Unusually Long Renders

[Graham Bernard]

That’s not good. Try unchecking the GPU acceleration – just try it, and get back here with the results.

G

Video Content Creator and Potter
PC 7 64-bit 16gb * Intel® Core™i7-2600k Quad Core 3.40GHz * 2GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 560 Ti
Cameras: Canon XF300 + PowerShot SX50HS Bridge

[John Rofrano]

You could also try putting the AMD GPU in the new computer and see if it performs better than the NVIDIA. This is because the 780 will only run at 1/4 speed with Vegas Pro so you’re not getting the full power of the card. This may be the differnece because your CPU’s were about the same (i.e., 3.5 Ghz i7 quad vs 3.4 Ghz i5 quad) so you shouldn’t be seeing a big CPU boost.

~jr

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

[Shawn Haidary]

That explains the GPU but wouldn`t the increased amount of ram solve this problem?

It makes sense considering the situation I`m in. Would a possible solution be to overclock my cpu and rely on it more or to switch to a new editing software.

[Shawn Haidary]

Also I have taken GPU acceleration off and it still performs slowly

[John Rofrano]

[shawn Haidary] “That explains the GPU but wouldn`t the increased amount of ram solve this problem?”

Increasing your RAM from 8GB to 32GB won’t speed up renders. Vegas Pro hardly uses 8GB of RAM when it renders. It must be something else if it’s not the GPU’s.

~jr

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

[Graham Bernard]

“Slowly” doesn’t describe by what factor, compared to previously render experience. Is it 50% slower or 25% faster than not having the card? Do you see my point? In any event, what this does indicate that there IS usage of the GPU acceleration, albeit unsatisfactory..

Grazie

Video Content Creator and Potter
PC 7 64-bit 16gb * Intel® Core™i7-2600k Quad Core 3.40GHz * 2GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 560 Ti
Cameras: Canon XF300 + PowerShot SX50HS Bridge

[Steve Rhoden]

I wouldn’t have recommended you upgrade your system you had with all
that stuff, just for the sake of increasing Sony Vegas’s render time.
Vegas rarely makes use and go hog wild if you stuff a whole lot of GPU
Cards and Gigatons of ram into it.
The upgrade to the i7 4770K processor is a good move for Vegas though.

Steve Rhoden
(Cow Leader)
Film Editor & Compositor.
Filmex Creative Media.
https://www.facebook.com/FilmexCreativeMedia
1-876-461-9019

[Stephen Crye]

Hi Shawn;

First, I strongly recommend that you get a better picture of what your system is doing by installing Process Explorer. (https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx) PE is safe, stable, and written by one of the biggest system gurus in the world – in fact, his software was so good that not only did Microsoft buy Mark Russinovich out, MS agreed to let him retain full control over all his software after the buyout.

After you install it, put it in startup so that it is always running. Customize the “tray icons” so that is shows all of them – IO. RAM, CPU, etc. PE will be able to show you exactly what the CPU and GPU are doing.

Here are some shots of the graphs while I rendered a small project on SVP 12. I have an nVidia Quadro 2000, and I just updated to the latest drivers (331.82). BTW, after the update ( I was at a very old 2012 version), Vegas started using more GPU, and render times got a bit better.

Process Explorer will show you:

* That Vegas is CPU/GPU bound (mostly)
* That Vegas does not need a lot of RAM
* If you have a disk IO bottleneck.

Be sure to set the Vegas temp file location on a drive other than the Windows OS drive, and also on a drive other than the one to which Vegas is building the rendered file.

SSD drives, if you can afford them, also seem to help. I have a friend who just build a new system, he configured it with a SanDisk SSD drive for Windows 7 Pro, and uses additional SSD drives for the render target and the temp files. His system is impressively fast for both rendering and video timeline preview. He has a very high-end Graphics card.

BTW everyone, sorry I have been gone so long. My wife was ill, near-death, but we managed to fix her up – lots of surgery. She is MUCH better, albeit disabled, but happy and able to do many things. I had a computer sitting in a box for nearly a year – a new Dell T7500 with 24″ Dell Ultrasharp. Finally built it, using it to post this! Happy Happy. Also have new Panny GH3 and a big backlog of projects. Yaay!

Steve

Win7 Pro X64 on Dell T7500, MultiTB SATA, 8GB RAM, nVidia Quadro 2000, Vegas 12, 11, 10, 9 DVDA 6.0 & 5.2(build 135) Sony HDR-CX550V, Panasonic GH3 with both the “good” F2.8 lenses

[Dave Osbun]

Shawn,
If your previous i5 processor was an Ivy Bridge cpu, you’re not going to get that much improvement in render speeds by going to an i7. Is your new i7 an Ivy Bridge or a Sandy Bridge? The Ivy Bridge cpu’s will give you increased render performance over a Sandy Bridge cpu, but it’s going to be a small amount. If you’re wanting your cpu to give better render performance, you’re going to have to jump up to a newer Intel Xeon processor, but that will necessitate a motherboard switch as well. It’s just not worth the $$$ unless you are doing this for a living.

Just to share some of my system info with you: my system specs are below, in my signature. My renders are sbour 2x the clip length using the MainConcept 1080p for internet render choice (I also crank up the maximum and average bitrates two steps higher than the default), so a 10 minute clip takes around 20 minutes to render. If I leave the default bitrates alone my 10 minute clip renders in about 11 minutes. My final videos do not contain any heavy affects.

I hope this info helps you.

Intel i5 3570K Ivy Bridge 3.40GHz quad core
Asus P8Z77V-LK
16gb RAM
ATI Radeon HD7850 2gb
Crucial M4 SSD + Seagate Barricuda 7200rpm
Windows 7 Pro 64