Comments

pops1 wrote on 3/28/2000, 1:56 PM
i'm not an expert about processor/software relationship but here is
some of my limited understanding:
vegas is not optimized to take advantage of PIII possibilties
(and probably not athlon either)
that doesn't mean that a faster processor isn't better.
rendering a file with a 500Mhz processor will be faster than doing it
with a 350Mhz.
it just means that vegas was written to PII standards. the PIII
processor has systems (presumably, upgraded from PII) to process data
and Vegas isn't written to take advantage of the upgrade.

am i putting my foot in my mouth here or is this remotely correct?




Jennifer LaVoie wrote:
>>What is the best processor for Digital Audio:
>>Why?
>>
TJ wrote on 4/2/2000, 3:26 PM


Jennifer LaVoie wrote:
>>What is the best processor for Digital Audio:
>>Why?
>>

At a given clock speed the Athalon is faster
at floating point than the PII or PIII.

Vegas Pro uses a LOT of floating point, especially in
Effects, so in a project with a lot of Effects, the Athalon
would probably win UNLESS the Effects were written specifically
for the PIII. (None of the SF Effects are, 3rd party Effects
might be).

In a project with lots of files, but fewer Effects,
the limiting factor will be getting the data off of disk,
so the speed of the processor will probably be irrelevant.
For this scenario (the most common one). Get the FASTEST
disks you can find, and buy whatever processor comes with
them. In a project that has a lot of copyies of the SAME file, or a few files, but not many Effects. The limiting factor will end up being memory bandwidth. This is the least likely case, but possible. tj
MixNut wrote on 4/5/2000, 3:53 PM
I was told differently by someone at SF...They stated that Vegas ran
much better on PIII's DUE to optimizations for that instruction
set...And also, that only limited testing had been done on Athlon
clad machines, thus there was no "guarantee" that it would work...

I hope I wasn't speaking to the mail room clerk...

The Athlon does seem the better candidate for floating-point, but
with ALL compatibility issues in mind (including hardware I/O's) I
went PIII...

David

John M. Knoeller wrote:
>>
>>
>>Jennifer LaVoie wrote:
>>>>What is the best processor for Digital Audio:
>>>>Why?
>>>>
>>
>>At a given clock speed the Athalon is faster
>>at floating point than the PII or PIII.
>>
>>Vegas Pro uses a LOT of floating point, especially in
>>Effects, so in a project with a lot of Effects, the Athalon
>>would probably win UNLESS the Effects were written specifically
>>for the PIII. (None of the SF Effects are, 3rd party Effects
>>might be).
>>
>>In a project with lots of files, but fewer Effects,
>>the limiting factor will be getting the data off of disk,
>>so the speed of the processor will probably be irrelevant.
>>For this scenario (the most common one). Get the FASTEST
>>disks you can find, and buy whatever processor comes with
>>them. >> >>In a project that has a lot of copyies of the SAME file, or >>a few files, but not many Effects. The limiting factor will >>end up being memory bandwidth. This is the least likely >>case, but possible. >> >>tj >> >>