New computer, clean install

NicolSD wrote on 12/25/2011, 2:59 PM

OK folks, I just built a new system (mobo Asus P9X79 Pro, cpu I7-3930K 3.2 Ghz, 16 gig DDR3-1866 RAM, HD Corsair Force GT 120 gig - holds Windows and programs, the data is on an old 1.5 terabyte SATA drive - EVGA GTX 570 video card, Windows 7 64 bit).

I am not finished installing the drivers and software for things like my Hauppauge HD-PVR, my scanner or my webcam, but that shouldn't be long. I installed VP 11 (build 511) and ran it without problems. None whatsoever.

I am not suggesting everybody go through a clean reinstall of everything and would never suggest you go through such a long and dragged out process but since I had to do it, I wanted to share the results with you. Actually, I can't even say if build 511 is working well because it is running on a totally clean install or because of my hardware setup.

I have not overclocked my CPU yet but should have no problem doing it. My Corsair H80 water cooler does a fantastic job and is keeping my CPU at a very cool 32 degrees. My first render times are blazing fast even if everything in my computer is running at stock speeds (3.2 Ghz cpu and 732 Mhz for the GPU) but to be fair, it was all rendered to my SSD hard drive.

1- A quick and dirty 1 minute and 30 seconds project, 3 tracks with source video at 320 X 240 rendered ato AVC mp4 1920 X 1080, 30 fps (don't ask why), 12 Mbps, took exactly 1 minute to render. It was quite something watching a video render at such a fast clip. Yeah, I know... it was kind of cheating rendering such a low res files. That's why the next test is a lot more telling.

2- A 5 minutes and 26 seconds 10 tracks project with 1920 X 1080 AVCHD source video rendered to AVC mp4 1920 X 1080, 30 fps, 12 Mbps took only 7 minutes and 52 seconds. It used to take around 2 1/2 hours on my old Core 2 Duo.

I was going to try the vp11 benchmark file but it doesn't seem to want to be downloaded. I'll post the results once I manage to download it.

Comments

PeterDuke wrote on 12/25/2011, 6:00 PM

It's good to hear good news stories. Thanks for sharing, and I hope nothing bites you tomorrow.

Former user wrote on 12/25/2011, 8:16 PM

I have done a clean install on two computers, and although I don't push it as hard as many, mine both seem stable.

I really think there are some issues with installing over V10 and the early versions of 11.

Dave T2

NicolSD wrote on 12/25/2011, 8:20 PM

I just rendered the VP 11 benchmark file. It rendered in 48 seconds. I wonder how fast it'll be once I overclock the cpu?

john_dennis wrote on 1/23/2012, 10:08 PM

"I just rendered the VP 11 benchmark file. It rendered in 48 seconds. I wonder how fast it'll be once I overclock the cpu?"

I just rendered this project with Vegas Pro 11-521 and on my hardware it took 2 minutes and 58 seconds. I rendered to XDCAM-EX HQ 1920x1080-60i, 35 mbps. I'm down for the Sandy Bridge E 3930, but I'm not likely to get a GTX570. Hmmmmm...

rmack350 wrote on 1/24/2012, 10:56 AM

Not trying to corroborate nor contradict...

I just did a "dirty" install of 521 on the home system that crashes when I adjust OFX FX. 521 doesn't change anything, 521 is still just as crash-o-matic on all OFX FX as 511 was.

I uninstalled 511 before installing 521. After determining that it still crashes I (finally) set up a new user account and tried running Vegas from there. No improvement. But I admit that my attempts to get VP 11 to work at home are pretty half-hearted. I just don't *need* Vegas enough to reinstall the OS and applications from scrap. As a consumer product, that's a lot to ask. I'm sure my tune would change if I actually needed to edit video. I'd rebuild a computer before heading down the PPro rabbit hole.

My PC at work doesn't have this problem. It's stable with VP11, as far as I can tell.

Rob Mack

NicolSD wrote on 1/24/2012, 1:42 PM

"I just rendered this project with Vegas Pro 11-521 and on my hardware it took 2 minutes and 58 seconds. I rendered to XDCAM-EX HQ 1920x1080-60i, 35 mbps. I'm down for the Sandy Bridge E 3930, but I'm not likely to get a GTX570. Hmmmmm... "

John,

I am fairly new to the world of VP and I've discovered something very important over the last couple of months. SCS programmers are constantly fiddling with the FX and/or the render engives. Build 425 was slower than 511. As for 521, it is faster with some tasks and slower with other tasks.

The 2010 rendertest gives me much better results than 425 and better results than 511. We are talking 47 seconds under build 425, 37 seconds under 511 and 30 seconds under 521. That is rendering at HDV using the default MPEG2 "HDV 1080-60i". If I go for MainConcept MP4, both builds 511 and 521 render at 20 seconds.

Meanwhile Sony's PressReleaseProject gives me totally different results. Build 511 was rendering in 48 seconds but my computer does the same job in 56 seconds (both rendering to MainConcept MP4). Not only that, my CPU is now running faster. It was at 3.2 GHz when I clocked 48 seconds. I got my 56 seconds at 4.7 GHz.

As for your computer speed versus mine, I rendered the PressReleaseProject using build 521 in 1 minute 3 seconds (using the same settings as you - XDCAM-EX HQ 1920X1080-60i, 35 mbps.

OldSmoke wrote on 1/27/2012, 1:08 PM

I rendered the same project to XDCAM-EX HQ 1920x1080-60i, 35mbps in 1:21 (81sec.). Here is my spec:
i-7-2600k @4.5GHz, 16GB RAM, P8Z68-V Pro/Gen3
ASUS ENGTX460TOP @900MHz
2x SSD in RAID 0 for Windows 7 64bit (I backup every day!)
2x SSD in RAID 0 for Projects
1x 6Gbs SATA III for capturing
1x 40GB SATA II SSD for Temp files and others required by Vegas

I wonder how to get down to 48sec... new CPU or GPU or both? Cutting rendering in half is huge! BTW... I tried SLI but that made it worse and I feel it has to do with the 16x verus the 8x I get on my motherboard in SLI.