After Effects Rendering

[« VK »]

Hi guys.

I do a fair bit of content creation for my YouTube channel which 100% relies on After Effects.

My current rig, seen here;

Spoiler

|| Intel 4670K @ 4GHz || Corsair H80i || 2x MSI NVIDIA GTX 770 2GB (2 way SLI) || MSI Z87-G45 ||
|| TeamGroup Elite Black 16GB (CAS 11-11-11-28 Timings) || Samsung 840 (250GB) SSD ||
|| Samsung 850 Evo (500GB) SSD || Seagate Barracuda 2TB (7200 RPM) ||
|| SuperFlower Leadex GOLD 750W || BitFenix Shinobi (German Edition) ||

|| 2x Asus VN247H || TT eSports Theron (Black) || Qpad Mk-80 (Blue Switches) ||
|| 2013 Astro MixAmp Pro || 2013 Astro A40 ||

takes a relatively long time to render out my videos. I recently stumbled upon this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbPbBgJJ3Co which explains that multicore rendering in CS6 (which is what I use) doesn't utilise the CPU as well as it can and I was wondering whether the script (BG Renderer) used in the video will utilise my 4 cores more than the built in multiprocessing settings in AE.

The gentleman in the video does use a far superior CPU to mine with a lot more cores/ threads + ram to play around with so I was wondering whether the effects would actually benefit me? I don't want to purchase something then find out that it doesn't actually benefit me that much if you catch my drift.

Some misc information:
- My videos heavily rely on trapcode particular

If there's any more information you guys require about my AE setup then please ask.

 

[« VK »]

What are your system specs?

It's in the spoiler in original post...

|| Intel 4670K @ 4GHz || Corsair H80i || 2x MSI NVIDIA GTX 770 2GB (2 way SLI) || MSI Z87-G45 ||
|| TeamGroup Elite Black 16GB (CAS 11-11-11-28 Timings) || Samsung 840 (250GB) SSD ||
|| Samsung 850 Evo (500GB) SSD || Seagate Barracuda 2TB (7200 RPM) ||
|| SuperFlower Leadex GOLD 750W || BitFenix Shinobi (German Edition) ||

|| 2x Asus VN247H || TT eSports Theron (Black) || Qpad Mk-80 (Blue Switches) ||
|| 2013 Astro MixAmp Pro || 2013 Astro A40 ||

 

[« VK »]

How long do they tend to take to render currently?

It honestly depends on the project. My content revolves around music so the more bass drops there are, the longer it will take to render out the video due to trapcode particular. With multiprocessing on, this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAqBzRNs0GM took me approx 2 hours and 30-40 minutes to fully render in .avi format and in this time, all of my cores are maxed out and I don't really want to cause a crash by performing other tasks whilst rendering is going on. Perhaps not exporting in .avi will have a major impact on the render times? Any suggestions? I know h.264 is commonly used in YouTube projects but I don't really want to sacrifice any quality loss. In addition, I don't bother with adobe media encoder to render my videos, I just do them straight out of AE.

As my channel has greatly increased in popularity, I'd like to churn out videos on a fairly regular basis with as little time rendering as possible. I'm starting back at Uni in September so most of my time will be spent working towards my degree which means I'll not have as much time to render content as I normally would.

 

[« VK »]

TLDR
After fx uses all cores
Some plugins don't.
If your workflow uses all cores - get xeons
If your workflow uses only uses 1 core - overclock (ghz is king), or change plugin and get xeons.

Thanks for clearing some things up for me, appreciate it. My videos utilise all cores so I presume it's worth investing into a processor with greater numbers of cores and increased RAM per core in order to achieve faster rendering times.

 

[« VK »]

Yeah I would use H264 and Media Encoder for a start. You can queue them up then too.

Also why does it need to be in 1080p when the main aspect is music? Also why is it in 60p? It should be in 25p.

Dunno. I've had feedback to say that people really enjoy watching these type of things (for some reason).

 

[« VK »]

It's the 60p that is killing you here. I'd suggest dropping to 30p which will make your renders twice as fast. If you're only uploading to YouTube export out via Media Encoder to H.264 as suggested.

"H.264 video is encoded with audio compressed with the AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) codec" - Is there a huge/ noticeable difference in audio quality compared with .avi?