Hardware Encoding or Acceleration Not Available

Hello everyone, i found this video here, very helpful

Moderator Note: Link/text removed. Sorry. Please do not use Console to change the application. It is against our corporate guidelines and is a request from Adobe Premiere Pro engineering.

As of mid-May 2020, you all can now rest easy:

Beginning with the released (non-beta) version of Premiere Pro 2020 14.2, released on May 19, 2020, Nvidia NVENC and AMD VCE/VCN support has been added to the Premiere Pro H.264 and HEVC encoders. So, if you have a gaming desktop or laptop that has either permanently disabled integrated graphics or no integrated graphics at all, then you can now use hardware encoding, provided that you have a driver version that is supported in Premiere Pro 2020 and you have a compatible discrete GPU (sorry, GeForce GT 1030 owners and owners of laptops based on an MX-series GPU except the MX350, you cannot have hardware encoding at all using one of those GPUs because they don't support NVENC at all).

Meanwhile, Intel had not updated its QuickSync encoder/decoder at all since the Kaby Lake days of late 2016. Today's 10th-Generation Comet Lake (10th-Generation mainstream desktop platform) CPUs still have only Intel UHD Graphics 6##, whose technology is a slightly tweaked version of the Intel HD Graphics 6## that was in the Kaby Lake (7th-Generation) CPUs of late 2016. In light of this, Adobe may depreciate Intel QuickSync hardware encoder support in a future release of Premiere Pro.

"Feel" versus "Real" are so often different things ... whether swinging a golf club or participating on forums, or even using applications.

When the UserVoice system doesn't result in direct responses, naturally the "feel" is nothing happens. Which is not necessarily in the same ballpark nor universe as to what happens internally within their system. You can't see it ... but think about it. They are working with something designed to work on thousands of machines. The most important data for them at any one point is the data about the larger group function.

And ... priorities always being set that way ... one works down the list of problems affecting the user base.

Past that, you have to realize their data-set for how many users are working and doing X or Y and working fine or having Z issues is going to be different than ours as individual users ... or even for those in shops with 30 other people. Across the user base, that's not even peanuts. And they do have a whole series of routinely incoming data-points for user experience.

And you're right, in that budgets and sheer time for engineer's to attack something factor in here.

For all its sins, the UserVoice system is one of the main data-points the Adobe Corporate Upper Managers use to determine 'pain' points for users ... and therefore .. engineering budgets and priorities. And it's the only one we users can directly affect.

As I said in the other post, it's an input device, not a two-way communication device. And whether we like it or not that is the way their system operates. I'm not a great fan of their setup ... and I've told a number of staffers up to program managers that ... very bluntly ... and in-person at NAB and MAX. However, they're not nearly high enough up the chain to change this if they wanted to.

I would add, that I personally don't have a clue why people assume that if you can explain how something works, you like the way it works. I've never in any way shape or form even implied that I LIKE the way their system works. But ... I've talked with enough of the staff, including engineers who read all the blasted UserVoice filings ... to know that is how their system is set up. How well it "works" from our user perspective is a completely separate issue.

Whether it "does" anything is a wasted discussion. It is utilized internally as it is setup to be used. Whether we like it or hate it is completely irrelevant to the question of how it functions in reality. What it "feels" like to us is also irrelevant as to the question of ... is it utilized in-house. It is.

As to whether we, the users, like it ... or how it feels ... the most polite thing I can say is the UserVoice system is a vast improvement on the old Bug/Feature Request "page", from a user perspective. But ... understand, that's a relative statement, and my opinion of that  older"page" is not printable here. Not because I'm thinking vile thoughts, but just ... certain garbage is most accurately described in real language in certain words. That aren't allowed here.

And actually, the engineers and staffers do care a ton about this app. That I'll give full credit for. And they want it working as perfectly as possible for as many users as possible. Most seriously.

There are always two major issues that affect how any discussion on this app goes with direct discussions with the development staff ... first, much as I may like them personally ... oh wow, engineers are ... engineers. When an engineer sees a compelling logical reason that some "tool" should be built in X fashion ... getting them to appreciate that for the user of that tool, it really should be setup in a way that doesn't make sense to the engineer ... is a very, very hard sell.

That problem isn't because they don't care, but rather ... it's exacerbated because they do care passionately about the app. They just disagree on the logic of how X tool should be designed and laid out. Those ... are difficult discussions.

The second one ... is even when they agree with you, budgeted time to rebuild something that is working at least passably for a large percentage of users ... isn't easy to get. With so many serious problems always that need immediate attention.

And actually ... this is where the UserVoice becomes the user's best friend, as it is the one and only way "we" can get the data ... the metrics ... to the upper managers to spring some budget loose.

Neil

1) MediaEncoder (Me) is the 'extended' and separable encoding engine for the Adobe digital video apps. You can run either Premiere or AfterEffects without Me installed. It is a completely separate entity. As such there are options within Me that are not available in Premiere. It isn't just a section of Premiere. One problem many users have is they don't realize the full potential and uses of Me as a stand-alone program.

2) Puzzling reaction. The UserVoice site is the primary input source to communicate problems to the engineering team. (As opposed to this site, which is primarily a user-to-user service.)

Note: that means it is an input service for the engineers. NOT an information source for users. I think your expectations are simply out of whack with the way their system works. And it does work. Not always perfectly nor as fast in every detail, but ... in general, it does work.

Where so many run into ... conceptual difficulties? ... is in thinking they are getting the same performance and issues as everyone else using the app around the world. Which to me is a bizarre approach, but one I recognize is perhaps most common.

Premiere is used daily by many thousands of people world-wide, the widest array of gear/media/workflows out there. Resolve is trying to duplicate this, and gee ... as they've left their coccoon behind, is having more issues also. I work with a lot of colorists who are Resolve-base, and they HATE that Resolve is being developed as a one-stop app as it's screwing up their work much more than it used to.

The vast majority of Premiere users are working away without issue. Some users are geting very annoying issues, and some are getting hammered by something. So ... depending on which category any one user falls into, the tendency is to think your issues are universal. From "this is wonderful, what are they complaining about?" to "this is the biggest suckiest mess on my computer!". And ... for any one user, either or something in-between can be accurate. Yea, for some users, it is a big sucky mess.

There's no way the development team can have enough in-house computers to test out the thousands of variables users will encounter. When they can't ... bugs can get out there that they have no way of replicating in-house, and so for that they NEED input from as many users with troubles as possible.

That is what the UserVoice site is for ... and I've talked with one of the engineers who reads every flipping post. His biggest complaint? Nowhere NEAR enough detail for most problems posted for the engineers to even have a clue how to try and replicate the problem. "X is broke ... fix it!" is not at all useful. "I've an XYS computer with Q, R, and D hardware added running Pr and simulateously Word, Opera, and X; when I use V media and apply N effect playback does a jitter-hop." gives them enough information to try and chase something down.

It also means the user may get an email or private message directly from the engineering staff, as they tend to communicate directly with individual users filing posts rather than do a reply to the post itself on UV. I've had several comments from other users who were shocked that they got a message from an engineer. Well ... yea, on looking at their UV post, I could see where the engineer would have assumed this user was worth asking questions about the difficulties they were having.

And the last thing about UserVoice ... Adobe's upper managers live by metrics. That is one of my ... issues ... with their corporate system, but that is the way they work. One of their main tools for gathering metrics on both user issues by issue and by numbers (in percentages across the user base) of users is the UserVoice system.

They decide budgets by metrics. UserVoice gives them metrics used for deciding budgets. Understand ... as a user that wants things changed, it is in your interest to get as many things posted on UV as possible, and to get other users to "upvote" things. That's just life while using Adobe products.

Neil

As this thread has wound on, it is clear that as expected, many do not understand the admittedly confusing pair of "hardware" and "software" encoding items in Premiere. And therefore get all upset about what they've misunderstood. Yea, it's confusing.

Hardware/Software Encoding in the Export Settings Dialog Summary Box

First ... the Export Dialog's hardware/software encoding message in the summary section has nothing whatever to do with any GPU or its use ... period.

This line ... shown below underlined in red:

ONLY refers to whether or not your computer's CPU is an Intel CPU with QuickSync both physically present and enabled in the BIOS. If so, then your Intel CPU can and will use the internal hardware of that CPU to do H.264 encoding. It is similar to the same sub-chip in cameras that does the specialized math/formula H.264 long-GOP encoding. Some Intel CPUs have that extra bit of hardware built into the CPU. Some don't. This again ... only refers to the presence and active ability of  QuickSync within the CPU itself.

That is an Intel-only item, not anything "natively" Adobe by design or function. AT ALL. It is merely a polite notification about your CPU's capabilities for that particular H.264 encoding process. And note, this is ONLY used for H.264 encodes. It has nothing whatever to do with encodes in any other format.

And for some laptop computers that do have both a QuickSync-capable CPU and a factory-included discrete GPU card, the manufacturer disables QuickSync in the BIOS.

Premiere Application GPU Use Settings in the Project Settings Dialog

The use of a discrete GPU "card" in Premiere is set in the Project Settings dialog, the Mercury Acceleration section. Options are:

• "software only" meaning that the program will not use any GPU (if present on the computer);
• "CUDA", available if you have a recent-generation Nvidia card (a few 900-cards, all 1,000 series and newer);
• "Metal" for AMD cards particularly on Mac OS;
• "OpenCL" for AMD cards on older Macs and some PCs.

All video post apps are coded for different priorities/processes for different parts of the typical computer system. Premiere uses the CPU as the heart of the system, especially for encoding, and that central unit calls upon the other subsystems as it is coded to use and apply them.

Premiere uses the GPU for major frame-resizing (think 4k on UHD timeline and Warp Stabilizer), color/tonal corrections (think Lumetri), and a growing list of other things. Go to your Effects panel, enlarge it to full screen, and click the "Accelerated" lego-block icon at the top. Now all GPU-accelerated effects will be shown ... including lens distortion corrections, some blurs, PIP, and nearly everything in the Video effects list and the Transitions. The vast majority of  video effects are now GPU accelerated. In other words ... those effects use the GPU.

That list has grown dramatically in the last couple years, btw ...

For basic encoding without using any of that laundry list of effects ... that is left to the CPU. For encoding with things from that vast list, the CPU is still the heart of the job, and will call on the other subsystems of the computer (including the GPU) as it needs them at that moment.

As to why the Adobe engineers haven't assigned basic encoding to the GPU ... my guess is they figure a lot of the users are using GPU accelerated effects on their exports. Which ... depending on the effects used ... may or may not peg the GPU for the things already assigned to GPUs.

I tend to do a lot of color correction, resizing, and transitions. My GPU is at times pegged, and and other times, idling. I occasionally have situations where the CPU needs to wait for GPU work, and so the GPU is pegged but CPU isn't.

All of these apps "balance" things differently. If you want the "balance" in Premiere to be different, the place to suggest that is the site for communications to the engineers ... which is the UserVoice website/system. All postings there are viewed by at least one engineer, and they are also collated and sent to the upper managers who determine budgets and such.

If you do so, it's a good idea to post back here with a link to your post on the UserVoice system so others can go "upvote" it. 

Neil

Yeah, this confused me too. Turns out that by the time you export your project to Media Encoder, it works perfectly fine withmy NVIDIA card and offers hardware encoding. Premiere itself doesn't seem to make this option available (this is with Premiere Pro 2020). I also have HP hardware if it matters, a Z800 workstation.

Follow these steps :-

1. Download Latest Nvidia driver and install it ( download "notebook" version of nvidia gtx 1060 series 10 from nvidia site)

2. Open Nvidia control panel by right clicking on desktop and go to 3D -> program settings

3. In the program settings find premiere pro and select desired gpu in the drop down menu (select Nvidia of course)

4. Restart

Things to make sure :-

1. Check (Open GL) under File -> project settings in premiere pro

2.You might be only able to use vbr pass 1 with hardware encoding which works fine (I still don't know the reason of not been able to use hardware encoding with vbr pass 2)

I think that your problem is that your particular laptop has the integrated Intel UHD Graphics disabled at the factory that manufactured the laptop. Therefore, there is no QuickSync, and thus no hardware acceleration. On the other hand, most laptops with this combo have both the integrated Intel UHD Graphics and the discrete GPU enabled.

Hi OmerGuac,

If you scroll down from where your screenshot leaves off, are you on VBR, 1 Pass or VBR, 2 Pass? If you switch it to VBR, 1 Pass, does the Hardware Encoding option become available?