poor Videopreview despite big gpu

GuidoR wrote on 12/24/2011, 3:50 AM
Hello together,

Sony tells us by every new version that the preview and the gpu support getting better, but i feel exactly it´s reverse. At every Version since 8 i get a bigger gpu and nothing happens.
Now i use VP11 and a geforce 550ti instead of yesterdays gt430! The 550ti has double the power, but nothing. No faster render and no faster preview. I could use my boring onboard 8400, it were the same! I can´t understand that and i think it is not important codecs i have. If i use the same footage in premiere 5.5 the preview runs like a finished video!!! I can´t understand why it is so. I love Vegas more than other progs but this makes me more and more think about CS.

Have you an idea to pimp that? :-)

Happy xmas to all!

regards

Comments

ritsmer wrote on 12/24/2011, 4:56 AM
What are your system specs?

What are your media?

What are you doing (FX'es, multicam, 3 D etc etc)?
farss wrote on 12/24/2011, 5:43 AM
"At every Version since 8 i get a bigger gpu and nothing happens."

Nothing was supposed to happen. It's only really V11 that makes real use of the GPU.

"If i use the same footage in premiere 5.5 the preview runs like a finished video!!! I can´t understand why it is so."

Adobe seem to use the GPU in a very different way. Also their Mercury Playback Engine only runs on nVidia hardware. PPro does not render FXs on the fly which takes a lot of the load of everything. Also they've had a Hardware Abstraction Layer for a long time which may have made coding for GPU acceleration easier. Third party vendors have been suplying lots of boxes to plug into Ppro for years.

"I love Vegas more than other progs but this makes me more and more think about CS."

Unlike spouces it's OK to love more than one NLE :)

Bob.
GuidoR wrote on 12/24/2011, 2:08 PM
I have a: Win7 Pro 64bit; AMD Phenom II X6 1090T; 8GB Ram; 120GB SSD System; VP 11 64bit

My Files are: AVC Files from Canon 5DII and AVC Files from Sony NX5 and Panasonic AG-AC160, as alone or in combination.

My Work: cutting with saturation and graduation adjustments, some simple text and not real anything, sometimes a simple effect no huge filters.

regards
rraud wrote on 12/24/2011, 3:08 PM
Vegas just plain doesn't work well playing back AVCs. Render your project AVC files to an intermediary or proxy, and your preview problems should be a thing of the past.
dxdy wrote on 12/24/2011, 3:16 PM
You can also try setting the Dynamic RAM to 60 (Menu: Options/Preferences/Video Tab). This made a huge difference for me. I now preview Best (Full) at 29.97 FPS.
GuidoR wrote on 12/24/2011, 7:24 PM
Ouch i thought the RAM Must higher Not Lower! what intermedia conversion Should it be and is it Not a much more work in the end? And is this Thing with the Proxy Not also a Big Thing? Thanks and regards
ushere wrote on 12/25/2011, 4:02 AM
try nvidia beta drivers....worked for me
GuidoR wrote on 12/25/2011, 4:38 AM
Which one do you use, the latest from the org nvidia site or a special? Version number?

thanks and regards
GuidoR wrote on 12/25/2011, 5:11 AM
So i do a test with 60MB Ram instead of 1024, no change! I put on the latest Betadriver from Nvidia.com, same no change rather poorer! I put Ram to 2048, no change.

Have some one a workflow for proxy and intermediate or a how to?

thanks and regards
ritsmer wrote on 12/25/2011, 5:41 AM
I am using AVCHD files too (from i.e. Sony CX700 being 1080 50i or 50p at 24 Mbps or more.)
My machine has about the same power as yours and I can easily preview even two 1080 50i tracks doing a 20 seconds crossfade at 100% full speed (25 Fps) at preview quality "Preview half" or full too.

Better preview quality (good or best) however, slows down to some 7-20 Fps.

For my work the preview,half is quite Ok combined with Preview in Player (a great function, however removed in V11 - as an error, I really hope...)
farss wrote on 12/25/2011, 6:54 AM
"I am using AVCHD files too (from i.e. Sony CX700 being 1080 50i or 50p at 24 Mbps or more.)"

Which is a very different problem to files from the 5D which is what the OP is grappling with. The 5D files are in a QT container, decoded by QT as far as I can see, so no GPU acceleration.

The OP could try converting the 5D files to the XDCAM 4:2:2 codec before putting them on the T/L for a smoother editing experience as Vegas decodes them natively.

Bob.

dxdy wrote on 12/25/2011, 7:17 AM
QuickTime? Has the OP checked his QT version? 7.6.2 is the last one that was good for me.
GuidoR wrote on 12/25/2011, 7:49 AM
QT is the newest and my playback setting is "preview auto"! If i use any over that it it tend to unuseable. The hint with the 4:2:2 xdcam i will follow.

More and more i think that it is the AMD technique that makes it not go round. i think that 80% of the people who have no probs, have a intel system. I have a Notebook from Lenovo with 4GB and an modern 2 Core pentium, SSD and geforce, that works not poorer.
My next PC becomes defenitive an "i?" :-)

thanks and regards
dxdy wrote on 12/25/2011, 8:17 AM
The newest QT version has rarely (if ever) been the best version for Vegas. If you are on version 7.7.x, roll back to 7.6.2 and give it a try.
ritsmer wrote on 12/25/2011, 8:56 AM
GuidoR complained about previewing AVC files - and I tried to give an indication about what was to be expected with that file type - and well knowing that he did not even tell if it were p or i files.

Everybody knows about the Mk II earlier firmware mov/QT problems - but the NX5 mentioned by GuidoR too produces more or less the same AVCHD as I referred to - according to pro.sony.com: AVCHD FX (24Mbps) 1920x1080/60i.
farss wrote on 12/25/2011, 1:58 PM
I was picking on the 5D files as they've been known to be problematic with Vegas.

I just tried a sample clip from a 5D compliments of LarsHD from a while ago.
Vegas 11 plays it smooth as silk at Best / Full on my office PC which is a lowly i5 2.67GHz with 6GB of RAM, GT220, running Win7/64.

But....

The 5D footage is 30.000p, I believe the other two cameras in question record at 29.970. If I change the project settings to 29.970, the 5D footage no longer plays back smoothly. I'm not certain if Canon ever fixed the 5D to record at 29.970 or not.

I agree, we need more info from Guido before we can really help him.
I don't think we even know if he's running his projects in 8bit int or 32bit float.

Bob.
ritsmer wrote on 12/25/2011, 3:26 PM
Funny - what is happening here? every time you and I write G U I D O (without blanks in between) we (or at least here on my machine) just get some asterixs - like here: ...guido ...
but if I write it with an R at the end then it works: GuidoR ...

It works like that in IE9 and also in Chrome.

GuidoR wrote on 12/25/2011, 3:38 PM
oh oh oh sorry, that was my mistake, you are all right!!
I´m from germany so i use - The specs:
1080p 25fps mostly shot with 1/50 viewed on Dell U2711 with 60Hz and an Dell U2211H on 50Hz via Geforce 550ti and GT430 for a third office screen. I don´t use any codec pack, only Qt and win7 own codecs and lagarith lossless Codec. In VP i have this settings: 8Bit, renders in optimum, Gauss and non interlaced. I don`t cut with trimmer, all on the line, i change the whole footage to no resample. Audio in standarts.

If i forgot something thats important, please let me know!

Thank you
GuidoR wrote on 12/25/2011, 3:53 PM
I change QT to 7.6.2 and the result in VP11 is no change but in playing back raw footage in Windows Mediaplayer is 1000times better :-) :-) thank you for that!!!

regards
farss wrote on 12/25/2011, 4:06 PM
OK, so all your footage is 25fps., either 25p or 50i.

So how well does just the camera original footage play out on the T/L with no fx added? Can you get Best / Full and it plays out without droping frames?

Bob.
GuidoR wrote on 12/25/2011, 4:43 PM
aaaaahh i know what you mean, superb, best results over the whole options up to best/full!! And know?? ;-)
farss wrote on 12/25/2011, 5:05 PM
So then, your problem only arises when you apply effects?

If that's the case then I think a faster / better CPU might help.
Probably an Intel CPU with a nVidia GPU.


Your current CPU has six cores but doesn't appear to have as much memory bandwidth as the current Intel CPUs e.g. the i7 2600K.

Disclaimer: I cannot guarantee ust how much more performance you will get for your money. I generally leave applying any FXs until after I'm done editing so the drop in preview performance from apply FXs does not worry me. Your projects, workflow and source footage is quite likely different to mine and others here as well.

Bob.