While making the final decision, it would be worthwhile taking into account the different system requirements as recommended by the Vegas team for FHD, UHD and AI FX. These recommendations can be seen at https://www.vegascreativesoftware.com/us/product-comparison/ (scroll down to 'System Requirements').

You mentioned in a recent post/comment:

... I am planning a transition from my current Vegas 15 + Win-7 computer (flawless;) to a new Vegas 19/22 + Win-10 platform 

Windows 11 is the current Windows version and has been for some time. Microsoft has announced that updates, security updates and support for Windows 10 will cease from 14 October 2025 (less than 13 months away).

From https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/faq/windows#windows-10

What options do I have for continuing to use versions of Windows 10 that reach End of Support on October 14, 2025?

You may continue to use Windows 10 after support ends; however, it will no longer receive quality updates, new or updated features, security updates, or technical support. We recommend that customers upgrade or transition to a new Windows 11 PC for the best, most secure computing experience.

And there have been rumours that Windows 12 is on the horizon.

Yes... and what about the render time?:) How long does it take on your CPU + Vegas 22?

Sorry, but I'm not downloading anything from an unknown server. The usual advice on the forum has been to make downloads available from DropBox or similarly well-known cloud sources.

Sorry, but I'm not downloading anything from an unknown server. The usual advice on the forum has been to make downloads available from DropBox or similarly well-known cloud sources.

Fixed!

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/s7pmi8y8tdm3e98fodg52/vegas_testing.zip?rlkey=jfsuvl923dykjcgbikhvyauxa&st=oa5nvqri&dl=0

@KKS Use the sample projects of @RogerS for comparing render times with your and other PC's. It makes no sense to make your own project and wait till other users are willingly to compare for you.

@KKS Use the sample projects of @RogerS for comparing render times with your and other PC's. It makes no sense to make your own project and wait till other users are willingly to compare for you.

Yeah, I wish I could... my platform is not compatible with Roger's projects.

I'm willing to take a chance and wait a little bit more for some willing users;)

Or maybe you can help by answering this question:

Assuming I only replace the CPU (and update to newer Vegas if necessary) in my workstation and everything else stays exactly the same (for purposes of testing), and the new CPU has benchmark 3 times as high (19000 points) as my current CPU (6500 points), is it correct to expect that renders will be performed 3x times quicker?

Renderingspeed is not only CPU depending but mostly GPU depending. When rendering speed is important take also a look at Voukoder for Vegas.

Renderingspeed is not only CPU depending but mostly GPU depending. When rendering speed is important take also a look at Voukoder for Vegas.

I don't have a GPU at all, apart from the iGPU in my Intel processor, so I can assure you rendering in Vegas is possible without a dedicated GPU.

Let me ask my question differently:

What impact does the benchmark score have on Vegas rendering times?
Does the i7-1200k help make the rendering 5 times quicker than i7-3770k (because it's 5x times as strong)?

Is a I5-

Is a car with 5 times more horsepower 5 times faster?

The older project in my signature works on all versions of VEGAS from 16 onwards. You can also look at the results for a variety of CPUs to see how they affect performance.

Is a car with 5 times more horsepower 5 times faster?

I am not a race driver nor a mechanic.... so I have no idea (I know there are tractors with a lot horsepower which are very slow, for example). And I am not a computer nerd so I have no idea about CPUs; Roger's page seems very convoluted and hard to understand for me.

Let me ask the question differently, one more time;

We have the latest, freshest platform.
It's the most powerful computer in the world.
There can't be anything newer or better for at least the next month. And you cannot change anything in the RAM or SSD speed and stuff.
It has an Intel Geezaurus XCV-8000 CPU installed (benchmark: 1'000'000) and it's running Vegas 22.
Now imagine Intel starts a sudden, out-of-the-blue press conference and they say "sorry, we forgot to mention - we also have the Geezaurus XCV-9000 CPU - it's the same architecture, the same socket, and it's ready for you to buy! Benchmark: 2'000'000 (double).
You take out your current XCV-8000 and you put the XCV-9000 in its place. Is the redner going to be 2x faster?

An old truism about many areas of technology ... the higher go the specs, the ever-diminishing rate of return. An increase in specs does not automatically mean a linear increase in performance; rather, more likely a logarithmic-like down curve on the increase in performance

Also with your example, you have asked the decades old question about computers - 'should I wait until the next CPU/GPU/etc release?' If basing a purchase decision on this premise, you will never buy because there is always a new 'better' version on the horizon.

@KKS Just duplicate the system in my signature and move on with your life.

Here's how the sausage was made: System Upgrade 2023

Windows 11, Vegas Pro 22-122 Trial, OBS at the default settings.

P.S. I've answered this question in the past.

Intel Press Release

Here is a PugetSystems analysis of how many generations you need to see a doubling of performance with Intel CPUs. The results will more or less apply to VEGAS. Do try to get a dedicated GPU as well, even if it's used

@KKS I downloaded and looked at your test project, media, and render settings and I don't see anything in there likely to be influenced much by choice of gpu. If that's your workflow and you're sticking to it, any gpu that takes advantage of a fast display will do... but 720x1080 media is a pretty low hurdle.

For your type of material, you should focus on the fastest and most economical cpu, ram, and disk i/o you can get. Since an igpu will probably be superfluous to you, a fast Intel cpu without an igpu would be less expensive than, for instance, a similar K-model. A Ryzen should be even more economical. Also, since your test project runs all my cpu @ 100%, an aio water cooler would benefit performance... my 11900k has a single radiator but a triple would be better on hotter processors.

Fast reliable ram isn't cheap. The best you can do there is to not exceed the specs of the cpu you settle on. The same can be said of fast disks, though prices seem to be declining... but filling m.2 ssd slots that exceed available pci lanes always lowers performance.

Bottom line is you might optimize your current practices but be unhappy with those choices if your desires evolve. For instance, your test media is 720x1080 but your project is 1080x1920 and could be enhanced by AI-Upscale FX which vp15 cannot do. But AI runs best on the latest gpus which would be otherwise useless to your current workflow.

Although my systems are hardly anywhere near optimal for your needs, or as current as others here, I did a bunch of comparative vp22 renders anyway on a couple of my systems with different combos of (video/decoder) graphics:

Zenbook 12900h laptop (3060/3060): 1m 31.15s
Zenbook 12900h laptop (IrisXe/IrisXe): 1m 27.20s
Custom 11900k desktop (6900xt/6900xt): 1m 23.87s
Custom 11900k desktop (4090/4090): 1m 24.91s
Custom 11900k desktop (uhd750/uhd750): 1m 27.36s

Interesting how little difference my laptop and desktop do with your test project. My laptop is so slow on my 4k multcam workflow, I wouldn't dream of using it for projects I shoot.

Btw, for a bench of what Vegas does best with a variety of fx and media... see the link to a folder in my signature with various RedCar benches. The only one you could run as-is is with vp15 the original Sony version (PressReleaseProject(VP10).veg) if you place it in the same folder as the media... here's a direct link to the one vp10 can run: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KA2Trmu4LvnRGVzZxDKe7uvLH3GB7A44/view?usp=drive_link
If you download a vp22 trial, you could test the other versions which I made with vp16 as well as Roger's.

I am curious about one aspect of the fx in your test project... Black Restore makes your swinging black object look terrible. Does the same thing to my big black piano-shaped objects. Chroma Key-Black behind it is also curious. Ha, ha, but if Elton John ever plays in my living room, I could disappear my piano in the video and deep fake a red one in its place.

Here is a PugetSystems analysis of how many generations you need to see a doubling of performance with Intel CPUs. The results will more or less apply to VEGAS. Do try to get a dedicated GPU as well, even if it's used

This analysis was really helpful!
Thank you for trying to understand my question instead of telling me about the newest version of Windows and car horsepower!;)
 

@KKS I downloaded and looked at your test project, media, and render settings and I don't see anything in there likely to be influenced much by choice of gpu. If that's your workflow and you're sticking to it, any gpu that takes advantage of a fast display will do... but 720x1080 media is a pretty low hurdle.

Also, since your test project runs all my cpu @ 100%, an aio water cooler would benefit performance...

Fast reliable ram isn't cheap. The best you can do there is to not exceed the specs of the cpu you settle on.

If you download a vp22 trial, you could test the other versions which I made with vp16 as well as Roger's.

I am curious about one aspect of the fx in your test project... Black Restore makes your swinging black object look terrible. Does the same thing to my big black piano-shaped objects. Chroma Key-Black behind it is also curious. Ha, ha, but if Elton John ever plays in my living room, I could disappear my piano in the video and deep fake a red one in its place.

Thank you!

Can you please explain what a "gpu that takes advantage of a fast display" is?
How am I supposed to find a graphics card like that?
I thought I would just get a GeForce GTX 1080 Ti if I ever felt like I wanted an independent GPU.

Why is your CPU running at 100%? This is a little bit worrying. My i7-3770K runs at max 75% and the platform is super-stable (PSU not activating, fans blowing with stable speed, etc).



My planned setup is a CPU described as "DDR5-4800 mhz" plus a motherboard that supports DDR5 up to 7200 mhz. I was planning to get a RAM module at 6000 mhz. Are you saying this should not be done? Should I get my RAM at 4800 mhz to match the CPU, even if the motherboard can handle faster mhz?

Cannot use Vegas 22 now because I'm on Windows 7;) But I have Vegas 19 (possibly 22 too) bought & ready for my new platform.

Oh, my test project is using just a random video shot I took. I cannot show you the real video because I'm working with prototypes of instruments not yet released. Here's what my projects look like when finished. This weird FX-chain that you're asking about is necessary to achieve this result.

If you do a CPU only render (say MagixAVC with Mainconcept) it's often at 100% use when rendering. That isn't a problem. If you have say an NVIDIA GPU (I'd recommend 20XX over 10XX at this time and 8GB of VRAM) you can also use NVENC which takes most of the load off the CPU and custom chips on the GPU handle the encoding while the main circuitry of the GPU handles other tasks like any Fx or moving elements.

For ram there's likely no practical difference between DDR5 ram speeds. Pugetsystems also looked at this for creators (their articles are a treasure trove of real-world data).

Does your CPU support a maximum of 4800mhz for ram? If so don't waste money on more expensive memory that don't work with the CPU controller and would likely fall back to 4800 anyway.

Can you please explain what a "gpu that takes advantage of a fast display" is?
How am I supposed to find a graphics card like that?
I thought I would just get a GeForce GTX 1080 Ti if I ever felt like I wanted an independent GPU.

@KKS The world seems to have moved on from 1080p-only HD monitors. Generally the fastest monitors are IPS and have G-Sync (Nvidia) and/or Freesync (Amd) gpu support. But I just looked at B&H and the few available HD-only monitors are all slower TN with no kind of special sync. But dirt cheap. Also, saw a Reddit post explaining that the 1080ti predates G-Sync. Suggest you consider a minimum 1440p monitor with G-Sync if you like Nvidia. I saw a number of moderately priced monitors like that. Also think about a minimum 1600-series gpu, which seems to be the 1st line in which Nvidia introduced G-Sync. I think that combo would give you better performance, even if you set up to operate 1080p. Personally, I find Vegas is easier to work with on a larger display at 4k resolutions which shows me more of everything, like tracks and previews.

I assume you mean you're considering a cpu with an onboard igpu, but plan on holding off on buying an independent video board. If you go with an Intel cpu, make sure the model you choose actually has an onboard igpu. 11th gen or later support what Intel calls Adaptive sync which is based on Amd's Freesync. To take advantage of that, you'd need a monitor that supports Freesync. If your plan is to later get an Nvidia gpu, you'd want a monitor that supported both Freesync and G-Sync.

Can you please explain what a "gpu that takes advantage of a fast display" is?
How am I supposed to find a graphics card like that?
I thought I would just get a GeForce GTX 1080 Ti if I ever felt like I wanted an independent GPU.

@KKS The world seems to have moved on from 1080p-only HD monitors. Generally the fastest monitors are IPS and have G-Sync (Nvidia) and/or Freesync (Amd) gpu support. But I just looked at B&H and the few available HD-only monitors are all slower TN with no kind of special sync. But dirt cheap. Also, saw a Reddit post explaining that the 1080ti predates G-Sync. Suggest you consider a minimum 1440p monitor with G-Sync if you like Nvidia. I saw a number of moderately priced monitors like that. Also think about a minimum 1600-series gpu, which seems to be the 1st line in which Nvidia introduced G-Sync. I think that combo would give you better performance, even if you set up to operate 1080p. Personally, I find Vegas is easier to work with on a larger display at 4k resolutions which shows me more of everything, like tracks and previews.

I assume you mean you're considering a cpu with an onboard igpu, but plan on holding off on buying an independent video board. If you go with an Intel cpu, 11th gen or later support what Intel calls Adaptive sync which is based on Amd's Freesync. To take advantage of that, you'd need a monitor that supports Freesync. If your plan is to later get an Nvidia gpu, you'd want a monitor that supported both Freesync and G-Sync.

"NVIDIA G-SYNC is groundbreaking new display technology that delivers the smoothest and fastest gaming experience ever. G-SYNC’s revolutionary performance is achieved by synchronizing display refresh rates to the GPU in your GeForce GTX-powered PC, eliminating screen tearing and minimizing display stutter and input lag. The result: scenes appear instantly, objects look sharper, and gameplay is super smooth, giving you a stunning visual experience and a serious competitive edge." / https://developer.nvidia.com/g-sync

I'm sorry but I'm confused : are you giving me advice about how I can update my platform to take advantage of the latest solutions from the world of gaming, or are you saying that if I buy a new computer with a 12th generation Intel CPU and a GTX 1080 / 1660 then I will be unable to use my old Dell monitor? Contemporary motherboards / GPUs come with a DisplayPort output and my monitor has a DisplayPort input and I thought that's enough?

PS. I have never experienced any "screen tearing" or "input lag".

Why is your CPU running at 100%? This is a little bit worrying. My i7-3770K runs at max 75% and the platform is super-stable (PSU not activating, fans blowing with stable speed, etc).

@KKS Runs at 100% on all my machines too. I'd be worried too if it didn't with your project and a MainConcept render.

Sorry if I missed it, but what did you say the render time was on your system?