@fr0sty

Any difference bettewn TI and regular version?

@Derkus Hi, there's a Benchmark test https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/benchmarking-results-continued--118503/?page=1

This is the online Spreadsheet showing peoples results from that test, btw despite what fr0sty says i would be 14th on this list 0.43secs render of FHD & avg 14fps playback on Region 1 😒

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1b3ggVifKsuT-cp2kQHjum_KnQ4-2jBmUIvzmu7BQZ34/edit#gid=699797034

Payback of 4k is ok on my machine, simple crossfade transitions need to play through once before full fps is achieved, & any fx slows playback, it needs to loop play several times & even then Dynamic Ram preview or Prerender needs to be done to get full fps, Vegas will crash on me a few times a night depending on what fx's i'm playing with, Just a warning however much you spend on the GPU don't expect Vegas to play perfectly or render supper fast every time, because it'll depend on the different media's & fx's added as @fr0sty says,

PS specs in my Signature at the bottom of this comment, you can add yours by going to your icon at the top of this page - My Profile & fill in Signature 👍

VEGAS does really seem to like Intel iGPUs paired with a powerful GPU. My laptop with a i9 9800k and RTX 2060 has no trouble keeping pace with or even exceeding my 64GB Ryzen 7 1800x system with 2 Radeon VII Pros in it.

Yep, i'm finding that just generally with a lot of software, most programs are ok but sometimes it seems like Intel comes first & AMD is second, i sort of wish i'd seen that benchmark before i bought this pc, but it's a bit late now, I used MEP since 2004 & have gone back to it for my simple 4k vids, it plays transitions at full res 1st time no prob, & exports in 1/3 of the time it takes Vegas, but it doesn't do half the things Vegas can, so Vegas for me at the moment is more of an effects editor, I do like Vegas so hopefully there'll be some changes in the future 👍

,

Yep, i'm finding that just generally with a lot of software, most programs are ok but sometimes it seems like Intel comes first & AMD is second, i sort of wish i'd seen that benchmark before i bought this pc,

 

Intel and AMD don't have the hardware encoding pausing/lagging that NVENC has in Vegas, because of that there's only so much truth to that benchmark and is flawed for testing GPU processing.

This can be seen where People use the same CPU, decode settings and Nvidia GPU at 4k hardware render and use NVENC and Intel QSV. The difference for a particular example(JN-) from the spreadsheet is 58 seconds for QSV, 65s for NVENC. The difference is 13%, which is the slowdown caused by the pausing in NVENC encodes via MagixAVC at 4K in my testing.

What is better evidence is the playback fps of region 1, I recall a AMD GPU owner saying it was much higher then seen by Nvidia people. But you have to know they did the test correctly, including GPU PREVIEW ram set to zero. I think it's most likely AMD GPU's are more efficient at processing in Vegas, but I wouldn't own a modern AMD due to their driver problems.

3080 12GB taking into account of other software that needs higher VRAM, if you were buying just for Vegas you could go cheaper 3060ti - 3070ti. Depends on what you do and how much you want to spend. I just spent a long time rendering at 16fps in Davinci Resolve, my GPU was pegged at 100%, cpu 30%, so a 3090ti would have made a noticeable difference compared to my 3080, this is unlikely to be the case with Vegas