working flawless with the older build. Sony emailed me - that was cool. Source footage is h.264/dslr stuff. template is 1080p 30p. Same as i've done for years. Windows 7. 16gb ram. guess it's only me having those issues w/ build 714....

Having the same problem. Where did you get the older build?

Usually here, but the earlier versions of Vegas Pro 12 appear not to be archived yet.

I took the liberty of putting the older builds on my Dropbox account.
These are all direct links to the exe files.
Build 367
Build 394
Build 486
Build 670

Mike

No 710 Mike? - g

Grazie, you're very bad!!!
:)

Mike

Grazie, you're very bad!!!

You have noooo idea . .

G

I have a trouble ticket open with Sony about this now. I keep getting Windows low memory errors and Sony and sometimes my PC crashes. I have 32GB RAM and am not coming close to maxing that out when rendering. Anyone else hear from Sony yet?

Had the same issue after I installed 32 gigs of memory and upped the Dynamic Ram to 4 gigs. Setting the Dynamic Ram back to the default of 200 stopped the crashes and the low memory warnings.

I tried that and it did not fix the error. One of the error messages I received blamed the crash on the following registry entry:

nvoglv64.dll

I believe this belongs to NVIDIA. I used Movie Studio 12 for a long time with no issues but Vegas Pro 12 crashes almost 9 times out of 10 when rendering. I am currently testing it with my GTX460. I may throw in my Quadro cards and see if it is still an issue.

I have a GTX660 (311.06) and neither SVP11 or 12 would well unless I went into the nVidia control panel and enabled the CUDA cores, under Audio & PhysX Settings. CUDA cores are not enabled automatically oddly enough. When I did this the 'CUDA Available' was now visible under Render settings in SVP. Yes, I already had GPU enabled in Video Options.
Also, older Quadro FX units have older Open GL and CL languages so SVP 11 and 12 cannot recognize them. I had an FX4000 and it became worthless upon upgrading to v's 11 and now 12. I bought my 660 for 1/5th the price and it works better.
When I render a small project less than 15 minutes I render using GPU only but if larger like a two hour mixed content video I use 'CPU Only' or 'Automatic' else it crashes. I can render a two-hour, 25 track, 5 camera edit in 4.5 hours overnight on the 1st try.

Interesting. I have the GTX460 327.23 and CUDA is enabled by default. I also have a Quadro 2000 and recently acquired a Quadro 4000/ These are not the older FX models but they are not the newer K models either. My goal was to benchmark render time improvement for various codecs. I planned on rendering once with CPU only and then another time for each of the GPUs (I would only have one GPU in at a time). Despite the consistent crashing I did have a few renders that worked but the CPU time was significantly faster than render times with the GTX 460 and Quadro 2000 (have not tried the 4000 yet). I am frustrated with the crashing and am hoping when resolved I will see that GPU processing actually improves rendering time rather than slowing it.

Here is a thread how GPU acceleration does work when a system is well optimized.
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?Forum=4&MessageID=859391
The GTX460 depending on the model is as power full as the Quadro 4000. The 2000 is just not enough to be faster then a good CPU. In any case, I recommend driver 296.10 for older Fermi cards especially under Win7. My suggestion would be to disable Win7 Update, do a complete and clean removal of the current driver, install driver 296.10 and try the GTX460. Do not enable Win7 Update nor Nvidia Auto Update as it will override the 296.10 driver !. I have a GTX460 DCII TOP which is blue color in my older system with a Q6600 and it still performs very well under Win7 with the mentioned 296.10 driver. If I do the same render on that system it will take about 50sec which is not bad even compared to the 32sec in my thread. To make good use of GPU acceleration you need a GTX560Ti or higher in the 500 series. Yes, still 500 series but that's the way it is until someone has prove that the 600 and 700 series are as fast and stable.
Here is a link where you can compare Nvidia cards. Aside from CUDA cores, bandwidth is an important factor too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units
VP12 Build 714 is performing flawless on my system and so did VP11 latest build; i just don't use it anymore. Vegas is certainly more "sensitive" when it comes to hardware but it is still one of the fastest NLEs out there. There is no other professional NLE where you can in seconds throw clips on the timeline, make cuts, some simple crossfades,basic color correction and have it rendered in no time.

Interesting. However, rendering with a CPU and GPU should be faster than CPU only correct? I previously benchmarked Sony Movie Studio 12 with a project of my own. I rendered it is 2:13 with my GTX 460. When I used the Quadro 2000 instead, render time dropped to 56 seconds! However, now that I am using Vegas Pro I cannot duplicate that. I am continuing to benchamark as I think I may have resolved the crashing issue. I will update the thread when done.

GPU rendering will be and is slower then CPU if your GPU isn't powerful enough hence there is an option to switch it off. My Dell laptop has a G210M Nividia which I can select to be used for CUDA accelerated rendering but it is slower then CPU only. Drivers are very important too. I did use newer drivers but always got a performance drop by as much as 50% depending on the version of driver. Also keep in mind that not all render codecs are accelerated and those that are use GPU acceleration to a different degree. The most accelerated one I found is MC AVC as it can utilize both of my GPUs equally; MPEG2 only uses one.
I am also quite certain that Movie Studio and Vegas use GPU acceleration differently. The preview RAM setting in Vegas also influences render times and I always keep mine at the default of 200; it is the fastest setting on my system for preview and rendering.

Maybe I am misunderstanding how GPU acceleration works. I thought it "accelerated" the rendering process by working hand in hand with the CPU. I monitor CPU and GPU usage actively and when I render with GPU, both my CPU and GPU are very active.

However, are you saying it is either or?...that if GPU rendering is chosen, the CPU does no rendering and is simply only offloading the work to the GPU almost entirely? If that is the case what is the point of using a GPU for rendering unless you have a Quadro K series and a Tesla card installed?

I am using an i7 3820 which is a fairly high end processor. When rendering with both the Quadro 2000 and 4000 installed I seem to get slightly better times than CPU only...assuming it doesn't crash. I thought I would cut the rendering time in half with both of those Quadro cards installed!