-
Dave Haynie
November 17, 2010 at 9:39 amJust a consideration… did you switch from 32-bit to 64-bit in the process of the upgrade? And what is the input CODEC used for the rendering you’re doing.
Why I’m asking… some of the video CODECs out there have terrible performance in 64-bit mode. No idea why, but I’ve seen that with several, particularly open source stuff like Lagarith (that one was never acceptably fast even in 32-bit, but it got worse).
In any case, if this is your situation, try a more standard video input format, and/or install the 32-bit version and see if things get better. Rendering always takes too long, but I have not experienced any significant difference between Vegas 9 and Vegas 10 (in theory, Sony AVC should be faster in Vegas 10… but the GPU boost isn’t very significant, at least with my current nVidia 8800GT).
-Dave
-
Dick Dyszel
November 17, 2010 at 12:00 pmThanks for the suggestions. I tried to make sure I’m comparing apples with apples. Both versions of Vegas are 32 bit. The video in question was shot this weekend on a Canon HV20. I am using the recommended HD rendering settings for Vimeo HD. The project settings were the same and I even checked the preferences under options in both 8 and 10. Here there was a difference with allocated dynamic ram: 120 for 8 and 350 for 10. However on further testing I set them both to 120 and there was change in performance.
I for testing purposes I took the same 1:10 sample rendering to mp4 using MainConcept. It too 7:35 for 8 and 15:59 for 10.
Using identical 1:10 SD files and Vimeo SD settings:
it took 2:20 for 8 and 5:00 for 10.I tried a variety of AVI files and here 10 was only a second longer.
The computer is running XP with all the latest Windows updates. But again I have both 8 and 10 running on the same machine, so that shouldn’t be the difference. I’m really confused and disappointed.
Any furhter suggestions would be appreciated.
-
Dick Dyszel
November 17, 2010 at 2:34 pmHello again,
Trying to leave no stone unturned, I went back to Microsoft and downloaded .NET framework 4.0 to see if it made a difference and to make sure I didn’t screw up makeing new templates, I tested using only standard templates in MainConcepts and Sony.Sadly there was no change. 10 rendering took twice as long as 8.
Could having both 8 and 10 on the same machine create a problem?
-
Jim Murphy
November 17, 2010 at 3:24 pmI still have 8 on my computer with the trial version of 10, and I got better results in rendering with 10. The trial version of 10 is 64 bit. Jim
Vegas Pro 8 DVDA 5 Excalibur
Dell Quad Core 2.67 GHz
-
Al Bergstein
November 17, 2010 at 4:23 pmDick, I would make the assumption that the differences between 32 and 64 bit, along possibly with your kind of codec, might have some thing to do with this. 64 bit is going to use all the RAM you can throw at it, not to say that it uses *all* the RAM, because some of it appears to be more of a disk oriented operation. The conversion to AVI seems to be disk based more than RAM based, but both do use all four of my available cores to the max advantage. In Windows 7 you have a great Resource Monitor tool that allows you to see it in action better than XP did.
It may be that you are getting to the point where an upgrade would be worth your time & money. HD footage really needs 64. I found that many of my crashes vanished when I moved to 64 bit. Not to say that you might have others, but I’ve not since then.
I try to remember that the code base for XP is really old. MS does not do much in the way of optimization of dead code, which XP is at this point. Not that Vista was much better, but it seems that they have got it finally right with Windows 7 and 64 bit. It’s been my impression that it is the best OS they have done since XP came out.
Best of luck finding the right situation, probably sticking with what you have until you can upgrade is viable plan.
Alf
-
Jim Murphy
November 18, 2010 at 1:56 amI purchased the upgrade today, and I am glad I did. Thanks for everyone’s ideas on this. Jim
Vegas Pro 8 DVDA 5 Excalibur
Dell Quad Core 2.67 GHz
-
Alex Ramz
November 29, 2010 at 11:13 pmI upgraded to Vagas pro 10 64bit from vegas 9 and what a difference it made.
My vegas pro 9 used to crash every 30 to 40 minutes of use. Also, rendering was always a pain specially when I had text.I use vegas professionally and I make my living that way.
I only find one thing upsetting… I can’t use all the effects I had before including magic bullet.
Before when I used to upgrade, they would automatically move to the new vegas but not since it changed to 64bit I get nothing.
Is there a trick to be able to use my plugins?
Anyone?Thanks,
-Alex
-
Theo Van laar
November 29, 2010 at 11:57 pmMagic Bullet Looks is not (yet) supported by Vegas 64 bits, only 32 bits. Sorry!
Theo
-
Jim Murphy
November 30, 2010 at 1:15 pmI made the upgrade, and I’m happy with it also. I wish I could answer your question about the plugins, but I don’t know the answer to that one. I suspect John Rofrano or one of the other experts can help with that. Good luck. Jim
Vegas Pro 8 DVDA 5 Excalibur
Dell Quad Core 2.67 GHz
-
Dave Haynie
December 1, 2010 at 7:25 amInstall the 32-bit version. See if they magically appear.
The way plug-ins are designed (both FX plug-ins and video CODECs, apparently), you need 32-bit versions for 32-bit apps and 64-bit versions for 64-bit apps. So older plug-ins don’t show up in 64-bit Vegas.
You can, of course, have multiple versions of Vegas installed at the same time. This works for 32-bit vs. 64-bit just as it works for different major versions of Vegas.
-Dave
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up