[Mike Brennan]

Hello Nigel.

Prior to reading your post, I tried to render 2 files off of the same project at the same time.Vegas won’t let you do that.

So I figured that maybe you ran two “instances” of vegas by opening it up twice. Thanks for confirming that!
I tried it and it worked like a charm. I rendered two files in not much more time than it took to render just one. Man, did THAT get all of those cores cooking!

And that’s what I love about the support on this forum.
Here I was yesterday wondering why I spent $$$ for all of that power, and today I realize that it will never be enough 😉

Cheers,
Mike

[Mike Brennan]

Hello Ken.

I don’t think that I did that, but it’s a good point and I’ll check.
Thanks for the tip.

Regards,
Mike

[Mike Brennan]

Hello Nigel.

Thanks for the post. I’m really glad to hear that.
So you rendered two projects at once ? how did you do that?
Details please!

I also need to render out various output format versions of the same project. I never thought to start rendering one, change settings and file name,render that one, repeat as needed… I can’t wait to try that.

Maybe we should all have a tailgate party 🙂
Regards,
Mike

[Mike Brennan]

What you said made sense, so I did a few test renders to disk with various core affinity settings and monitored with resource monitor. Yep, it’s exactly as you say.

If I run all cores, they load at 50% and I render my test in 1 min:45 sec. If I drop down to 4 cores,Those 4 run at about 87%, and I render in 1 min:46 sec, so I get about the same level of performance.

If I drop to 2 cores, they load at 100% and it takes 2 min:56 sec to render. If the computer didn’t have those extra cores doing everything else it needed to do outside of Vegas, it would really choke!

So the machine seems to tax the CPU as needed. I would imagine that those extra cores would come in handy for plug ins and such, especially when you do multi track audio along with your video.

I sure would love it if I could have pushed those cores closer to the max to speed up the render time, but I guess that’s not how Win 64/Vegas allocate the workload.

Thanks again,
Mike

[Mike Brennan]

Hello Steven and thanks for the reply.

This machine is dedicated to audio and video only, so no browser
runs in the background. Internet access is for driver updates only, so I don’t have any heavy virus/spyware software running, just windows security essentials.

My audio interface is the RME UFX. RME is known for the efficiency of their drivers. It is not cpu intensive at all, so no problem there.

I’ve always read on this forum that Vegas is CPU intensive, and the more CPU power/speed, the better. So I’m a bit confused by the “tailgate” analogy. I look at the CPU and Ram as a locomotive pulling a heavy load. That’s how I thought that Vegas worked.

I’m new to multicore/turbo boost technology, so I’m wondering if I should dedicate more (or less) cores to vegas. Does it matter?

I remember reading somewhere that dedicating more than 4 gigs of ram will actually slow things down for some reason, so I stopped at 4 and left 4 gigs for everything else.

Any insights are appreciated.
Thanks again,
Mike

[Mike Brennan]

Thanks John, that was the signal path recommendation that I was looking for. I had given thought to using the DV camera (I did that at times with my old system) but I was unsure as to what the best technique was.

An AJA card and a Flanders monitor would be great but I can’t justify that expenditure at this time. Are most of the Vegas community just using LCD’s and VGA’s?? How about for color grading?

BTW, let me give you a big thanks for all of the help that you give on this forum.I’ve ran searches many times prior to posting, and your name comes up am lot! And an equally big thanks to everyone else as well.

Keep the ideas coming!

[Mike Brennan]

Hello Richard.

Do you mean the dark TV that’s in the center? You could make that in an animation program like lightwave or maya and composite it in over top of the digital juice background.

Regards,
Mike

[Mike Brennan]

thanks for your reply. I have several NTSC monitors already.
I would use a scan converter to go from VGA to video.

Do you find the VGA monitor good for SD? No one seems to like
LCD panels for SD, so I’m looking at options.

Thanks,
Mike

[Mike Brennan]

I recently bought a new audio rig ( the RME UFX ) and I fully intend on integrating it with vegas pro 10 as a 64 bit DAW. I believe that there is no MIDI support in Vegas, but short of that I see few limitations with Vegas as a DAW.

Back with Vegas 4, I used to use an Mbox1 as a transport that linked to a focusrite preamp through SPDIF.
Back then, the ASIO support was limited and the Avid drivers weren’t very good, yet I got away with it on small projects. So outside of some 64 bit ASIO problems concerning audio drivers that I’ve heard rumored about Vegas pro 10, You should be off and running. The 32 bit version of Vegas 10 purportedly runs the audio ASIO drivers with no issues.

I’ll report back next week when I get my new system up and running.

Good luck!
Mike