The other hardware way to decrease rendering time that John forgot to mention is network rendering. You can add up to two additional computers on the network and either send the entire project to one of them for rendering, or alternatively, split the render between your main computer and the two additional computers.

Theoretically, with three equally fast computers (your main computer and the two computers out on the network) you can reduce render times to 1/3 of what your main computer would take. In practice, it never quite comes to that because of the overhead of moving big files back and forth over the network, and because Vegas insists on stitching the file back together, something others have pointed out doesn't really need to be done if you are going to print to tape, or are subsequently going to encode to another format. However, despite that minor flaw, network rendering is still very fast, especially for short projects that are very render-intensive. For instance, if you have a fifteen minute project that takes 24 hours to render, this is an ideal candidate for network rendering, and you will come very close to reducing render time from twenty-four down to eight hours, if you have three equally fast computers.

Thanks indeed.

MEMORY! :)

"Is there any additional hardware could help in decrease time in rendering video."

A true dual processor machine or even better a dual multicore machine will cut your render time dramatically.

Regarding this question I have a puzzler.

Which would be faster for rendering - a single P4 1.6Ghz processor, or dual P3 800 Mhz or P3 1 Ghz processors?

I ask this question because I have 2 motherboards available and a set of 800m or possibly 1G P3s for the P3 board, but only 1 case, power supply and video card, etc to build up one machine. I would like to put it together for a rendering computer.

Of course, the processor is not the only variable, as bus and memory speed play into it as well, but in general would there be a preference?

Tom

A 1.6ghz would usually be faster than dual 800mhz.

Two processors have to share the memory.... this lowers the bandwidth/speed of the memory. Also, sometimes the work can't be split in hard. So one CPU would be idling.

For $600, you might be able to snag a hot deal on a dual core Dell. That might be more worthwhile??

They would all be amazingly slow. Go to TigerDirect and get one of their motherboard combo deals for about $150. Memory, CPU and Mobo.

Well, I admit I'm a scrounger/cheapskate/environmental awarenik. I try to recycle computer stuff that's headed for a landfill and use it as long as I can. I grabbed the dual P3 stuff from my "real" job before it hit the dumpster.

I think I will go with the single P4 for now, and look at a better alternative later. Yep, $150 will buy a lot of stuff today, but I wanted to utilize what I have, if I could. My small home "enterprise" is still non-profit at this point.

T