popup was shown in the windows taskbar, but it was hidden. Using maximize in the taskmanager, I was able to see the dialog but it was blank. The problem was persistent, although I did not try as many times as 20-30 :-)
On both occations the problem occured on multi (3) screen systems, which I suspected to be the problem (Java has historically had some issues regarding multi screen systems), but now I'm not so sure.
Did you find a solution / cause?

Exporting HD in FCX - massive render times issues

Hello,
Reading the FCP X Help topics etc I think I have a good understanding of import/export criteria. However, I have it from some peers that I could do much better with regard to reducing the massive render times I am experiencing.
Currently the render time for an 8minute clip is 26 hours using Compressor 4 using preset 'HD 1080 Video Sharing (H2.64) - AAC
BACKGROUND:
OS X 10.8.3 (12D78)
17-inch, Late 2008 MacBookPro
2.5 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
FCX 10.0.8
Raw footage is 1920 - 1080 from Canon D7 card - copied to an external HD.
Import settings: both proxy and optimised - both with huge export times as above.
Destination to Movei folder or desktop
The 8 minute sequence includes filters which I know will increase processing time, but by this much is pretty horrendous. (a 'preset' colour correction + sharpen + manual colour correction)
My understanding is that if I import - or later convert all footage - into optimised files - these become ProRes222 files which will give me much faster render and export times. But this does not seem to be happening.
It simply is not efficient or practical to myself or any clients to have 25 - 30 hour export times for 8 minute sequences
My impression is that this computer is simply not up to faster rendering/export processing - but my peers tell me my currrent render/export times are rediculously long.
Can any one advise please.
Thank you.

This is the Final Cut Studio forum.
You need to ask your questions here: Final Cut Pro X

AME render time 2x SLOWER in CS6 than CS4

I just upgrade to CS6. A good portion of my projects are very long continuing professional education videos for streaming on the web. AME4 could render an 8-hour video into baseline, H264 700x290 in about 12 hours. (I know, strange, custom frame size. It's for side-by-side speaker and overhead presentation.) I opened the same CS4 project in CS6. It was resaved for the new version. I also created a new sequence and copied the files over, just to be sure. With EXACTLY the same export settings, render time is about 27 hours!
AME4 was not a 64 bit app, whereas AME6 is. So, my 16 GB of ram should be put to better use, I would think. According to Premiere, ram available for other apps is around 13GB. In task manager performace, processor is at the ceiling but memory use is only 6GB:
System specs are:
Media drive is Western Digital Caviar Black 2 TB SATA III 7200 RPM 64 MB Cache
GPU= AMD RADEON HD 6570 DP 1GB PCI EXPRESS 2.0 X16
How can I get AME6 to access more memory? Why in the world would the render speed more than DOUBLE with a newer version?!? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

Yes. A CUDA card is on my wishlist, but my company may be tapped out for a while after new ram and an upgrade to CS6.
I did queue this one. I wasn't aware that this would make a difference. I'll try the direct export method next time.
RE: "encoding times have increased with the newer more feature rich versions" Really? So was I just mislead/misinformed that a 64 bit version of this encoder would be faster? Wow, that sucks. But is there no way for AME to access more than 6GB of my ram? I guess the slowness may be the price you pay for stability. My 8-hr project failed two times in AME4. I have 5 hours left of encoding on AME6. It's my last, best hope for being able to deliver this project on time.

Render time taking 1 hour for 4 seconds

I am trying to render a 4 second clip of 3d text doing a 360° turn, I export in H.264 and have okay computer specs.
3.04 GHz Quad core
12 gigs of ram
I'm new to this and want to start exporting more video for a project, but I can't do it with this render time.
Brandon

LilTunchiB8 wrote:
What would be a conventional, frame-based codec? Thank you so much for the help!
Uncompressed AVI is one, but the file sizes are going to surprise you. Quicktime with the PNG codec is usually smaller, but still huge. Quicktime with the PhotoJPEG codec is even smaller. Some popular choices that are even smaller are DNxHD and Cineform (either MOV or AVI). They're still going to be much larger than the H.264, but that's okay!
For many (most) professionals, the usual workflow is to render a lossless file (or nearly lossless) out of AE and then use the Adobe Media Encoder or Premiere to create the final deliverable. There are several reasons, but one is that AE is not very good at rendering h.264 files (and there are some very technical reasons for this). Anyway, the AE team deprecated the h.264 rendering in the latest version of After Effects because of it.
In your case, I would suggest rendering into a TIFF sequence (or something similar). This way, if there is a crash or something, you can pick your render up at the last frame it rendered rather than having to start at the beginning. I always do this when I'm doing 3d work and the render is going to be over an hour. Then you can bring that TIFF sequence into Premiere as if it's a video file, put your audio and everything to it, and send your final H.264 render from Premiere.

Unusual render times

Hello, I seem to be experiencing weird, fluctuating render times with my projects. Some 10+ minute projects render in 20 minutes or so, others like the one below take far too long for what they are.
I am running a Macbook Pro, 2.5ghz Intel Core i7, 8GB 1333 Mhz DDR3 ram, and an AMD Radeon HD 6770M 1GB.
Here is a current project I am working on at the moment - please excuse the blurred sections, this is an internal business video and I am required to do this for security.
The maximum filesize will only be est. 134mb, the length of the video is 3 and a half minutes, and I am only rendering at 720p with 90 second keyframes. When I render this file it takes upwards of 2 hours; sometimes longer.
The source files are 1920x1080 and 1440x1080, and I have 4-5 nested sequences approx 10-20 seconds long each with warp stabilizer applied to them.
I also have fast color corrector applied to all clips. I usually have a VBR of min-4 max-6 but attempted to change it to CBR to see if that decreased rendering time; it didn't.
I've also tried optimizing the memory for both rendering and memory in the preferences window, but I see no difference.
Can you spot anything that might be causing this render to take so long?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Brendan

Thanks for the speedy reply, shootemz. I had no control over the source footage unfortunately and the video needs to be uploaded to a private Youtube channel, so I just selected the Youtube preset from the Export Settings section - and Youtube seems to have a sad every time I try to upload anything that isn't 29.97fps so that's the one I chose.
So all of the things you mentioned increase the encoding time? I didn't know that! I am new to this type of export. It's always been very straight forward in my past jobs. I guess I will play around with the settings and see if I can keep them as close to the source as possible. Thanks for the reply! If anyone else has any other suggestions I would love to hear them also.

Same Computers/Settings - Different Render Times

Hello, great and powerful Adobe Community. My coworker and I have identical machines (Dell Precision T7600 - Xeon 2GB, 32 GB RAM, NVIDIA Quadro K5000, Windows 64 bit OS), both running Adobe CS6. Our render set-up for After Effects is to pull source footage from the main HD (2 TB), render to a second HD (150GB), with a third HD (150GB) set up for cache, media cache, and database folders. Both machines are set up to render multiple frames simultaneously. However, for some reason his machine is taking ridiculously long to render. For the same file, my machine finishes rendering in about 2hrs, while his is showing an estimated time of 17 hours. When left to run overnight, his machine still hasn't finished the next morning and shows 60+ hrs remaining. This is a recent problem and his computer has had reasonable render times up until recently. Software is up to date across the board, no new software has been installed on either machine lately, and any updates required by our system admin would have been applied to both.
Other than checking that the above listed conditiions are identical between our two towers, I'm not sure where to look for the problem. Can anyone suggest a reason for his machine's poor performance? Any insight would be appreciated. My thanks in advance for your help.

I wouldn't call it a bug.
Besides, although the effects you use in all these comps might all be precisely the same, you didn't breathe a word whether the codec of the footage used in these comps is precisely the same... and codecs can make a big difference.
Sure, you may have rendered to the same codec. Did you START with source footage that's all the same codec? If not, you're not comparing apples to apples.

HUGE difference in render times

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for