That's about what I'm getting as well. Render times have decreased in recent versions of Vegas.

For somewhat faster rendering you can try Voukoder (or Happy Otter Scripts).

That's about what I'm getting as well. Render times have decreased in recent versions of Vegas.

For somewhat faster rendering you can try Voukoder (or Happy Otter Scripts).

vegas should work on their software rather then depend on others.

vegas should work on their software rather then depend on others.

As a small team you can't beat everyone else (by far larger or more specialized) on the market anyway.
That's why I find it even more intelligent to concentrate on the core business and, and where it makes sense, to offer the possibility of integrating plugins as diverse as possible.

vegas should work on their software rather then depend on others.

If Magix followed your advice we wouldn't have a useful Fx like lens correction. There are many good open source tools available that rival commercial products, and both Magix and third-parties make them available for use in Vegas.

Maybe someday Vegas will be even better optimized for modern hardware, but to their credit, performance and stability have improved dramatically over the past few years. I expect that focus to continue.

Do you go back from Resolve?

 im asking vegas pro team to optimised properly their software and make it to 80% performance so that no one has to waste their money. im paying 500+$ every year for vegas, and still got no improvement.

There are many good open source tools available that rival commercial products, and both Magix and third-parties make them available for use in Vegas.

why would i buy third party software for 20% performance increment.

Maybe someday Vegas will be even better optimized for modern hardware, but to their credit, performance and stability have improved dramatically over the past few years. I expect that focus to continue.

yeah i have waited for 2 years and do you mind telling me how long should i wait.

As a small team you can't beat everyone else (by far larger or more specialized) on the market anyway.
That's why I find it even more intelligent to concentrate on the core business and, and where it makes sense, to offer the possibility of integrating plugins as diverse as possible.

im sorry so saying vegas has small team, and still charging high as premier pro and apple.

Do you go back from Resolve?

im playing here and there as my workflow. resolve is still faster and i just ask here to improve this vegas pro

so heres the final answer

(feeling bad for this guy who upgrade graphic card for performance)this video is 2.5 years old and still same trash performance with same amount charging(600$)

and a big slap on customers face from vegas developers

@dream

With one of my typical delivery use cases, UHD camera source to FHD delivery, it takes two of my six processors to keep my Radeon RX 480 ~98% busy.

When rendering to UHD from UHD source the CPU requirement to keep the GPU 100% busy is even less.

I don't watch renders, so I don't often know or care how long they take.

I don't know or care how long it takes Premier or Resolve to achieve the same output.

You didn't state what CPU you have.

While I rigorously defend your right to do whatever you want in the privacy of your own home, I don't see a net benefit to society from rendering a 720 source to 4K output.

Notes:

System specs in my signature.

Vegas 17-452

@dream

With one of my typical delivery use cases, UHD camera source to FHD delivery, it takes two of my six processors to keep my Radeon RX 480 ~98% busy.

When rendering to UHD from UHD source the CPU requirement to keep the GPU 100% busy is even less.

I don't watch renders, so I don't often know or care how long they take.

 

This is more a demonstration of how bad the VCE encoder is at AVC on with 4K video. Your GPU encoder becomes the bottleneck. Mostly hardware encoding is never the bottleneck so it's good to use with these efficiency tests to see how much cpu and GPU processing Vegas will use.

Btw, if that is AVC encode, try again with HEVC, I recollect it's faster and may not be a bottleneck and show true efficiency of vegas with your CPU/GPU

@Former user

dream defined the "problem".

nvenc only (uses)optimised 20% when i render my 720p video to 4k

why can't they uses 80%(im using gtx 1060)

If you upgraded to a 5000 series AMD card you would not have the hardware bottleneck, from the results I"ve seen here, the hardware encoder was transformed from slow embarrassing to faster than the most expensive current consumer Nvidia card. And you should see your GPU encode will show it's nothing like 100%

Dream's nvenc only uses 20%(assuming this is gpu encode, rather than 20% total gpu) because at 4K it's capable of encoding at maybe 160fps (I forget exact number), whereas your VCE encoder shows 100% because you're maxing it out. I don't think it can even do 60fps at 4K encode.

Not to worry. I upgrade on the calendar. Right now, I have an AMD Ryzen 5950X and potentially, whatever video adapter AMD announces later this month as placeholders for my upgrade in Q1, 2021. Between hardware refreshes, I usually don't complain.

I'll humor you. This is VCE HEVC.

why would i buy third party software for 20% performance increment.

Voukoder is donationware. There is no cost to try it and if you like it, it's free. The open-source community has created a lot of great software tools over the years.

yeah i have waited for 2 years and do you mind telling me how long should i wait.

I would not advise anyone to wait. If the software you are using doesn't do what you need, switch. If what you want doesn't exist today I would not assume it will ever will.

I think the metric of % GPU and CPU use isn't the only important one. The key thing is whether the performance is sufficient for playback performance and rendering speed.

If a program hit my CPU and GPU at 100% I couldn't use it- I'm on a laptop and that will cause severe thermal throttling and a loss of performance, leading to dropped frames and longer renders. I'd rather have software that is efficient and uses the least amount of power and resources to accomplish a given task. I find Vegas timeline performance acceptable- it's real time for 4K AVC playback with various color correction Fx on a 2 year old i7 with GTX 1050 card. Rendering is greater than 1:1 performance and only moderate throttling for longer projects.

 

I'll humor you. This is VCE HEVC.

So in that scenario where you've got plenty of CPU and GPU encode to utalise but vegas won't use it, you can see what Dream is complaining about. If that is the UHD to UHD encode your cpu use has gone up 10% perhaps indicating the encoding speed also increased due to the limitation of the AVC hardware encoding bottleneck having been removed but wouldn't it be nice if you used 62%cpu instead of 31% and saturated your HEVC hardware encoder at 100%