New Vegas 16 seems to perform worse than Vegas 15?

marcel-vossen wrote on 8/29/2018, 9:08 AM

Hi there,

I've just installed the new vegas 16 and openened the project that I am working on with 2 4k MP4 (from GH4/5) tracks in a 1080 project with it.

It seems that the preview playback of the timeline is less stable than it is in Vegas 15, when I set the video settings the same way I had them in Vegas 15:

Dynamic RAM preview max: 4096 (max available is 31676)

Number of rendering threads: 16

GPU acceleration: OFF

I have experimented with these settings in the past and this is what worked best in my Vegas 15, I've NEVER been able to use GPU acceleration in ANY version of Vegas with ANY videocard I ever purchased. The fact that Sony would not recommend any hardware that is compatible with there software was always very annoying to me. When I did enable the GPU acc. vegas would simply crash while rendering or perform worse in the previewing instead of better.

I have a pretty decent card in my Ryzen 1700 system, a Radeon RX 480

Does anyone have any clues for me to get this working better? Do I need to install something apart from the video card drivers in order to get Vegas to work with my card in the best way possible?

For the GPU acceleration setting I can choose between OFF and 'Advanced Micro Devices Inc Ellesmere' which does not even look like it is my Asus Radeon RX 480 card?

Would GPU acceleration even improve the previewing of the timeline or is it just for faster rendering?

Marcel

Back to post

Comments

Reyfox wrote on 10/2/2018, 4:23 PM

I see the same results as what @BruceUSA

posted, but I have a RX480 8GB. 100% usage when using AMD VCE to render. CPU (Ryzen 1700X) is about 60% being used. It flies with 4K render.

dape wrote on 10/2/2018, 7:47 PM

Vegas 16 is faster, and more reliable. I have done video benchmark tests in other threads on this forum that show about a 25% increase in NVENC encode time,

Not on my Ryzen 7 2700x machine with 16 gigs of ram and GTX1080. Seems like the same NVENC speed like VP15..

fr0sty wrote on 10/2/2018, 7:56 PM

I haven't had time to do side by side tests with more complex projects, perhaps timeline rendering bottlenecks things back down to the same speed once things get more complex, but in this test of raw render speed on a single clip, no effects, Vegas 16 did render faster on one clip than 15 did.

DrNeb wrote on 10/3/2018, 3:56 AM

A couple of observations from someone who has used Vegas since it was owned by Sonic Foundry...first, and I've upgraded and used versions 14, 15, 16. 16 to me in regards to rendering MP4s is quite a bit faster than 15. The MP4s are a little dark however, and this is with an average of 250 thousand bits and average of 135 thousand bits.

I've also started to realize, because I also use Blender that whilst my graphics card is alright - a Nivida GTX 1060 with 6 gigs of ram...it's not really powerful enough for intense effects processing, and in fact...the CPU is more adequate for general play back with moderate fxs processing, which leaves the graphics card to run the monitor from. I tend to use 50fps, and feed the video signal into a 4k monitor. I also use an Acer Nitro laptop with 32 gig of ram and SSD production drive, as well as a SSD program drive. Sorry, my point being...I think this is where the problems lies in regards to peoples' problems involving crashes and GPU acceleration - this is the graphics card has only so much memory and when it gets full...a crash happens. I'm not an expert in this mind you, I'm just making an observation and correlation between what happens in Blender and Vegas. It may have something to do with the virtual memory too...but again I'm only still learning digital film technology still. I come from an audio background, and there are similarities between digital audio and digital film.

Finally where GPU processing does come in handy, for me anyway is when I create an animation - I tend to create PNGs in Blender and composite in Vegas...Vegas is excellent for this by the way. There would be no way I could create an 8 minute 3d animation of some 20000 thousand PNGs, motion blur and other VFXs of which I use a plethora now. So what I do is create small chunks or segments of my animation which I then slice together. I use the AVI format too, because I want no compression before I make a final product. And here is where I will do stage one processing - so motion blur keying for example. And again with the GPU accelerator on. 10 secs of animation and motion blur takes about half and hour when I don't have the GPU on...I know :).

Sorry, but on saying all that - I have noticed Vegas is a lot less stable now with the GPU on and when trying to cram gigabytes of AVIs through the pipe line and fxs processing. But this could be simply a problem within either the nvidia card or Vegas getting confused with the duel monitors...there is an issue there. Changing a couple of settings in the Nvida control panel has somewhat made it more stable.

jozef-pavlik wrote on 10/3/2018, 1:58 PM

a short clip VP16

https://vimeo.com/287455141

Which gpu is that?

your GPU has reading %90 an my only 15-20% what im doing wrong I have GTX 1070

gamehits wrote on 10/3/2018, 2:14 PM

I have found that with my NVidia 980m, 16 renders faster than 15 using GPU acceleration. probably on the order of 15-20%. that being said, it's still just as crash prone and buggy as 15. the sad fact is we keep buying into it. :(

fr0sty wrote on 10/4/2018, 12:51 AM

It's far from "just as" error prone as 15 was... in 15 I'd be lucky to get a project rendered, I'd be lucky to even get the render dialog to pop up half the time. It always would turn into a game of "did I remember to save before rendering? Nope? Oh well, there went 20 minutes of work since the last autosave". Now I no longer have that issue, and my renders complete far more often than not. Vegas isn't perfect, but it is making good progress.