-
Rendering in Sony Vegas is getting ridiculous ! What to do?
Specs3.Dell Laptop w/ Windows 7. Inspiron N5030
4.Processor: Pentium Dual Core CPU T4500 @ 2.30 GHZ
5.Ram: 2.00 Gb.
6.System type: 64 bit operating system
Basically, it generally takes me 1-2 hours(on a good day) to render a 10-20 minute anime video.
But whats really getting me is rendering game videos. I use game capture software(El gato) to record playthroughs of the games I own on PS3 and upload to youtube. Example: It took me 5-7 hours to render a 20-30 minute HD video of a playthrough of this game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoX6asW7bg8Here are the settings I use.
https://i.imgur.com/SyuHZ.png
https://i.imgur.com/T6g32.png
https://i.imgur.com/SQGuV.png
https://i.imgur.com/50KAC.pngNow, I think 5-7 hours is ridiculous. So I was wondering. Will I see any improvements either in preview speed, and/or render speed if I upgrade from 2gb of ram, to 8 gb? I wouldn’t mind If I could cut the render speed of my gameplay videos to 1-2 hours(on high quality settings),but 5-7 hours is way too much for me and it doesn’t help that my CPU jumps up to the 90’s(with Vegas taking a large chunk of it) and my laptop gets very heated.
TLDr: Will 8gb of ram(from 2gb) help to reduce my Sony Vegas Rendering speed? Or will I need something else?
Getting a new laptop is not an option for now.
Oh and I use Sony Vegas 10.
-
4 Replies
-
Dont blame Vegas for that. You have Vegas handling HD on a
severely underpowered system for efficient video editing,
that’s why you are getting those render times.
….Those times for that system is normal.Upgrading to 8gb of ram alone is not gonna cut it.
If getting a new system is not an option for now,
you are gonna have to settle for those speeds.Steve Rhoden
(Cow Leader)
Film Editor & Compositor.
Filmex Creative Media.
https://www.facebook.com/FilmexCreativeMedia
1-876-832-4956 -
[Steve Rhoden] “Upgrading to 8gb of ram alone is not gonna cut it.If getting a new system is not an option for now, you are gonna have to settle for those speeds.”
Upgrading to 8GB (GB == GigaBytes, Gb == Gigabits, gb == nothing) might actually help here. There’s an awfully good chance that a system rendering HD resolutions with 2GB RAM is going to be paging — swapping data to and from the HDD. Bad idea where performance is concerned, and in particular, if it’s being done on a laptop with a single HDD, that also puts the swap drive in contention with both video input and video output. And yeah, the ancient laptop make that bad situation even worse. So additional RAM might help.
Another thing that might help: a second drive. Rendering output, even to a USB 2.0 HDD or Flash Drive, will take some load off the internal drive. It’s not that the internal drive is necessarily all that slow (though laptop drives tend to be slower), but hard drives are like Muscle Cars: great in a straight line (eg, streaming a single file), bad when cornering (eg, seeking from file to file).
-Dave
-
[Andy Fantom] “4.Processor: Pentium Dual Core CPU T4500 @ 2.30 GHZ”
I agree with what Dave said about more memory. In fact, your laptop is actually misconfigured. Microsoft recommends that with only 2GB of memory you use a 32-bit OS and you need at least 4GB for a 64-bit OS to perform adequately.
The bigger problem is that your processor is woefully under powered. You have to understand that laptop processors come in classes and the T4500 is at the bottom of the list. Above it is the T5000 series, T6000 series, T7000 series, T8000 series, and the T9000 series. I wouldn’t attempt to edit HD video on anything less that a T8000 series.
Also the Pentium Dual Core CPU was a dog. It was actually slower than a single core. That’s why Intel came out with the Core 2 Duo series (2nd generation) which has since been replaced by the Core i3/i5/i7 series. Once again the Core i3 and Core i5 are rated for content consumption and only the Core i7 is rated for content CREATION which is what you are doling.
So while more memory might help, that CPU is going to slow things down to a crawl anyway. In short, you have a laptop that is OK for web surfing and word processing but no where near capable of content creation.
To answer your original question of what you can do, the answer is buy a more capable laptop because at the end of the day, raw CPU power is what speeds up renders the most.
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
[John Rofrano] “The bigger problem is that your processor is woefully under powered. You have to understand that laptop processors come in classes and the T4500 is at the bottom of the list. Above it is the T5000 series, T6000 series, T7000 series, T8000 series, and the T9000 series. I wouldn’t attempt to edit HD video on anything less that a T8000 series.”
Absolutely agree. When you look at rendering, there are a bunch of things basically in a pipeline… CPU, FPU, GPU (if you have a good one), main memory, storage (HDD, etc). It’s not that difficult to have enough RAM, enough HDDs, etc. to make the CPU subsystem the weakest link in the pipeline.
The things I suggested are what you’d need to look at that might be weaker links in that pipeline. Certainly you have too little RAM, and when you consider that RAM is usually at least 1000x faster than a hard drive, if you’re paging during a render, you’re going to make things run very, very slow compared to what you might achieve. You can pretty much tell just by popping up the Task Manager and looking at your CPU and memory use. If you see less than 90-95% CPU in use during a render, or see your total memory nearing its limit (heavy use of paged, aka, virtual memory), you’re being slowed by things more easily controlled.
But you have a weak CPU, no two ways around that… the Pentium T4500 was a low-end CPU in 2009. Looking it up, I find a CPU Mark (https://www.cpubenchmark.net) average of 1402. The CPU in my desktop, not currenty by any stretch, is an AMD 1090T six core, rated at 5618. It would be reasonable to expect my computer to run at least 4x faster… I’ll bet in practice it’s more like 8x-10x, since newer processors have media-specific optimizations not always brought out in general benchmarks. And the latest Intel i7s (no, I can’t afford one either) averages out 14,763… over 10x the performance on this benchmark suite (so expect media performance to be even greater).
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/mid_range_cpus.htmlThe CPU in the fairly low-end laptop my son Sean’s getting for Christmas (shhh…), an AMD A8-4500, does about 2651 on this suite. And that’s in a $400 laptop (shhh… and before you judge, he got a custom-made-by-me i7-based desktop for his birthday). You’ll usually get much faster performance from a desktop PC for the money… in both cases, you have to shop around.
-Dave
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up