NEW Rendertest-HDV.veg

John_Cline wrote on 5/8/2007, 9:50 AM

I ran the rendertest.veg file today on my QX6700 Quad machine to see if there was any difference between Vegas v7.0d and v7.0e. I had been getting 14 second renders in 7.0d, but I am now getting consistent 12 second renders in v7.0e.

Since the render times were getting close to the 10-second range and Vegas only reports render times in 1-second increments, I thought that perhaps it was appropriate to increase the "time resolution" of the test by making it a bit more "intense," so I modified the original rendertest.veg file for HDV. I increased the resolution of all the generated media and set the project properties for "HDV 1080-60i" and rendered it out as HDV using the default MPEG2 "HDV 1080-60i" template at the "Best" render setting. My machine rendered it in exactly 120 seconds.

If anyone else wants to try the new, modified test file and report their results back to this thread, I have uploaded the VEG file to my web site:

rendertest-hdv.veg

John

Back to post

Comments

John_Cline wrote on 9/11/2008, 5:00 PM

My "old" QX6700 quad-core with 4 gig of RAM and no overclocking used to render the rendertest-hdv.veg file in 120 seconds. Using 64-bit Vegas v8.1, it did it in 110 seconds. This was with rendering quality set to "best", with it set to "good" it did it in 50 seconds.

I also had a "worst case" HD project which has 50 .PNG panorama images that are each 10,000x3000 pixels and there are pan&crop moves on each one. The 32-bit version of Vegas would hit the page file almost immediately and the render took forever, with v8.1, it sails along nicely. I'm happy. Today was a major leap forward in the evolution of Vegas.

mdopp wrote on 9/12/2008, 11:31 PM

Here's a summary of my findings (all renders with "best" settings):

Pentium 4 / 3,06 GHz / Windows XP / 2 GB RAM
Vegas 7.0e
1 Thread / 128 MB Preview: 18:10 mins

Apple MacPro / 8 x 2,8 GHz / Windows Vista Ultimate 64 / 8 GB RAM
Vegas 8.0b
2 Threads / 128 MB Preview: 3:31 mins
4 Threads / 0 MB Preview: 7:00 mins
4 Threads / 128 MB Preview: 1:50 mins
4 Threads / 512 MB Preview: 1:50 mins
4 Threads / 1024 MB Preview: 1:50 mins
Vegas 8.1
4 Threads / 256 MB Preview: 1:36 mins
8 Threads / 256 MB Preview: 0:53 mins
16 Threads / 256 MB Preview: 0:53 mins

Practically, Vegas 8.1 doubled the speed over Vegas 8.0 on 8-core machines. Pretty nice!

Martin

neilslade wrote on 9/13/2008, 1:36 AM

Arg-- No way will I switch to Vista for 64 bit Vegas... hahah!

I will make a sandwich while I wait for longer render times.

I will note this--- I have not been able to detect the difference between
GOOD and BEST rendering for standard resolution projects that end up on 4.5GB DVDs

Any thoughts?

Thus-- unless you are doing a feature ending up on a giant theater screen- seems like the best way to chop render times in half is to use GOOD.

neilslade wrote on 9/13/2008, 1:50 AM

Incidentally--- what gives with MEDIA MANAGER?

Good lord, Vegas now takes FOREVER to load.

I removed Media Manager, and Vegas boots up in just a few seconds.

I've never used the damn thing anyway-- beats me what is up.

Sherif wrote on 9/13/2008, 2:30 AM

Martin, what s/w are you using to run Vegas on your Mac pro?
Thanks

mdopp wrote on 9/14/2008, 12:01 AM

I am using Apple's BootCamp dual-boot software to start either Mac OS X or Vista Ultimate 64.
The software ships with every Mac and is very easy to set up.
You'll only need a genuine copy of Windows to finish the installation and - voila ;-)

Martin

jabloomf1230 wrote on 9/14/2008, 11:14 AM

Dual Core AMD FX-60, 4GB RAM, Vista x64:

8.0c : 2:52
8.1: 2.02

These times are both better than with 8.0a (The last time I ran this project) which was 5:57.

MMOODY wrote on 9/14/2008, 11:53 AM

Asus P5E, Intel Core 2 Duo E8400, vista x64, 4GB DDR2-800
All tests with 8.0c

Test#1 - oc'd to 400fsb x 9 = 3.6Ghz - Render time 3:01
Test#2 - oc'd to 445fsb x 9 = 4.0Ghz - Render time 2:40

May have to reinstall 8.1 and test but uninstalled due to some issues and lack of 32-bit plugin support.

MMOODY wrote on 9/14/2008, 12:24 PM

Performed Test#2 on 8.1 with a render time of 2:19... so slightly better than 2:40 on 8.0c. About a 15% improvement.

Maverick wrote on 9/14/2008, 1:48 PM

Just did the orginal Render test from the top of the page and got 3:40.

Pro 8.0c
AMD 64 x 2 6400
3GB RAM
2TB HDD spread over several drives

Never before rendered to HD as I stil only work in SD.

warriorking wrote on 9/14/2008, 4:32 PM

Rendered to Bluray template
1:58 with 8.0c
1:44 with 8.1
Q9550 Quadcore
8Gig DDR2
Vista Ultimate 64Bit

busterkeaton wrote on 9/14/2008, 8:47 PM

My guess is for a new version of Vegas, the first time Media Manager starts up, it has to catalog all your media again.

Silverglove wrote on 9/15/2008, 5:44 PM

56 Seconds
Apple MacPro / 8 x 3.2 GHz / Windows XP / 4 GB RAM

neilslade wrote on 9/16/2008, 5:33 PM

I wish it were that simple-- others have reported the same hanging issue--

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=613616

I finally gave up trying to fix it-- after trying all kinds of re-installations and instead restored a backup version of my entire system before this issue came up, and it's fine again.

I may be deleted registry entries deleted by a "registry cleaner" type of program-- I will back this up, and test again to see if that messes up things.

Dan Sherman wrote on 9/18/2008, 10:21 AM

54 seconds to render this test.
Have new dual core Intel something new memory and stuff.
I don't know, I'm no computer guy.
Faster is good because I can crank out more projects and more projects means more groceries and ice cream now and then.
Ain't technology wonderful, even if you don't understand it.
Magic to me.

jonathan-kenefec wrote on 9/20/2008, 6:22 AM

H Peabody.

That's pretty quick. Did you follow the settings at the top of the thread to the letter?

"set the project properties for "HDV 1080-60i" and render it out as HDV using the default MPEG2 "HDV 1080-60i" template at the "Best" render setting".

Not being cheeky - it's just that you got a very quick result and I'm upgrading my computer in the next month or two so I'd be interested in your PC components if your render result is accurate!

Cheers

Jon.

megabit wrote on 9/20/2008, 7:08 AM

105 secs here, with the 8.1, everything set to "Best" (QX6700, 8GB RAM, 2048 Preview buffer).

Kahuna wrote on 9/20/2008, 7:26 AM

2 min's & 28 sec's on my HP Slimline, Intel 2Quad Q9300, 2.5GHz.

Silverglove wrote on 9/20/2008, 8:40 AM

"I'm upgrading my computer in the next month or two so I'd be interested in your PC components if your render result is accurate"

get a Mac and use Bootcamp

Christian de Godzinsky wrote on 9/21/2008, 4:19 PM

Hi,

Here are finally my render test results for 8.0c and 8.1, both running on Vista 64 bit:

8.0c = 82 seconds (exactly the same as it was in 8.0b and XP x64 -on the same computer)

8.1 = 73 seconds

My other specs are:
CPU: Qx9650 (Quad core) running @ 3,82Hz
RAM: 8GB( DDR3 Corsair 1600MHz)
MOBO: Asus P5E3

So a improvement of 12...15 % (from 8.0 to 8.1) can easily be confirmed here too. Its an improvement, ever if not a huge one. I'm still wondering IF - or WHEN - SCS will implement the CPU's SSE4 instructions... It would be stupid (or almost insane) not to harness that unused(?!) potential in these CPU's.

This is probably still one of the best render times for a quad core (albeit somewhat overclocked)? And not bad for hardware that is already 10 months old :) And please don't get me wrong - I'm not bragging here...

This means that in 8.1 and on a mobo with 8 cores (at similar clock speeds) the render time would be close to 35...36 seconds! That is If you would prefer to invest in TWO expensive CPU's... well - time IS money at least in this case!

John, its soon time for you to create a new render test... ;)

Christian

cmallam wrote on 11/19/2008, 8:27 PM

Win XP AMD X2 (dual core 4800+) 2G ram Vegas 8.0c 6:39
Win Vista 64 Intel core i7 940 @ 2.93 GHz 6G ram Vegas 8.0c 1:42
Win Vista 64 Intel core i7 940 @ 2.93 GHz 6G ram Vegas 8.1 1:08

fordie wrote on 11/20/2008, 12:21 AM

vista 64 home premium
4gb ddr2 ram
intel Q9300 @ 2.9
vegas 8c 1 min 33 secs
uninstalled 8.1 as its pointless
from these results the i7 doesnt look good value if you consider new M/B new Ram, IMHO

Christian de Godzinsky wrote on 11/20/2008, 11:31 AM

Hi cmallam

Congrats for breaking my record!!! :)

It took the new i7 core to do it. My best render time is 73 seconds, yours 68 seconds, about 7% faster. Ok, I'm overclocking, you are not... But for the bang per buck I'm still quite satisfied.

How much did the hardware (Win Vista 64 Intel core i7 940 @ 2.93 GHz 6G ram ) cost you, if you don't mind asking?

Christian

xstr8guy@sbcglobal.net wrote on 11/20/2008, 5:36 PM

8.1 = 51 seconds
8.0c = 106 seconds

System info...
Polywell PolyStation 5400X8, Vista 64bit Ultimate, 2-3.0ghz Xeons (8 cores total), 16 gigs RAM, 6-15,000 rpm SAS drives (3 RAID stripes), 2 SATA drives (RAID stripe), Quadro FX1700 graphics.

My best time came using my SATA drives with software RAID. All that money spent on SAS drives seems wasted. Maybe my RAID card is a bottleneck. The difference was only 2 seconds between the SAS and SATA. I am also running a drive utility in the background that is formatting some external eSATA drives. I'll try running the test again after I'm done to see if I can shave off another second or two. And I guess my system doesn't like 8.0c either.

1 … 10 11 12 … 21

of 21