I just got an AMD 6800 XT from Best Buy online for $1300 OTD after tax/coupon & am picking it up this weekend. To cover a chunk of the cost, I'll likely sell a VEGA 56 for $800 that I got for just $200 before the mining craze...

According to Techgage & the Benchmarks on these forums, the 6800 XT has some of the best Vegas numbers, but I'll decided for myself before Best Buy's generous holiday return period...

Previously I got a Nvidia 3060Ti from Best Buy for $400 but it was not a huge improvement over the VEGA 64 LQ I am keeping in another system and I would prefer to keep VCE renders in all of my systems vs. some NVENC so customers receive the same file regardless the system I use to finish their order...

I'll post my benchmark numbers sometime this weekend in my 9900K & 11700K systems...

Techgage has some recent benchmarks with Vegas: techgage.com/

I installed my (overpriced IMO) $1300 AMD 6800 XT today in my non-overclocked 11700K system, benchmarked it, and have mixed feelings...

On one hand, the "SampleProject 4K" playback rate is above 20 fps between the 2 markers compared to my VEGA 64 LQ's average playback of 13.25 fps. (The 6800 XT did not drop below 20 fps, so it was easy to see that it was in the 22 FPS range as @Howard-Vigorita reported on his 11900K system...)

It also completed the "SampleProject 4K" UHD test in 0:59 and FHD test in 0:30, compared to my VEGA 64's scores of 1:33 and 0:48 respectively... So, I'm getting about 35% better performance according to that benchmark...

HOWEVER, for my day-to-day work, in reality, I'm only getting 15% better performance tested across about 5 different recent projects, so I'm not sure if I'll keep it considering the price.... I was really hoping to find one in the $650 range like when first introduced, but that's not going to happen until the mining craze slows...

IMO $1300 is a lot for a GPU considering my 9900K, VEGA 64 LQ, motherboard, DDR4 & Liquid Cooler upgrade only cost $1350 and my 11700K, VEGA 56, motherboard & DDR4 upgrade only cost $850. I'm going to test some other Apps during Best Buy's generous holiday return period before deciding whether to keep it or not... If I keep it, I am going to try to sell the VEGA 56 while it's still selling for $700-$800 used...

 

@TheRhino This is really interesting! Would you be able to upload the new scores for this card to be included in the database? The data submission process is now semi-automated.

https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/benchmarking-results-continued--118503/

Intel's new ARC series GPU's are going to be released Q1 2022. I'm hoping they are good and available!

@TheRhino if you can sell that old one for $700, I would say keep the new one.

1, it's the latest generation which will be more and more benefited in your everydays work; forget those percentage benchmark percentage that means nothing.

2, especially its big VRAM will insure your 4k-job in every aspect.

3, even the price over charged, this card is better for NLEs than a same prised RTX 3080 in my eyes.

@Hulk, never touch a running system, never be 'ne Laborratte  out of curiosity.

@TheRhino if you can sell that old one for $700, I would say keep the new one.

The 6800 XT is growing on me..., especially since Preview set to BEST/FULL stays above 20 fps, in the 22 range, as others confirmed... All of my Vegas benchmark data is using the specified UHD & FHD render settings, etc.

Note that my 11700K cannot be overclocked because I paired it with an affordable $200 ASRock W480 workstation-class motherboard that does not provide OC provisions. However, for the money, it came with PCIe 4.0 plus built-in Thunderbolt ports and 10G networking, saving me $150+ on add-on hardware cards...

I only paid $200 for the VEGA 56, so if I resell it for $700, that takes $500 off the cost of the 6800 XT making my net cost about $800. Using Best Buy's 0% interest for 18 months credit card & generous holiday return policy gives me time to think about it before actually spending a dime...

@TheRhino Been enjoying the 6900xt myself. I really wanted an Asus 6800xt LC but found a Sapphire LC for less... my sense is they're about equal for video editing. But had to upgrade my case to full tower to fit the 360 radiator. Which allows oc'ing the gpu to boost performance on larger projects. Have a single space aio on the 11900k so I can't oc that much but happy getting stock 5.3ghz out of it. Not able to maintain more than 4.8ghz air cooling my 9900k. There's so much room in the new Define XL-7 case, I can now also fit another triple-fan aio cooler for the cpu... maybe next year.

@Stephen-Goldberg If all you're doing with it is Vegas editing, you'll probably get the best bang for the buck with AMD gpus. Would suggest you also consider a 5700xt which probably fits performance-wise between the 6600 and 6700 and is better supported than them in Vegas at the moment. For broader support and better performance in other apps, Nvidia will cost more for equal performance in Vegas. Suggest you also consider a more modern 1650 or 1660 which would have broader decoding support than the 1050... they have the same decoders as the 2000-series.

what resolution are you playing at? 1080p?

Ok, running a Radeon Vll now. I see on Ebay going for $1,900 to over $2,000. I paid $550.00 at Best Buy 2 years ago. I do not care about rendering speed. Vll renders fast. I want timeline playback. Would a 6800 be more powerful than a Radeon Vll for timeline playback? In Vegas 19?

On one hand, the "SampleProject 4K" playback rate is above 20 fps between the 2 markers compared to my VEGA 64 LQ's average playback of 13.25 fps. (The 6800 XT did not drop below 20 fps, so it was easy to see that it was in the 22 FPS range as @Howard-Vigorita reported on his 11900K system...)

It also completed the "SampleProject 4K" UHD test in 0:59 and FHD test in 0:30, compared to my VEGA 64's scores of 1:33 and 0:48 respectively... So, I'm getting about 35% better performance according to that benchmark...

 

@TheRhino Hi, they're impressive times, can i ask for something? I'm really not doubting you but i get a bit frustrated with the times i get in the benchmark test, I can see where other 6800's are in the Excel list & where the RTX 3080's are, the 6800 are better, 😒😂

But for idiots like me would you share a few screenshots, pls, the orig screen shots in the download are either a little dated or dependant on system, mine look just a little different,

This is the orig download

& this is mine

Like i say i'm not doubting, i just want to be able to see if i've got the settings of the render the same to compare accurately my times, Thanks

Full screen shot during region one playback.

Render choice

Settings when you go to Customize this template, 😁 Thanks again 👍

@Former user Here are some screenshots. I get slightly faster UHD renders if I render from one M.2 RAID to another M.2 RAID, but these were done running the Benchmark from a 2.5" 400 Mbs SSD for comparison...

Note that AMD VCE tends to render faster than NVENC and I can open multiple instances of Vegas and batch-render 3+ Clients' work overnight using Scripting whereas I think the current limitation of NVENC is just (3) NVENC renders at once. All of my studio workstations have AMD GPUs so I prefer to stick with VCE so regardless of what system I render a job on, the client receives the same file specs as before...

 

@TheRhino Hi, they're impressive times, can i ask for something? I'm really not doubting you but i get a bit frustrated with the times i get in the benchmark test, I can see where other 6800's are in the Excel list & where the RTX 3080's are, the 6800 are better, 😒😂

@Former user

Just a reminder that it's an unfair benchmark test of GPU's due to vegas's inability to NVENC encode without starting and stopping. It is a fair test of MagixAVC though because that's how it operates. I compared speeds with voukoder in this benchmark, for me 1080P test 2 seconds faster, 4K test 8 seconds faster. It's not the huge difference you see with a direct transcode comparing Nvenc via Voukoder and MagixAVC.

But the 20fps playback speed(as a segment of the benchmarks) seems to prove it is actually the fastest GPU on vegas for processing

The benchmarking results are here and thank you to TheRhino for uploading these latest results for our reference.

Note to others looking to purchase a 6800 XT in the US... I got a MSI Gaming X Trio for $1300 (US) OTD from Best Buy online (after tax & 10% OFF birthday coupon using my BB credit card which has 0% interest for 18 months...) I merely watched a YouTube LIVE video showing real time GPU stock while already logged into my BB account. BB has a captcha process that prevents bots from buying-up all of the stock, so all you have to do is beat other HUMANS, LOL!

@TheRhino  Thankyou, yep mine look the same as yours, that's good to know 👍 I've got Nvidia RTX 3090 so i don't have VCE, only Nvidia & Mainconcept as an option, unless i'm missing something 😂

'I get slightly faster UHD renders if I render from one M.2 RAID to another M.2 RAID'

My motherboard came with 1 x Hyper M.2 X16 Gen 4 Card, I've got my 2 main M.2 drives on that, do you think if i got another card & separated them it would be a little better?, i did wonder about all that info having to travel back n forth through the same Pcie slot, i was assured i wouldn't notice a difference but that has to be a bit of a bottle neck.

I get 8fps -18fps on Region one, avg 13fps i guess, 
UHD render best time was 1.05mins.
HD render best time 0.43secs. 

I never have to render more than 1 thing at a time 😁

@Former user Yeah i think it's the playback that gets me, when i see times like that in their 20s i'm guessing general playback is better overall, mine isn't 2 bad but when you spend best of £9k on a machine you'd expect it to work better or at least the software to utilise every bit,

On a similar note, you might have seen someone grassed me up on here in a comment about me asking on the Boris site about Avid Media Composer reg their plugins 😒 I'm always curious about other editors, I downloaded the MC Trial, it was a pain, the main window opens across both screens if you've got dual monitors, took most of one night just sorting that out 😒 It has a function where you can specify the amount of Ram used, you can max it out 👍 but i noticed it wasn't using my GPU, so i dug deeper, only half a dozen cards are supported by MC, & looking at the RX a5000 - 6000 on MC forums & on the net i found lots of people complaining, saying MC isn't using their expensive GPU's not even the ones it says are supported, Apparently MC is focussed on Ram utilisation, as that covers more varied a machine, the quote is

'Since RAM can be the easiest and least expensive way a user can upgrade a computer, Avid has been architecting the 64-bit playback engine to take advantage of RAM first.'

My GPU was flat at the bottom pretty much during render & playback wasn't much better, it looked similar to others photos i saw online 😒, playback cache time of the timeline was the same as all other programs, Render times were nothing to talk about, no faster than Vegas, my CPU got to 30%-ish during render & my GPU was doing F'all, hard to know what Ram was being used as it fills the Taskmanager window as soon as you allocate the amount, allocate 30% & it shows 30% even when MC is doing nothing, 😒 I played with it for a few days but i wasn't impressed the more i tried & learnt, & because the Trial didn't show my Boris plugins i couldn't try them out, Uninstalled & deleted all MC stuff 🙋‍♂️😂😂

@RogerS Looking at those times mine's comparable to the similar RTX3080s, i wish i'd seen that Benchmark thingy before i bought this machine, i9 CPU seems to do quite well overall, Hindsight eh 🤣🤣🤣🤣😏

 

My GPU was flat at the bottom pretty much during render & playback wasn't much better, it looked similar to others photos i saw online 😒, playback cache time of the timeline was the same as all other programs, Render times were nothing to talk about, no faster than Vegas, my CPU got to 30%-ish during render & my GPU was doing F'all, hard to know what Ram was being used as it fills the Taskmanager window as soon as you allocate the amount, allocate 30% & it shows 30% even when MC is doing nothing, 😒 I played with it for a few days but i wasn't impressed the more i tried & learnt, & because the Trial didn't show my Boris plugins i couldn't try them out, Uninstalled & deleted all MC stuff 🙋‍♂️😂😂

@Former user Resolve Studio is ahead of them all as far as using GPU (processing (3D) but unfortunately it's resolve and nothing is as simple to do, and the Fusion tab is nightmare fuel. But because it offloads so much work to GPU your 3090 is going to get used there. An example is 8K60fps AV1 (kind of niche) but although Resolve GPU decodes AV1, it also requires a huge amount of GPU processing just to play in an 8K60 timeline, CPU no problem, but my rtx3070 red lines at 100% and it's not possible to edit smoothly (in a no proxy simulation). Would work fine with a 3090

But resolve isn't where many would prefer to be, if for some freak reason you had a constant supply of 8K AV1 footage to edit you might learn to live with it

Hi, I have the free DaVinci Resolve but not the Studio, it has a studio part but doesn't work well & i found that a few of the Boris effects don't work correctly, esp Mocha Pro that i love, this is just one eg. play it through & it just gets worse until the Mocha mask turns black instead of transparent 😒 There may be a way of tweaking these things, turn off something.. 🤷‍♂️

The card I found within my budget was the Sapphire AMD Radeon RX6600. for $679 CAN. It seems like a big improvement over my previous card and so looks like it's performing well with HD files