Comments

OldSmoke wrote on 9/25/2017, 8:28 PM

Not much has changed in Vegas, it still runs better with higher clock speeds then more cores. For the price of the 1950X I would rather buy a i9-7900x.

Proud owner of Sony Vegas Pro 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 & 13 and now Magix VP15&16.

System Spec.:
Motherboard: ASUS X299 Prime-A

Ram: G.Skill 4x8GB DDR4 2666 XMP

CPU: i7-9800x @ 4.6GHz (custom water cooling system)
GPU: 1x AMD Vega Pro Frontier Edition (water cooled)
Hard drives: System Samsung 970Pro NVME, AV-Projects 1TB (4x Intel P7600 512GB VROC), 4x 2.5" Hotswap bays, 1x 3.5" Hotswap Bay, 1x LG BluRay Burner

PSU: Corsair 1200W
Monitor: 2x Dell Ultrasharp U2713HM (2560x1440)

fr0sty wrote on 9/25/2017, 10:27 PM

I'd have to agree. Unless you do other CPU intensive work on your computer that is better suited for multicore, such as CG animation, motion graphics, etc... If Vegas is your primary CPU hog, you're better off with the intel chip. If you use programs like Cinema 4D, like I do, the performance of the AMD chip is good enough to make it worth skipping intel.

Systems:

Desktop

AMD Ryzen 7 1800x 8 core 16 thread at stock speed

64GB 3000mhz DDR4

Geforce RTX 3090

Windows 10

Laptop:

ASUS Zenbook Pro Duo 32GB (9980HK CPU, RTX 2060 GPU, dual 4K touch screens, main one OLED HDR)

bravof wrote on 9/29/2017, 3:04 PM

Agreed with above comment: I have a 32 thread workstation and Vegas never uses more than 50% CPU. Better to have high clock speed and 8 or 12 threads.