You said "performance," without going deeper into your needs.

Preview and real time effects processing are important to some people, while rendering benchmarks are more important to others. I fall into the latter category.

For all kinds of benchmarks under various conditions, Tomshardware is still the best place to start. Don't even think of looking at their gaming benchmarks, unless gaming is what you like to do the most. In that case, their are some pretty sensible reasons for buying two computers.

That all said, I couldn't be happier with my Intel i7 12650H with 24GB RAM. The preview acceleration is very good, and the CPU runs cool at less than 5% load during full-throttle ProRes rendering, something I do a lot for my restoration work.

Thank you for replies;

Intel hasn't made much performance gains since the 12th generation but the processors are still good for VEGAS - I have two.

Even with new Ultra Core 285K? I know that 14th gen was almost identical to 13th gen, but small increments accumulation, make a gap anyway compared to my current CPU.
(Another reason why I want to replace it is that apparently, Win11 can't ben installed on it. I don't want to buy 13th/14th gen due to oxidation problems that were announced, 12th Gen is too close from current CPU, so what's left at this time is latest gen.)

Whether you need the IGPU depends. For 10 bit 422 HEVC it's the only GPU able to decode it, but do you have to shoot that?

I think encode HEVC, but my cameras are getting old and I don't think I shoot it. So you mean this shouldn't matter in an AMD or Intel choice?

For benchmarks see my signature for two.

I think I remember this, I was hoping to find it back.

Save money for a good GPU, you don't need the best possible CPU if it eats into your GPU budget.

I already have an RTX 4080 I purchased (last year I think). The thing is also that I mentioned a few activities here, but I may do many other things, what I will want to do is somewhat improvised/non-predictable, so I'm used to have at least one top-performing computer at hand, and used to buy a new one every X years (postponing the last one since almost 2 years). I usually consider that, to some extent, and depending on market situation: oversizing is easier (and actually cheaper) than regretting and upsizing afterwards.

You said "performance," without going deeper into your needs.

I thought about this, For me, preview and some effects is more important. On rendering side, I have no urge, and I often render on secondary compute (which is slower but at least leaves main computer fully free.)

For all kinds of benchmarks under various conditions, Tomshardware is still the best place to start. Don't even think of looking at their gaming benchmarks, unless gaming is what you like to do the most. In that case, their are some pretty sensible reasons for buying two computers.

I always buy computers with productivity in mind. Gaming performances are just a "nice to have" for me. And the few games I play don't require competitive performances, so they run fin enough even on a "non-gaming optimised" computer.

That all said, I couldn't be happier with my Intel i7 12650H with 24GB RAM. The preview acceleration is very good, and the CPU runs cool at less than 5% load during full-throttle ProRes rendering, something I do a lot for my restoration work.

Look at benchmarks, but I haven't seen large jumps from 12th through present with no real gains from 13 to 14. The present gen seemed like a big change in structure with lower power usage but performance a mixed bag. I haven't seen any VEGAS-specific tests. https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review

The software problems with i7/i9 13/14 should be solved with a bios fix and don't think chips with oxidation issues are still on the market, but buy whatever you are comfortable with.

If you don't need Intel decoding (and likely don't if your cameras are old and you're not shooting 10-bit 422) you can freely choose Intel or AMD CPUs. Since late in VP 21's cycle the performance of GPU decoding has really improved, especially for NVIDIA. At this point I have two NVIDIA/Intel systems and switched NVDEC decoding which is faster than Intel QSV for almost all the formats I tested.

For encoding (rendering) NVENC is also very fast and reasonable quality you don't need an iGPU for this either.

So for timeline fx and media decoding it's the GPU that matters most. Pair your great GPU with any modern CPU and you'll have a good experience in VEGAS. There really aren't any wrong choices.

@TTTT You should find out exactly what your cameras are shooting. You can download MediaInfo, which free, and find out. You need to know that to assess possible gpu impact on decoding.

I just noticed you asked what a riser is in another old thread... that's a cable that plugs into a partially obstructed 3rd slot in my system and brings the connection out to a more clear location so I can plug in an Intel Arc that can decode hevc faster. The Arc can also be teamed with the igpu for qsv hyper-rendering in Resolve Studio, ffmpeg, and Riguya apps, but unfortunately not with Vegas yet.

Here is how to use MediaInfo. https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/faq-how-to-post-mediainfo-and-vegas-pro-file-properties--104561/

Feel free to post in your main media into this thread.

Advances in chip design from AMD have been quite outstanding. While my CPU is a couple of generations older, it still holds its own quite well. One of the reasons for staying with AMD is the longevity of their motherboards. So all you would have to do is do a BIOS upgrade and drop in a new CPU. No new motherboard purchases.

Since you mention productivity, watch this:

Thank you for all replies.
I mostly wanted to know if there was a clear winner. But often with hardware, it's a lot of "this option is better if... this other option is better if... and stuff we're not too sure about..."... resulting in some kind of NP-complete problem... Also, I'm asking regarding Vegas because this is the Vegas forum, but I really have a mixed bag of activities on computers... So for now, I think I'll go for Intel due to the better performance in productivity.

Regarding chipset longevity, I heard the AMD's AM5 chipset is approaching end of life now... Intel's one is more recent... Anyway, usually, several chipset generations have passed at the time I update (be it Intel or AMD).

I don't have any current video project and I am really submerged by info I need to read and fetched everywhere (not only regarding the PC, also regarding "stuff"...) so I did not think that I would re-check what videos my cameras encore... but, checked quickly using some project archive and VLC, confirmed by MediaInfo... All my cameras encore "MPEG-4 AVC (part 10) (avc1)" (that said, ideally, I should upgrade them or some of them during the life span of the PC I plan to purchase, but, not all expenses at the same time...).
 

AM5 is not approaching EOL. I would like to know where you heard this.

AM5 is not approaching EOL. I would like to know where you heard this.

I don't remember xactly, some video, or some Reddit, I guess. (Or other sources.)

No problem. That is false information. But for some, maybe 2027 is approaching EOL.

But there are pluses and minuses to everything. Choose what will work for you.

No problem. That is false information. But for some, maybe 2027 is approaching EOL.

@Reyfox In the same way you could say AM4 is not EOL because 5 refreshed CPUs were released for that motherboard this year. AMD is not saying or confirming ZEN6 will be on AM5 but if they knew it would be, they would say, there's no down side. When directly asked they reply with the corporate speak you quoted rather then "ZEN6 will be compatible with AM5 motherboards"

@UltraVista like Intel, AMD comes out with new CPU's every year. Gotta love competition. If they say Zen 6 will be compatible with AM5, I would tend to believe them. Where have they been wrong in the past about CPU compatibility with their motherboards? I have a Zen 1 B350 motherboard that can support my top of the line Zen 3 5950X 16 core 32 thread CPU with zero problems outside of a BIOS upgrade. This is a motherboard from 2017. You can not name one Intel motherboard that has that type of longevity with CPU support. As for "corporate speak", things could change for sure, but so far, AMD has been faithful with longevity of their motherboard platforms.

So for the next couple of years, to 2027, AMD will be releasing new CPU's and that AM5 will be supported by the CPU's they will release. Can't say the same about Intel.

I think motherboards for Intel cpu's have been changing more rapidly than for amd. But EOL is probably the wrong buzzword since Intel is still releasing chipset firmware and igpu driver updates for most of them. What Intel changes is the cpu socket and supporting chipset which forces buying a new motherboard if you want to upgrade the cpu. I was particularly annoyed when the 11900k series socket only lasted one year. 12th gen lasted until Ultra recently came out with yet another new socket. Once upon a time Xeons and Cores shared the same socket and chipset but no more... I think the old Xeon I still have running was the very last one.

So for the next couple of years, to 2027, AMD will be releasing new CPU's and that AM5 will be supported by the CPU's they will release. Can't say the same about Intel.

If I follow my usual pace, I won't replace that new computer before 2027, more like 2028, 2029 or so. So, though theoretically interesting, this aspect is not relevant to my own CPU choice.
 

But EOL is probably the wrong buzzword ...

It is also possible that "EOL" was not the precise word I heard/read and that I used it to lightly thinking it expressed the same idea. Maybe the idea was "obsolete" or "superseded". (Also, English is not my mother language, and most of the time I try to be precise, but sometimes my word choice may end up carrying some approximation.)

@UltraVista like Intel, AMD comes out with new CPU's every year. Gotta love competition. If they say Zen 6 will be compatible with AM5, I would tend to believe them. and that AM5 will be supported by the CPU's they will release. Can't say the same about Intel

@Reyfox You said that, AMD did not, AMD said the board will be supported until 2027, and I gave you examples of how the AM4 motherboard is still supported in 2024 with 5 new refreshed CPU releases this year, but you can't use a 7000 or 9000 series CPU on it ans similarly there's no evidence to suggest a Zen6 CPU would be compatible with an AM5 motherboard at this point with the limited information you have. You've been manipulated into thinking that.

Luckily you did not buy into a new ecosystem with new ram motherboard and CPU, but your unsubstantiated claims in a CPU buying thread could lead others to do so. I would have bought a 9000 series CPU if I knew the generation following would use same CPU/RAM/Motherboard but I don't know that because AMD refuse to say. 2 possibilities - AMD themselves didn't know the answer when asked (release of 9000 series CPU) or they do know the answer and it would reduce sales of the new CPU's.

@UltraVista yes, AM4 boards are still supported with refreshed CPU's. I think that's great, especially compared to the competition. It's not so much that I've said that Zen 6 will work with AM5 motherboards, but websites such as Videocardz, Wccftech, TechPowerUp, and other websites have mentioned it. Now, could they be wrong? Of course! We won't know until the CPU's are actually released. But overall, AMD does give you more choices and greater longevity than anything Intel has produced in recent years.

But maybe I should have made myself clearer. AMD says they will support the AM5 platform to 2027. And while there is no evidence from AMD at the moment that says specifically, Zen6 will be supported, there is none that points to where it won't be. I can point to where Zen 1000, 2000, 3000, and 5000 series CPU's are supported on on my first gen B350 motherboard. So, what I have is a track record that escapes Intel completely. Now, does that mean every version of the CPU's will work? That's dependent on the board manufacturers. I am giving what my board can support.

As for my claims being unsubstantiated, yes, you are right. AMD has kept its mouth shut on this, and your speculation as to why is based on what evidence. Like Intel and every other hardware manufacturer does with their roadmaps, they give generalities, not specifics. But as I've clearly pointed out, again, my B350 Gigabyte motherboard supports Zen 1000, 2000, 3000 and 5000 series CPU. Of course you can't use a Ryzen 7000 or 9000 on it. But again, look how many versions of AMD CPU's could be used on my first gen B350. Whether they are new CPU's refreshed (updated performance as manufacturing improves) or those when the board was first released, it is still supported.

No one should take anything that anyone writes (including what you've wrote) about without doing the research themselves.

@Reyfox Good points, In my case I was going to get the AM5 motherboard and ram, and probably get a 7000 series (maybe 9000) CPU and then update CPU with ZEN6 release as 9000 series(other than 3d variants) are underwhelming, ZEN6 is where the big gains should be but I"M not buying because AMD won't say if ZEN6 is compatible with AM5.

When you consider AMD are legally obligated to make decisions that prioritize the financial interests of shareholders Not saying ZEN6 is compatible(when it is) is something they could be sued for unless they have a really good reason not to say because its reducing sales.

So the default cautious position to take is to assume ZEN6 won't be compatible. There is a grey area I can see like maybe Zen6 could be compatible with the new 800 series AM5 motherboards but not other AM5 boards and AMD didn't want to get bogged down in technicalities, but that too doesn't make sense, that's one way of selling overly expensive 800 motherboards that few are buying and also imagine the confusion having a non 800 series AM5 socket compatible motherboard that isn't compatible with ZEN6. Very odd.