[Rosario Andò]

Finally, I got an AMD HD6950 2GB for only 65€, with aftermarket triple fan.
First test, with Sony Vegas 13: 10 minutes video, 1920x1080p, 14MBps, 29,97p (NTSC), audio 256Kbps, @48KHz, codec MainConcept AVC

CPU only: 28 minutes
OpenCL: 5 minutes!!

[Rosario Andò]

Is Handbrake format compatible with H264, and so with social media platform like Youtube and Instagram?
I tried different videos format in Sony Vegas, but only MC AVC (H264) is supported by these platforms.

PS: Scott said that R9 290 previews and renders fine, but here it seems that there’s no difference between CPU rendering and GPU rendering with this graphic card. 55 seconds in both cases

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlM6KvgEqUk

Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

[Rosario Andò]

I really appreciate the help you gave me and the great knowledge you show about Sony Vegas.
Unfortunately, my experience with this software is very limited, because I am not a professional of video editing and I use SV since few months.

This is what I have so far figured about Sony Vegas through my little experience and through long internet researchs:

1. The new AMD R9 card performs very well, as confirmed by Luxmark benchmark (I already knew that test), but I suppose that Luxamrk is realiable when you speak about preview window, the ability to play smooth preview with complex effects and transition.
In Sony Vegas 13 there is a folder called “GPU accelerated” that collect effects like Glow, HSL Adjust, Lens Flare, Defocus, Fill Light, Quick Blur, Radial Blur, and so on. With this effect, especially when you use many of them in the same clip, I suppose that a last-generation GPU like R9 290 or R9 390, performs bettere than a 2011-GPU.

2. But when it comes to render a video with MC AVC codec, the things go otherwise, as confirmed by users in SCS Forum…..
…..
https://www.hyperactivemusic.com/vegaspro/vegaspro.html

because MainConcept stopped to support AVC codec in 2010-2011, so only the GPU of that era are ufficially supported.
Here, the last-gen GPU for which you spent a lot of money, goes worst than a 2010-2011 GPU and it takes more time to render the same video.
There are many topics about this problems on the web, and even in Creative Cow forum. This is why I started to search for an old GPU and not for a GTX980.

Tell me if I misunderstood something.

Anyway, is very weird that in Luxmark bench, an high-end last-gen nvidia GPU (GTX980), scores lower than a 2012 AMD GPU (HD7970) (1521 vs. 2102). Both AMD and nVidia supports OpenCL, but as you noticed, AMD holds a monumental GAP in performance…de facto, nVidia is 2-3 years behind.

[Rosario Andò]

Ok AAron, rendering times depends, first of all, from the complexity of the project, and then from many other parameters, but the adjective “fine” is too hazy, too subjective.
I prefer to speak of numbers, numbers are objective.

Anyway, i don’t work, and i will not work in the next years, with 4K display and 4K clips beacause my Sony A6000 mirroless camera and my LG 22″ monitor, are both limited to 1080p.

Today I got in touch with some people selling used graphic cards. The options are:
nvidia GTX 560Ti (price to set with the seller)
nvidia GTX 580 (price to set with the seller)
AMD XFX HD6850 1 GB (70€)
AMD HD6950 2GB with triple fan aftermarket heatsink (65€)

Yesterday I saw a GTX590 (a dual GTX580) for 80€, but it was already sold.

The HD6950 2GB wins in therm of raw power compared to the 560Ti, but in this video, even with this mid-range nvidia GPU, the render times are accelerated by about 3x (78minutes -> 28 minutes with deblocking filter OFF)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZBAtlbZ5bc

The same factor (3x, 4x) appears with many other GPU from nvidia and ATI, when you pass from CPU rendering to GPU rendering. This benchmark appeared in the SonyCreativeSoftware forum, so it would be quite realiable.
https://www.hyperactivemusic.com/vegaspro/vegaspro.html

My idea is that Sony Vegas and Mainconcept AVC don’t work like a 3D game, where if you double the computing power, you double the framerate, so, when you render a project, the difference between a 100€ GPU and a 400€ GPU is very little, so I think that even the little nVidia 560Ti could works fine for me.
Maybe the impact of the CPU (4cores/4thread of i5 vs. 4cores/8thread of i7) is more remarkable.

Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

[Rosario Andò]

Sorry, but when you say “I have a R290x and it previews and renders fine.” what do you mean?

For example. With my old desktop PC (Athlon 64 x2 5400, 2 GB RAM), a 10 minutes render (only CPU, 1920x1080p, 14Mbps, 29.97 fps, 256KBps audio, 48KHz) it tooks about 1h15′ (1:7 render time…1minute video ->7 minutes render)
With my new desktop PC (i5 6600), the same render tooks about 30 minutes using only CPU (1:3 render time).

With your R9 290x, how many times it requires to render a 1 minute video with this settings (1920x1080p, 14Mbps, ecc…)?

[Rosario Andò]

I think I will not update to the new Vegas version. BTW, what it will change? Improved render performance with Mainconcept AVC codec or just “cosmethic” changes to the software interface?

So, your advise is to buy a new AMD R9? Now I don’t own any graphic card, just Intel Intel integrated graphic of my MSI mainboard, and a non working nvidia GTX590.