gpu acceleWHAT?

digilyd wrote on 3/10/2018, 4:23 AM

Older than that (5xx and back), you must use Sony AVC codec and select OpenCL as the GPU acceleration mode.

For NVIDIA 5xx and older you use Mainconcept AVC with CUDA, not OpenCL which is for AMD cards and the Sony AVC encoder. However, for VP15 you have to enable "legacy GPU" support first.

And THEN the hot spare 490 with a 2.5 GHz pair of Xeons and the 1050ti shows a significant rendering speed increase with a test file, expected render duration 43 minutes instead of some 55 minutes, codec Sony AVC.

steve-kauzlarich wrote on 4/25/2018, 10:56 AM

This is great and current information indeed - and I have another question.

What would be the best card for the smoothest playback on the timeline? I'm currently using v-13, but have had v-15 since the release. I use an R9 card and a Boxx (overclocked) 8 processor computer.

BTW - shouldn't this type of information be listed front and center on Magix's site?

OldSmoke wrote on 4/25/2018, 11:14 AM

This is great and current information indeed - and I have another question.

What would be the best card for the smoothest playback on the timeline? I'm currently using v-13, but have had v-15 since the release. I use an R9 card and a Boxx (overclocked) 8 processor computer.

BTW - shouldn't this type of information be listed front and center on Magix's site?

What kind of R9 card do you have in your system?

Unfortunately, MAGIX is as quiet about precise specs and technical information as SONY was.

a Boxx (overclocked) 8 processor computer

Sorry, but these are not proper specs, be more specific please.

steve-kauzlarich wrote on 4/25/2018, 11:18 AM

I have a SAPPHIRE Radeon R9 290X 4GB 512-Bit GDDR in my sysetm. I understand that Nvidia cards are working well with openCL these days.

NickHope wrote on 4/25/2018, 11:26 AM

This is great and current information indeed - and I have another question.

What would be the best card for the smoothest playback on the timeline? I'm currently using v-13, but have had v-15 since the release. I use an R9 card and a Boxx (overclocked) 8 processor computer.

@steve-kauzlarich For VP13, an AMD card. See this post.

In VP15 the GPU-support situation has changed, and things haven't really settled down yet. So it's difficult to be sure. My personal feeling is that something like an NVIDIA GTX 1080Ti would be a better choice than AMD, but that's based on reading the forum and not my own tests. Most forum posts have been more about rendering speed than smooth timeline playback.

In both cases, driver choice is critical, and don't be surprised if you have to roll back GPU drivers for stability or functionality.

This is great and current information indeed - and I have another question.

What would be the best card for the smoothest playback on the timeline? I'm currently using v-13, but have had v-15 since the release. I use an R9 card and a Boxx (overclocked) 8 processor computer.

Some guidance would be nice but the custodians of Vegas have basically never done that, at least for the last few years. I think it's because they want to appear to be "hardware neutral". They publish minimal system requirements, but it's been up to the users to work out what works well and what doesn't.

OldSmoke wrote on 4/25/2018, 11:35 AM

In VP15 the GPU-support situation has changed, and things haven't really settled down yet. So it's difficult to be sure. My personal feeling is that something like an NVIDIA GTX 1080Ti would be a better choice than AMD, but that's based on reading the forum and not my own tests. Most forum posts have been more about rendering speed than smooth timeline playback.

The short time I could test VP15 I found no difference in timeline performance between my Fury X and a GXT1080Ti that I ordered for my tests and returned thereafter.

The only difference I see is in the MAGIX AVC codec that currently only supports Nvidia's NVENC but not AMD's VEC.

In my opinion, a R9 290X with 4GB and 512bit bandwidth is sufficient for now. What is the exact processor you have in that box?

steve-kauzlarich wrote on 4/25/2018, 11:46 AM

The Boxx has an 8 core (4 physical) Intel i76700 CPU @ 4GHz, 512 SSD, 32G ram, (2) 6T internal hds. It works very well, but we all have an appetite for faster and better.

OldSmoke wrote on 4/25/2018, 8:24 PM

Considering that you have a 4 core CPU, the R9 290X is certainly sufficient and I doubt you will see much improvement with a better GPU but rather with a better, more core and high clock speed CPU, meaning not a Xeon.

Former user wrote on 4/25/2018, 8:37 PM

The short time I could test VP15 I found no difference in timeline performance between my Fury X and a GXT1080Ti that I ordered for my tests and returned thereafter.

What happened with rendering?

I've wondered what happens with very fast gpu's like that. Is vegas able to speed up the processing of the gpu plugins or does the GPU just use a lesser pecentage. My 1070gpu when it used to work with vegas would max out about 40%, so i'm guessing if your card also used that percentage or more it would be faster.

OldSmoke wrote on 4/25/2018, 8:48 PM

The short time I could test VP15 I found no difference in timeline performance between my Fury X and a GXT1080Ti that I ordered for my tests and returned thereafter.

What happened with rendering?

I've wondered what happens with very fast gpu's like that. Is vegas able to speed up the processing of the gpu plugins or does the GPU just use a lesser pecentage. My 1070gpu when it used to work with vegas would max out about 40%, so i'm guessing if your card also used that percentage or more it would be faster.

I think I forgot to mention the other test. That is using a GTX580 in VP15 in order to make use of the CUDA rendering and it was on par with the new MAGIX NVENC codec in terms of speed. However, if one doesn't render to an accelerated codec, like XAVC-I, XDCAM, MPEG and so on, the difference is 0 (zero) between the Fury X (AMD) and the GTX1080Ti. Also keep in mind that depending on your CPU, the GPU will have to wait for the frame to be prepared/feed to the GPU and back for writing to the file. So, putting a fast GTX1080Ti in a system with a slow CPU will not make it any faster compared to the same system with a GPU that just can handle the amount of information the CPU can feed, such a GPU will run at 100% while the GTX1080Ti can only run at maybe 50%. As such, considering the i7 6700K of @steve-kauzlarich, I considered the R9 290X as sufficient.

digilyd wrote on 9/10/2018, 2:52 AM

This is the explanation it seems, the card is not what it claims to be, ACCORDING TO GPU-Z IT IS A FAKE 1050TI. All is resolved, card is going to the electronics scrapheap at the recycling station.

digilyd wrote on 9/13/2018, 4:42 AM

I don't understand this at all. I got tired of slow frame rates on rendering 1920 x 1080 - a couple of frames pr. second - and got a 5770 graphics card from ATI, second hand and not costly. That about doubled the frame rate to 4.something.

More wants more, at least I did, because rendering doubles the mains power usage of my household. And I found a second hand not very old GTX 1050 ti card from Nvidia, just installed it instead of the ATI 5770 and rendering is back a 2.something frames pr. second.

Windows CPU rating 7.2 and windows graphics rating 7.2. Is this a software issue that will be improved on or should I just lament getting a newer and much more capable card for something, that it is not very good at and put it in the officeputer instead and put the 5770 back into this here dual double xeon videoputer?

Finally this is apparently resolved, a real nvidia card is in the mail. The issue with the 1050ti is that it is a FAKE NVIDIA 1050ti, beware! - it was GPU-Z that recognized the card as not being what it claimed to be.

BEWARE, suggest verifying that an NVIDIA card actually IS an NVIDIA card in case of driver and rendering issues!

digilyd wrote on 10/28/2018, 5:44 AM

And lo and behold, a lowly GT730 performs twice as good as the fake 1050ti and while full hd rendering only gets to 30 percent of realtime, it at least gets bearable. Also it seems to be a good match to the machine based on load on CPU pair around 80 percent and GPU around 60 percent.

astar wrote on 10/29/2018, 8:48 PM

Are you seriously wasting everyone's time on a PC from 2009, with dual 2 core Xeons? You just need a new machine that thing is well past its prime. The surface pro would likely out perform that PC these days.

digilyd wrote on 10/30/2018, 2:35 AM

It is bein transferred to audio and music,video is moving to an i5-4570. But take the arrogance, possibly unintended, out of your wordings lest it comes back and bites you in the butt some day.

The cause of the malfunction of NV ENC was not the PC, it was the fake 1050ti I got stung by second hand. There was apparently nobody here who understood that, it was because of installing GPU-Z to check GPU usage that I found out that the reason NV ENC didn't work was that the card in question is a hodge-podge of outdated components with a fake bios.

I submit two things that makes the thread most worthwile: one being the lack of knowledge of this and another being the inabillity of the software to say "sorry mate, your graphics card is broken".

Also, while I did get two "less old" HP SFF's with i5s in them at bargain prices, you need to appreciate that also people using outdated crap hardware because they are public old age pensioners can make quite serious video work. See also:

and my very first youtube video:

Both have the added value of good quality content :) - play them on a system with good quality audio for optimum experience. And while frank, thank you for your comments ;)