Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums VEGAS Pro Vegas 12 Workstation Specs

  • Vegas 12 Workstation Specs

    Posted by Pete Schaefers on November 25, 2012 at 9:57 pm

    I’m configuring a new workstation which will run Vegas 12 and have a couple questions that I’d appreciate feedback and opinions on.

    Given similar CPUs (4 core, 3.5 Ghz, 8MB), would you opt for 16GB RAM with a 2 channel memory buss or 8GB RAM with a 4 channel memory buss? (I’m weighing amount of RAM vs. access path/speed. 8GB seems like plenty and I not sure I believe “the more, the better” applies without limit.)

    I am planning on using a 1.0GB NVIDIA® Quadro® 600 video card. Any thoughts on that card’s performance?

    Other specs:
    Hard drives will be SATA 7200 RPM.
    OS will be Win7 Pro or ultimate, with XP Mode.

    John Rofrano replied 13 years, 6 months ago 5 Members · 27 Replies
  • 27 Replies
  • Steve Rhoden

    November 25, 2012 at 11:21 pm

    Have you searched the forum, there are endless recommendations here
    on that topic.

    Steve Rhoden
    (Cow Leader)
    Film Editor & Compositor.
    Filmex Creative Media.
    https://www.facebook.com/FilmexCreativeMedia
    1-876-832-4956

  • John Rofrano

    November 26, 2012 at 12:45 am

    I would go with the 8GB of 4 channel memory. In fact, that’s exactly what I did when built my new workstation. What good is more memory if you have less bandwidth to it?

    I’m not sure the Quadro 600 is worth it. That’s pretty low end. I have a Quadro 4000 and I love it. That seems to be the sweet spot of the Quadro line price/performance wise.

    ~jr

    http://www.johnrofrano.com
    http://www.vasst.com

  • Pete Schaefers

    November 26, 2012 at 1:34 am

    As a matter of fact I have been lurking here for quite some time and have searched. I haven’t seen much help in this specific area. MANY old posts, but specs for previous versions are useless. I’m not quite the noob you apparently take me for… but I’m open to any relevant links you want to post.

  • Pete Schaefers

    November 26, 2012 at 1:37 am

    That’s kind of how I was thinking, 2GB/core as a rule of thumb. I wasn’t sure if v12 had made much difference in that area.

    On the NVIDIA, I’ll be doing some more research. I had considered the 600 the minimum, but possibly adequate, but was also thinking of the 2000. Thanks, I’ll dig into it more.

  • Pete Schaefers

    November 26, 2012 at 10:13 am

    John, in looking at info on your website I came across your Dell comments. The link you posted about it was dead. Are you still “death on Dell”? One option I was considering was a Dell Precision (T3600 or better). I have been a long term Dell user and have had excellent experiences.

    Regarding the GPU, I think I will at least bump up to the Quadro 2000, possibly the 4000. I do think that the Quadro line is the way to go at this point though.

  • John Rofrano

    November 26, 2012 at 6:08 pm

    [Pete Schaefers] “in looking at info on your website I came across your Dell comments. The link you posted about it was dead. Are you still “death on Dell”?”

    I swore I would never buy from Dell again and I haven’t. There was no way of knowing from their web site that the parts they were using were misrepresented until you actually bought them to see for yourself. Since I have no intention of buying from them again, I will never know if they have changed. If they are still using proprietary connections on their motherboards that force you to buy overpriced parts from only them, and if they are still selling altered 3rd party parts and advertising that they are their commercial counterpart, then yes I am still down on Dell. Perhaps they don’t play those games with their Workstation line but they certainly did with their Home/Office line.

    ~jr

    http://www.johnrofrano.com
    http://www.vasst.com

  • Malcolm Matusky

    November 26, 2012 at 8:30 pm

    I had a machine built by https://www.ibuypower.com out of LA. They are a “gaming” company, but that’s exactly the kind of machine I wanted for a video workstation. Large case, lots of cooling and a big power supply. Everything is an option, so you get what you want, assembled and working. I called first to talk with one of the tech guys, and told him what I was doing, not gaming, and sent him the specs for Vegas Pro via e-mail. They put together a decent system for me and it’s working fine.

    M

    Malcolm
    http://www.malcolmproductions.com

  • Dave Haynie

    November 27, 2012 at 4:47 am

    2GB per core is a general rule of thumb, not really specific to Vegas. Of course, other things can influence this… I went from 8GB for my six core system to 16GB in 2011 because I absolutely needed it. Something about editing 20-50 shot panoramas from 18Mpixel RAW photos. Never needed more than 8GB for video.

    -Dave

  • Pete Schaefers

    November 27, 2012 at 7:57 am

    [John Rofrano] “I’m not sure the Quadro 600 is worth it. That’s pretty low end. I have a Quadro 4000 and I love it. That seems to be the sweet spot of the Quadro line price/performance wise.”

    I’ve gotten a lot of good input on CPU/RAM and mobo, both here and over on SCS’s forum, and I’m down to trying to sort out the GPU part.

    I’m getting input on the GTX line’s suitability that is all over the place, but then there’s the page on SCS where is shows a GTX 570 beating a Quadro 5000 (VP11 tests). The GTX specs “look” better than the Quadro’s (if you can trust specs) but I also hear talk about the processing being different, with the Quadro being more suitable for video.

    Has there ever been a Quadro/GTX shootout for rendering?

    Are the current (6xx, non-fermi) GTX boards supported by Sony and stable or not? (I, like others have reported, got the frustrating runaround when trying to get an answer out of Sony for current version hardware.)

    Do you think a Quadro 2000 is a decent option for full HD editing, and at what point do I need to look to the 4000?

    Sorry for the wandering questions and thank you all for the help.

    -edit-

    Just found this link: https://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5.htm Pretty decent info, though it’s not specific to Vegas. The GTX 570 looks good, and I seem to have run in to many posts saying it works well with Vegas.

  • John Rofrano

    November 27, 2012 at 3:41 pm

    [Pete Schaefers] “Has there ever been a Quadro/GTX shootout for rendering?”

    You don’t buy a Quadro because it is fast… you buy a Quadro because it is STABLE! If you want the fastest GPU, stick with a gaming card but be prepared to fiddle with it a bit. If you want rock solid stability, buy a Quadro card. I value stability over speed which is why I spent the extra money for the Quadro 4000 and I don’t regret it. While everyone else is turning GPU acceleration on and off trying to figure out why Vegas is blowing up with their gaming card, I’m getting “real” work done. With Quadro you’re not paying for the hardware as much as you’re paying for drivers that are tested with and tuned for professional applications instead of drivers that are tuned to play the latest games.

    ~jr

    http://www.johnrofrano.com
    http://www.vasst.com

Page 1 of 3

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy