thanks b3t,

i asked cause i read the following:

"The primary advantage in a 64-bit OS is the ability to address more than 4GB of RAM. Even when running 32-bit applications, each application can address 4GB of RAM for itself (if you have enough total memory in the system).
When running a 32bit OS, the 32bit application must share the 4GB of RAM with the operating system and with the pagefile (not to mention and other background/multitasked applications) leaving drastically less memory for the application itself."

so what you say qualifies that.

many thanks

leslie

To the best of my knowledge Win32 allows 2GB of space to each application. Not 4GB. That memory is usually a combination of RAM and pagefile. The more RAM your OS can address, the more will be available to Vegas.

So that's the OS limit but applications written for win32 are also usually written to limit themselves to 2GB.

As many users pointed out (and as Blink refined the idea), you can use third party tools to alter the Vegas executable and accompanying DLLs to be "Large Address Aware". This allows a 32-bit application or library originally written to limit it itself to 2GB to now limit itself to 3GB. This can be really useful if you are running 32-bit Vegas under Win64 with 4GB or more installed because now you have an OS that can address much more than 3GB of RAM and an application that can actually use up to 3GB of RAM. And 32-bit versions of Vegas are a lot more mature than the 64-bit versions so this setup ought to be a pretty good compromise.

Hacking the executable and DLLs turns out to be relatively easy and stable too. Most of the tools available just ask you to tick a checkbox and save. I've not heard anyone here say it's caused problems but the potential is there since Vegas probably wasn't tested under this circumstance.

The reason a hacked version of Vegas isn't so helpful under Win32 is that there just isn't enough RAM available for Vegas to use 3GB without competing with the OS for memory.

Rob Mack

thanks rob, appreciated.

btw, either of you happen to know under what thread b3t posted his details for, was it ccf?

Of course I do have the "above 2gig flag" tweak going on as well so that may be adding to the speed and stability.


Blink: Are you still setting these flags even with V9 ??

Ted

Yes... not that I'm seeing any crashing if I don't... but I like the idea of doing it anyway.

"btw, either of you happen to know under what thread b3t posted his details for, was it ccf? "



http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=648152

Hi,

Question. Aside from OS architecture constraints under XP Pro 32-bit how much Ram can V 9.0 utilize, or is it as much as your can throw at it if running under 64-bit?

I have a ASUS P6T Deluxe v2 X58 Mobo / Core i7-920 2.66GHz Proc running on XP Pro with three 2GB Chips and see only 2.99GB of memory. I read the Microsoft primer on memory so I understand that unless the 3GB switch is used in the Boot.ini file I will not see the additional memory for the OS but what about V 9.0 and with my Mobo can I create a dual-boot under Win 7 to allow for 64-bit higher memory usage?

Also, does memory tuning work and how is it done? The data sheet says apps can utlize 50% more virtual memory. But does vm also mean disc swapping which would slow down performance?

You mentioned "Hacking the executable and DLLs" is this only under 64-bit OS with a 64-bit version of Vegas?

Net, net I want to make this new machine fly for rendering 1080i and content for Blu-ray and if more memory will assist then I'd like to do it...

Thanks

FWIW, how much memory an app can & does commonly use/need are two different things. In Vegas &/or most video/audio apps it matters what you're doing -- cost/benefit can quickly drop for some after 4GB. 7 throws in a higher demand for RAM all by itself, so adding 2 or 4 GB is going to help, regardless what you're running... lots of folks are jumping to 7 64, adding enough RAM for 7 itself (happy minimum = 4GB), & thinking the boost in their software has to do with the software using all that. Also please remember that brand/model X does not always equal brand/model Y. Some RAM is faster -- takes tighter timings than others, plus if you're running AMD, 1066 brings all sorts of issues that can decrease performance. In a 32 bit OS, the way anything over 2GB is used depends in part on hardware.

That said, on the P6T you'll be better off in 7 64 most likely. Most any PC can dual boot -- the deciding factor is disc space, since you have to create a new partition or add a drive. With the virtual XP, you should even be able to run whatever won't run in 7. The down side is check & collect all your 64 bit drivers beforehand... 32 bit versions will just flat out not work, & 64 bit stuff for graphics cards are still very much works in progress. If you want to optimize your RAM settings, hit up the overclocking sites for your board -- even if you don't O/C, you'll find the best timing & voltage settings for performance & stability.

Virtual memory is disc swapping, & done faster on faster drives... many 7200 rpm drives are dogs speedwize, there are 10,000 rpm drives available, & of course Solid State is fastest by far.

Running 32 & 64 Vegas side by side works well in 7 64, & extremely useful IMHO if you even think about running any 32 bit video/audio stuff -- it's surprising how few 64 bit video apps/utilities/codecs/plugins there really are. There also may be some issues with 64 bit video code & handling in 7 -- you may find some things work better in 32 bit Vegas (or 64). I haven't come across anything personally, but 7 re-introduces some DX code from XP, so things work differently than in Vista (hopefully better but ya never know).

You point about use/need is understood and there are many factors, not all of which I mentioned in my short post. That said, I understand that complex and mult-level fx are going to take more processor and render time regardless of how much memory I have. My expectation going in is I'll have rather simple fx needs, mainly going to add head title and black fades at front/back and then render to either SD or HD 720p or 1080i and either 16x9 or 4x3. In some cases, I will simply generate an mp4 for mobile phone devices but it's all still up in the air.

One of the reasons I never went to Vista (other then I did not like the UI) was that is was a memory pig, even without all the multimedia options so I understand the "minimum" amount of memory one must have to get the OS going.

Was not aware of the speed of memory, thanks for that info. I am running PATRIOT Viper Series PVT36G1600ELK 6GB PC3-12800+ (DDR3-1600+) CL9 Triple Channel DDR3 for what's worth.. I am
also driving a EVGA 512-P3-N866-TR GeForce 9600 Dual head graphics card.

As for disc space, I have a 250GB Seagate ES boot drive and only have loaded about six apps for this edit/encode box so I gather I'll enough for 7 though I've not looked at the system requirements yet.
I was planning to get a copy of Partion Magic but have heard of some open source apps and was going to research those.

Will check the sites for timing and voltage settings, thanks...

From my Photoshop days I never wanted to run virtual memory on any file so would want to avoid this at all cost.

Will do a detailed search for 64-Bit drives in advance, thanks...

7 itself should take up around 15 GB so you've more than enough disk space for *now*. ;-) Never get enough! :-) If you change your mind, I saw 2 1.5 TB drives for $200 last week -- they're getting cheaper. Paragon makes a good partition mgr, & they often give away the last (not newest) version as a covermount for PC mags -- you can often pick those up on-line once word gets out. A company called Easus has a couple versions that seem to work OK -- they often give them away at giveawayoftheday.com . And there's a Linux Live CD that includes a partition mgr that's popular.

And yes, it helps to have the drivers handy, & have an idea of what works... that's coming from the ATI camp where every new version can be a crap shoot. With ATI when you 1st get it running 7 will offer to install an updated graphics driver, & that's when you install the latest from the factory -- not Microsoft! The Microsoft version can cause all sorts of problems & it can get real involved backing the MS drivers out of there... at least with ATI.

My rig: Vista64- 8gigs RAM- Q6600

I myself dont see much of an advantage to using Vegas 32 inside Vista64. I actually assemble all my projects in Vegas 32 (even the biggest, super fat, craziest ones)

Vegas32 wont render 1 out of 3 (average) of my projects. So, I render out the audio in Vegas 32 to keep the audio plugins and then switch over to Vegas64 to render the same project video. If necessary I just mux to two together outside Vegas.

Vista 64 renders flawlessly so far.

Question: "Cakewalk Sonar64" has a 32bit plugin "bridge" that allows 64bit Sonar to drive 32bit audio plugins.

GREAT IDEA! I'd love to see SCS explore this idea. (I'm sure they must be aware of it)

CT