Comments

TGS wrote on 4/28/2008, 12:38 PM
Don't know what you're missing, but audio should render much faster than video
Are talking actual time or percentage use?
jabloomf1230 wrote on 4/28/2008, 12:39 PM
When you render video, the CPU is the limiting factor. When you render audio, something else is limiting the render speed (probably File I/O). The other possibility is that in Vegas, the WAV renders do not use all the cores efficiently. I can't say that I've ever looked at a WAV render very carefully, since they are pretty fast.
johnmeyer wrote on 4/28/2008, 2:19 PM
Just for grins, quit Vegas, then start Vegas again and open the project. Without doing anything else, render the audio.
LongTallTexan wrote on 4/29/2008, 6:21 AM
Well i've tried the re-boot and restart vegas trick to no avail. Just for conversation sake, someone else open a current project and render to WAV and look at your CPU usage. I have tried it with many different projects with the same results. A lot of my projects are 5 sources or more of video and sometimes up to 24 tracks audio. All of my video renderes utilize my full CPU and all 4 cores but my audio renders are about 13% or so. Painfull.

L.T.
DJPadre wrote on 4/29/2008, 3:10 PM
"Just thought it was a little crazy that my quadcore 2600 machine works all cores almost at 100% when rendering video, but if I render to a wave file, it only uses maby 20%. Am I missing something here?"

Well, i wrote post up abotu this a while ago, adn it seems teh audio engine isnt actually running multiple threads.. in fact, from what i can gather, its still only single threaded.. now that each thread is at what its at, yoru audio renders are prolly slower.. much liek mine.. my single core CPU at 3.2 renders ac3 audio 1/2xrealtime (ie 1 hr took half an hou to process.. )
Now, with a quad core 2.4, it takes at least realtime.
Another thing i noticed, is that certain plugins, like sonic foundry clipped peak restoration or compressors, slow rendering in V7 and v8 considerably when compared to V6...