Comments

johnmeyer wrote on 5/8/2007, 10:39 AM
14:41 on my Dell Inspiron 6000 laptop, Pentium M 2.00 GHz using 7.0d.

John_Cline wrote on 5/8/2007, 10:51 AM
Thanks, John.
mdopp wrote on 5/8/2007, 11:43 AM
18:10 on my 4 year old 3.06 GHz HT Pentium running 7.0e.
cmallam wrote on 5/8/2007, 11:58 AM
Vegas 7e
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+
6:14
summer07 wrote on 5/8/2007, 1:05 PM
vegas 7d
e6300 1.86 ghz intel core 2 duo processor

6:20

see also http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=523647&Replies=17
kb_de wrote on 5/8/2007, 1:12 PM
Wow! Very proud:
vegas7e, x2 4200+
5:47

my machine works at 2.75gHz with temp max of 62 celsius, an old socket939 just got alive.
johnmeyer wrote on 5/8/2007, 2:00 PM
I test on another computer:

21:38 on my ancient 2.8 GHz. Pentium P4 using 7.0d.
Guy Bruner wrote on 5/8/2007, 3:19 PM
Ok, thanks for the new test, John.

My Q6600 OC'd to 3.15 GHz does the test in 1:55 (115 seconds) using Vegas 7.0e.

My Acer Core Duo 2.0GHz laptop does it in 9:18.
rs170a wrote on 5/8/2007, 3:26 PM
Thanks for the new test John.
I came in at 1:59 (119 seconds) with my QX6700.

Mike

edit: for the heck of it, I also tried a WMV using the 8 Mbps HD 1080-30p Video template (default settings) and it rendered in 1:08 (68 sec.).
Raising the frame rate to 59.94 (Double NTSC) increased it to 2:17 (137 sec.)
DJPadre wrote on 5/8/2007, 3:31 PM
avg 5 minutes on dual core/core 2 systems and 12 seconds on Johns.. thats a HUGE difference..

John would u care to share ur specs?
john-beale wrote on 5/8/2007, 3:39 PM
"...rendered it out as HDV using the default "HDV 1080-60i" template. My machine rendered it in exactly 120 seconds."

Just wanted to confirm you generated MPEG2 HDV and not Cineform Intermediate AVI. (Both of those presets are labeled 1080-60i in my render menu.) If so that is some fast machine you have; more than 10x faster than mine:

Desktop system: P4 2.8 GHz, 2 GB, Win XP SP2
Vegas 7d: 23:51
Vegas 7e: 22:02

Laptop: Dell Inspiron 9300: Pentium M 1.6GHz, 512 MB, WinXP SP2
Vegas 7d: 18:16
Vegas 7e: 17:31
blink3times wrote on 5/8/2007, 3:42 PM
2:11

Intel 950 dual core overclocked to 4Ghz.
jrazz wrote on 5/8/2007, 4:02 PM
Mine rendered out at 6 minutes and 20 seconds.

I have an AMD 64 Dual Core 5000+ cpu and a Asus M2N32 WS Professional MOBO. Veg file was on a 500 gig Firewire 72,000 drive and the encode was saved to a eSata drive 72,000.
Edit: 7d

j razz
TomG wrote on 5/8/2007, 4:11 PM
6:32

AMD Athlon 4600 Dual @2.8 MgH

TomG
UKAndrewC wrote on 5/8/2007, 4:45 PM
I always thought Vegas rendered slowly on My PC.

It took 12 minutes.
rs170a wrote on 5/8/2007, 5:25 PM
John would u care to share ur specs?

Hmm. Must be having a long dinner :-)
John's quad core specs

Mike
John_Cline wrote on 5/8/2007, 5:34 PM
Yes, as a matter of fact, I was having dinner...

Apparently, there was some confusion in an earlier post about my render times. There are now two versions of the rendertest;

The original, standard definition rendertest.veg, which is the one posted on the VASST site and the one which we have been using here for quite a while. It is designed to be rendered using the standard NTSC DV .AVI template with rendering quality set to "best."

The updated version, which I posted earlier today, is called rendertest-hdv.veg and uses the same media, but I set the project properties to HDV 1080-60i and increased the size of all the generated media to 1920x1080 and it is intended to be rendered to an MPEG2 HDV file using the default "HDV 1080-60i" template. I created the file using v7.0e, so it won't open in Vegas v6 or earlier.

Using Vegas v7.0e, my quad-core rendered the original SD test in 12 seconds. It rendered the new .VEG file in exactly 2 minutes, i.e. 120 seconds. (Although I need to re-run the test because I think I was serving up some files to another machine at the time and that was probably eating up some CPU cycles.)

Also, since the test uses all generated media, the speed of the hard drive shouldn't make any difference in the results. It's pretty much all about processor and RAM.

I see that Mike has already posted the URL to my system specs. Thanks, Mike.

John
john-beale wrote on 5/8/2007, 5:45 PM
This is really impressive to me. For the past 10 years, I would buy a new system every few years, at roughly the same mid-range price point, and the speed would be around 2x to 3x more than the old system. Even the most expensive system would get me at most 4x improvement. John_C's system is at the high end in price but the speed is 10x my current system, I've never seen that kind of performance jump happen.
DrLumen wrote on 5/8/2007, 6:51 PM
On an E6600 with 2gb DDR2-800

4:20 with 7.0E
4:27 with 7.0D

intel i-4790k / Asus Z97 Pro / 32GB Crucial RAM / Nvidia GTX 560Ti / 500GB Samsung SSD / 256 GB Samsung SSD / 2-WDC 4TB Black HDD's / 2-WDC 1TB HDD's / 2-HP 23" Monitors / Various MIDI gear, controllers and audio interfaces

PeterWright wrote on 5/8/2007, 6:54 PM
Core 2 Duo E6700 2 Gb Ram 4min.00

Interesting - Duo Core exactly twice the time of John's Quad Core!

Vaio Core 2 Duo Laptop T7400 1 Gb Ram 5 min.04
Guy Bruner wrote on 5/8/2007, 7:15 PM
Yes. I'm really having a problem here. My C2Q Q6600 does the original rendertest.veg in 28 seconds while John's does it in 12-14 seconds. Yet, my machine does the HD rendertest in 115 seconds. Curiouser and curiouser...
John_Cline wrote on 5/8/2007, 7:17 PM
"Interesting - Duo Core exactly twice the time of John's Quad Core!"

The E6700 is a dual-core 2.66Ghz processor, my QX6700 is a 2.66Ghz quad-core so, all other things being equal, one would expect the QX6700 to be twice as fast. What's interesting to me is that the Vegas code is apparently fully optimized for multiple processors and really does scale proportionately to the number of cores and speed of the processors. This is not something that can be said of all multi-processor software. Good job, Sony!
John_Cline wrote on 5/8/2007, 7:18 PM
Guy,

Are you rendering to a standard NTSC DV .AVI file using the original rendertest.veg?

Also, what method are you using to overclock your processor?
gjesion wrote on 5/8/2007, 7:23 PM
129 seconds 7.0d, 120 seconds 7.0e. QX6700 quad, 2GB ram.

Regards,
Jerry