| ||||||||||
| Why is everyone so hung up in multi-threading? Is multi-threading faster than single-threading? Yes. Is it the fastest way to render? No! If you have paid any amount of attention the last decade, you cannot have missed that the fastest way to render most things is to use the GPU. The After Effects team has been hard at work laying the foundation for a move to GPU rendering the last few cycles. This is exactly the opposite of what some of you are accusing them of. They are doing hard and important stuff that is NOT helping the marketing team at all. Work that we all will benefit from in future updates. In earlier versions, we got GPU accelerated Gaussian Blur, Lumetri Color, Sharpen, and Cartoon effects, and GPU accelerated Composition, Layer, and Footage panels. Plus GPU accelerated Brightness and Contrast, Find Edges, Glow, Hue/Saturation, Invert, and Tint. The latest update gave us GPU-accelerated Mocha Plug-In plus nine more GPU accelerated effects, including Color Balance (HLS), Curves, Fill, Exposure, Noise, Tritone, and Set Matte. Wave Warp and Median are now multi-threaded, BTW. The move to GPU acceleration is going to make rendering increasingly efficient. When ALL effects are calculated on the GPU, that's when we'll see the real benefits of this. Moving frames between the GPU and CPU and back is not very effective. When everything is done on the GPU, frames can be kept in the GPU buffer, and AE will get a lot faster. I hope the AE team continues on this path - moving more and more processing to the GPU. I would certainly not want them to waste time making some effects multithreaded, instead of making them GPU accelerated. /jarle |
