@fifonik "I'd add comment about this in "how to benchmark" because preview fps is much higher when it is in FALSE."

The first post explaining what's required is already fairly crowded, so I'll leave it to users that do use non default values to inform me, really best for users to just use defaults in the first place before doing their tests.

I do appreciate the trouble you went to in laying out your data, a lot of work. But here's the thing, there is a very good reason why I also went to the trouble in making up a user data file input template. It excludes non essential data input and makes my life easier for transferring users data into the spreadsheet. It also allows for a single comments field, which of course is limited in what it can contain.

There's nothing wrong in adding plenty of extra comment info here. By using the user data input item supplied at the zip download location the user will know exactly which of his comments goes into the SS and which will be left in his/her post only. Otherwise when the user data input format isn't used I'm really guessing which of his sometimes quite verbose comments should make it to the SS comments field.

I mostly only use the same comments info in all of the users multiple comments fields, that way as the data is sorted in different ways the comments for a particular user stay the same. Of course if a user has added a different comment for each of his different render entries then thats what I enter.

I've done my best to transfer your data above into the SS, less comments, (there's room for ~160 chars.), maybe you can specify what you want to go into the comments field.

If the screen grab below is ok then I'll go with that, just post your comments for the comments field here and I'll then update the data.

I haven't yet added an x264/x265 option, if there's sufficient interest by many other users I can look at that. It is currently available via Voukoder and HO Scripts. So I haven't included your x264 info because the SS currently hasn't that option, is only set up for what's in VP.

@fifonik @wwaag The contortions thats required to get even an approximate Avg. fps value is unfortunate, but it is what it is.

In an ideal world we would have had a script that could play either the whole project or just a small designated region, at the same time setting the necessary conditions as laid out in the first post for this thread.

This script generated average FPS value would be far more accurate than what we can do ourselves.

If it was made available then I'm sure some or maybe all users would be happy to redo their Avg. fps test with it. I know that @Kinvermark was hoping that Magix might make such a script available, but their probably kinda busy🤣.

@fifonik Let me know what you want to do about your comments fields, do I post as is without comments as per screenshot above or are you in the process of finalising your comments? For example do you have a single comment for all entries or multiple comments?

"Win10 Pro 1909, GPU Driver 20.2.2, GPU Model: MSI RX580 ARMOR 8G OC (factory overclocked)"

It could be the same comment for all entries as people may re-order rows so single comment could be missed.

P.S. Should not it be 4 rows for AVC, 4 rows for HEVC, 4 rows for CPU, 4 rows for VCE?

@fifonik "Results with "Internal | Enable so4 Component Reader for AVC/M2TS" = TRUE (default"

I used the 8, (from a total of 9, I didn't use x264 as previously mentioned) not 6, not 4 results from the above section that you supplied in your format, not the "User data input" format. I have already displayed a screenshot of those and will add your single comment above into all 8 comment fields.

A lot of this backwards and forwards between you and me would have been eliminated if you had supplied all of these benchmarks in the defined "user data input" format laid out at the first post on page 1, thus avoiding any confusion. I know it's pretty comprehensive the way that you have done it also, but the "User Data Input" format matches the SS when I'm transferring the data, and so there's far less possibility of my making an error while updating the SS..

Options available now are ...

A) I can add your supplied single comment to all 8 entries that you supplied and update the SS accordingly.

B) You can redo your new benchmarks, 8, 6 or 4, as you choose, in the recommended User Data Input format.

As I said before I sincerely do appreciate the time and trouble you went to to contribute all of your benchmarks.

Let me know what you want to do, thanks.

Going forward I'm not accepting any benchmarks that's not supplied in the recommended "User Data Input format"

@fifonik “P.S. Should not it be 4 rows for AVC, 4 rows for HEVC, 4 rows for CPU, 4 rows for VCE?”

Maybe you updated your previous post recently, see above. You now think that you made 16 entries, you no longer think that you made 6 entries as you had mentioned previously, but since updated.

I can still only see 9 entries, 9 discrete benchmarking times in your entries. If you think there should be 16 entries then please submit all 16 using the User Data Input format, otherwise maybe go with my previous suggestion of me updating your 8 entries with your single comment, do let me know what you would like to do, thanks.

This is your data input from the previous page below, my suggested reading of it is above, (less x264) it’s what I’m going by ...

@fifonik I think i’ve spent enough time on this single update of your data. If I don’t hear from you soon ill go ahead with my understanding of it. At the end of the day the more data the better, its a very useful resource for anyone looking to say upgrade their PC.

@fifonik Perhaps your getting your possible 16 entries now from using your default and non default data. I've already updated the ss with your suggested fps values for your older data, not posted yet. I see no benefit in adding in non default data, so 8 new entries it is. I'll post the 8 new entries tomorrow if thats still ok with you. If its not, as I have already said many times, post any new data using the predefined templates that I supplied.

@fifonik Is updated now.

Unless I'm mistaken, @Howard-Vigorita now has table-topping render times with his RX5700xt.

@NickHope I sent you a PM.

Unless I'm mistaken, @Howard-Vigorita now has table-topping render times with his RX5700xt.

@NickHope yes but only for this particular benchmark. The Red Car benchmark with a more balanced distribution of fx and camera footage load in all it's 4k variations does well with the RX5700xt but only at a level about 10% better than an RX580 while at much less power draw. This benchmark uses one particular media generator fx all over the place to generate the bulk of its output load which the RX5700xt apparently executes spectacularly well. I need to do more testing to see if that applies to any other media generating fx.

update: just tested a particularly demanding media generator I use in a show opening under same conditions... Titles & Text with rolling glow and enlarge animation with drop shadow... the Navi did very well but not as good as a Radeon 7.

update #2: Swapped out the 5700xt for a Vega64 Card expecting to see higher performance but it was a mixed bag, some a little better and some not quite as good but close. But the Navi still rules by a wide margin on this benchmark. On a whim I also tried the 5700xt in my 9900k workstation and it beat my Radeon 7 across the board in every bench except viewing h.265 without proxies... the 5700xt not only ran this thread's bench in a record 34 seconds, it did the original Red Car in 11. I take it back. It very well might be the best video board for Vegas 17.

@Former user Hi Leonard, really interesting stuff, most of its above my head.

I hope you appreciate that this threads primary function is for posting benchmarking results.

yes good point, a benchmark of a decoder, who's properties could affect encoding time when overloaded but it's not on topic. I"ll move it to a more appropriate thread when I got on next, and people can respond there instead of here

@Former user Thanks.

Here be mine.

@red-diamond Excellent! I’ll leave out the middle section, just top and bottom, if thats ok.

I’ll update here when its updated, later.

Thanks!

@red-diamond Hi Red, is updated now! Note that I put the same 12.7 FPS value for both entries, I have seen other users also supply different values for the same machine. The same machine can obviously only have one best average FPS value for the single marked out region.

Thank you for contributing, it's a nice resource for users going forward.

@JN- @Howard-Vigorita  (edit) I was able to test a $400 Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti (studio driver 460.89) and in Vegas 18.373 it appears to perform very similar or just a tad better then my VEGA 64 LQ, which is about where the AMD 5700 XT lands...

SAME 9900K as my other tests, but CPU set to 4.8 ghz & using the RTX 3060 Ti:

Red Car Sample Project to 1080p MP4 = 0:19

Sample Project 4K to 1080p FHD 25 fps MP4 = 0:47

Sample Project 4K to 2160p UHD 25 fps MP4 = 1:20

Sample Project 4K to 2160p UHD 25 fps HEVC = 1:28

FPS in loop area: 9-13, but more at 12-13, so average = 12.25

@TheRhino Excellent. I'm sure u will agree with me, but given d length of this thread already, I would have a preference to keep it for only posting results., as per the criteria in my 1st. post. By all means start a new thread on benchmarking, general discussion etc.

Update: I see you have since posted results of the Benchmarking 4k Sample Project. If its your wish to have any added to the 4K Sample Benchmarking project please let me know. If so please use the user data input format layout, its located at the start of this thread, thank you. See ...

“Sample User Data Input and example, text file versions are in the ZIP file …”

Here's a more moderate spec machine. If you do add a x.264 benchmark I'd be happy to take part as I use Voukoder normally.

User name        :RogerS
    Machine            :Dell XPS 15
    VP version        :18
    VP Build number        :373
    CPU            :i7-7700HQ @ 2.80GHz
    Cores            :4
    GPU            :NVIDIA 1050 4GB
    iGPU            :Intel 630
    OC            :No
    Render frame size    :UHD
    HW Acc.            :NVENC
    Render As        :MagixAVC    
    Encode mode        :NVENC
    Render time        :2:48
    FPS            :3.8
    Comments        :CPU undervolted -122mV with Throttlestop

    User name        :RogerS
    Machine            :Dell XPS 15
    VP version        :18
    VP Build number        :373
    CPU            :i7-7700HQ @ 2.80GHz
    Cores            :4
    GPU            :NVIDIA 1050 4GB
    iGPU            :Intel 630
    OC            :No
    Render frame size    :UHD
    HW Acc.            :Nvidia
    Render As        :MagixAVC    
    Encode mode        :CPU
    Render time        :5:29
    FPS            :3.8
    Comments        :CPU undervolted -122mV with Throttlestop

User name        :RogerS
    Machine            :Dell XPS 15
    VP version        :18
    VP Build number        :373
    CPU            :i7-7700HQ @ 2.80GHz
    Cores            :4
    GPU            :NVIDIA 1050 4GB
    iGPU            :Intel 630
    OC            :No
    Render frame size    :FHD
    HW Acc.            :Nvidia
    Render As        :MagixAVC    
    Encode mode        :NVENC
    Render time        :2:03
    FPS            :3.8
    Comments        :CPU undervolted -122mV with Throttlestop

User name        :RogerS
    Machine            :Dell XPS 15
    VP version        :18
    VP Build number        :373
    CPU            :i7-7700HQ @ 2.80GHz
    Cores            :4
    GPU            :NVIDIA 1050 4GB
    iGPU            :Intel 630
    OC            :No
    Render frame size    :FHD
    HW Acc.            :Nvidia
    Render As        :MagixAVC    
    Encode mode        :CPU
    Render time        :2:38
    FPS            :3.8
    Comments        :CPU undervolted -122mV with Throttlestop