Comments

farss wrote on 10/15/2004, 10:10 PM
As far as I know Vegas doesn't talk directly to the video hardware so I can think of no reason why it wouldn't work. Well unless you're trying to capture thru the video card, Vegas was never designed to work that way anyway and if it did, was only thru good luck.
The new PCI-E interface does open up some interesting possibilities for video though, the old AGP standard provided only a very small downlink pipe, with PCI-E it's roughly AGPx8 both ways so you can at last make good use of the horsepower on the GPU chip (Vegas doesn't use this of course but who knows what they're working on in the Sony skunk works).
Bob.
rmack350 wrote on 10/16/2004, 11:00 AM
Not only that, the GPU is useable for non graphical tasks. For instance I recently read about an audio plugin that is designed to use some GPUs.

Even if Vegas didn't specifically use the GPU for processing you might find plug in filters that do it. Or how about codecs? You could easily see a mainconcept / nvidia encoder.

But as far as Vegas using a PCI-e16 card now for just general display...I can't see any reason why not.

Rob Mack
p@mast3rs wrote on 10/16/2004, 11:02 AM
So any chance these cards would help speed up encodes outside of vegas (i.e. vdub+xvid)?
farss wrote on 10/16/2004, 3:06 PM
Anything that uses DirectX / OpenGL and if that makes use of the GPU then for certain. I think Staish'e wax does.
The interesting thing is that Intel were kind of hard pressed justifying this increase in horsepower, the one thing they seem to keep talking about is HiDef video, stay tuned for interesting times I think.
Bob.