fastest preview framerates?

sumitagarwal wrote on 8/23/2004, 6:07 PM

Most 'benchmark' posts on this forum (understandably) compare final render times for various PC configurations. For my work (editing a feature-length narrative with heavy color correction and other manipulation) the more important aspect is how close I can get to an 'on-line' real-time preview. The highest framerates are key so that precise timing in shot cuts can be executed without the need of previewing each adjustment with a render. In theory, what would be the best system for this? I know that dual-proc systems don't benefit much from V5 (audio goes to one thread), but it does help somewhat, no?
Dual Xeon 2.8Ghz (800FSB) VS. Dual Opteron 246?
Should I go single-proc and put the $$$ towards a higher CPU speed, like an Athlon FX 53 or P4 3.6Ghz?
Thanks a lot in advance for any advice any of you can give.
-Sumit

Comments

B.Verlik wrote on 8/24/2004, 7:50 PM

Lots of RAM for previews. I can watch an AVI at a normal 29.970 fps. I only have 768 ram. As soon as I add an additional track, I lose the framerate. As soon as I add any effects I start to lose some frames. I haven't tried going above 768, but I've heard other people here say that as soon as you start piling up effects that your going to start losing your smooth playback, no matter what. So you might want to base your new computer on how fast you can render a new AVI. Lots of RAM helps, but lots of editing ruins it. Set your preview window to 'Auto'. Do a search about the computer question. I just saw it answered a couple of days ago. I've heard some people say that when you go to watch the preview, give the computer a few seconds of rest, so the ram can give you the best image possible. (for a transition or something quick)

B.Verlik wrote on 8/24/2004, 8:17 PM

Here, give this thread a try......

http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=309378&Page=18

johnmeyer wrote on 8/24/2004, 8:55 PM

Vegas does everything in the CPU. To get faster previews, get a faster CPU. RAM won't help much, except that it will allow you to render short segments to RAM and get perfect real-time preview for that segment.

You certainly want to make sure you disable every possible background process (anti-virus software, etc.) so that the CPU can concentrate entirely on the preview.

I am sure that you already know that you can get faster preview by using one of the lower quality preview settings. However, many people don't know that you can get a huge increase in preview performance, although at the expense of lower spatial quality, by temporarily lowering the resolution of the project. If your main need is to balance color and to judge the motion of your finished product, this trick is definitely worth trying. I discovered it while looking at a project posted a few months back by one of the Sony developers. Here's the thread where I posted the details:

Faster preview trick. Is this a good idea?

sumitagarwal wrote on 8/27/2004, 11:08 PM

Thanks a lot... I'm going to give that a shot. The VEG file is pretty insane... pre-production animatics and voices paired up with organizational/shooting data in the form of text overlays mixed in with live footage from sections/sequences that have already been shot (shot anamorphic at 16:9 but then cropped to 2.35:1), and lemme tell you... my Athlon XP 2000+ CHOKES on it!
I'll likely do a combination of the temp resolution drop and a system upgrade. Still no suggestions on AMD vs Intel on the high-end dual CPU issue? (Xeon vs Opteron).
Thanks.
-Sumit

Chienworks wrote on 8/28/2004, 5:34 AM

You won't get much real advice on AMD vs. Intel, because there really isn't much to give. Sure, this month AMD edged out Intel with a new chip that runs 0.03% faster on tasks A, B, and F. Next month Intel will come up with something that beats that by 0.03% on tasks B, F, and H (whatever these tasks may be this month). In the end, who cares? If you live your life waiting for or buying the fastest processor you'll never get it because there will always be a faster one next month and you'll waste a lot of money in the process. Generally 6 month old CPU technology is half the price of bleeding-edge and is probably 90% as fast or better. In your case, your Athlon XP is getting rather old. But i still wouldn't suggest worrying about the absolute latest upgrade. Heck, for the price of the latest CPU available you could buy two 6 month old computers and use one for rendering while editing on the other. Think of how much that could speed up your workflow!