SphinxRa40

I think I also mentioned that while AMD cards are good, their drivers have always been an issue. It has imporved but still not as solid as Nvidia. I would go back to Nvidia too if the situation will ever improve with Vegas but I rather see myself having moved on by then.

I had the same problem but it was my motherboard, the drivers and had to wait a month for a newer flash. But in all fairness I have found all new tech has it's buggy drivers. So it probably would be better to wait 6 months for the drivers to mature. But in my case I think I'm pulling the trigger on the RX 480 4gig model today.

I think the 480X will do you well and in the next system too. As I mentioned, we are not gamers that need the latest and greatest but something to match the overall system or rather be a bit better to lost longer. I am bit worried about your 650W but lets see how it goes. If you experience an unstable system, that would be the first thing I would change. 

I think the 480X will do you well and in the next system too. As I mentioned, we are not gamers that need the latest and greatest but something to match the overall system or rather be a bit better to lost longer. I am bit worried about your 650W but lets see how it goes. If you experience an unstable system, that would be the first thing I would change. 

I may just go ahead and upgrade the power supply too. 1000 watts should be good. 

Mine is 1200W but cards and CPUs are becoming more efficient, 1000W is certainly enough.

I think the 480X will do you well and in the next system too. As I mentioned, we are not gamers that need the latest and greatest but something to match the overall system or rather be a bit better to lost longer. I am bit worried about your 650W but lets see how it goes. If you experience an unstable system, that would be the first thing I would change. 

I got a 650w PSU gold, Im running a OC nitro RX 480 4Gb, i7 6700K very stable, in fact I coud do a crossfire without a problem, you can do an estimate online using a PSU calculator, keep in mind is not a good idea to have an overkill PSU if you are using just half of its power.

There seem to be a lot of misconceptions about NVidia GTX cards. I have used Sony Vegas for years with NVidia GTX cards. The newer cards do support Open CL (presumably better than the older ones and there are benchmarks to prove that), but an update is required for the Maxwell architecture, and Sony never bothered  with that, presumably because they knew they were going to get rid of the product. Magix doesn't have the same excuse. I'm not a gamer, but I have used NVidia cards for my animation work with great satisfaction. It's Sony who dropped the ball after the GTX 5xx series. In a previous PC built with a GTX 580 GPU accelaration worked fine. Until there is more clarity on this issue from Magix I don't see a reason to upgrade to Vegas 14.

Well I went and pulled the trigger on that RX480. I went ahead and got the 4gig model as MSI confirmed as long as I buy the non-reference card then the 480 model come with the backplate. That was my only concern. I did go ahead and and buy into a EVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G2. So I should be future proof. I do plan later to upgrade to the I7 before they become hard to get for my motherboard as I have the 1155 chipset. So in a week or so I should be a happy camper. I agree with the idea Sony buffed up not upgrading vegas to use the newer cards. I run Vegas 12 pro and it runs pretty stable so I have no desire to move up to 14 since they are ignorant to the fact about the newer cards out. HUUUUUMMMMMMMM, is see the future, I see Magix pulling a Sony! 

Big honking power supplies are overkill. Stuff does not use as much power as you might think. Unless a PSU is under a decent load it is not as efficient. So a Gold rated PSU not running at enough load is not "gold" efficient.

The thing about PSUs is get a quality one. They will have a quality 12V rail. Otherwise you might need a high capacity PSU just to get enough power for the 12V rail.

Debunking power supply myths

Real system loads. Fully loaded CPU + GPU. Wall socket power consumption (which higher than PSU output due to PSU efficiency).

For what it's worth. I have a 650W Seasonic Gold, flat 4Ghz 4770K and a GTX 980, SSD, HD, optical. 350W is about the max used.

NormanPCN

I think it depends on what you are after. I am after stability in terms of voltage and current draw. While you are correct that running my 1200W PSU at only 50% load is not very efficient, it does however provide extremly stable voltage under load and espcially when the load has real spikes. I also bought the biggest PSU at that time, it was end of 2012 to ensure I could run 2 or even 3 GPUs with it. Until about 6 month back, I had 2x R9 290 in my system and now a single Fury X. Performance wise not a big change, only slightly better than the 2 R9 290 to be honest but it saves me PCIe lanes which I intend to use for a Decklink card and maybe a PCIe SSD.

Also keep in mind that manufacturers like overstate what their equipment can do. 

I don't think that Vegas supports Nvidia cards past the old 500 series.

That is actually only half true. Vegas will use the Nvidia cards OpenCL capabilities for timeline preview and fx processing; it NEVER used CUDA for that purpose. CUDA was only used for the encoders written by Mainconcept and if you go to Mainconcepts website you can info that their encoder only supports up to Fermi architecture. That is the reason it was never updated until today, has nothing todo with Sony or now Magix.

+1

OldSmoke is right and it's really important to understand this: Vegas Pro has Timeline GPU acceleration, FX GPU acceleration, and Rendering GPU acceleration for very specific codecs. 

Timeline acceleration uses OpenCL so the most recent graphics cards are supported. 

Rendering acceleration is a mixed bag. The MainConcept AVC encoder supported CUDA but only on very old Fermi cards. It also hard-coded very specific OpenCL cards, all of which are from around 2010. Sony AVC seemed to do something similar only supporting very old cards.

FX GPU acceleration is also a mixed bag. Some 3rd party FX use OpenGL (like Boris FX) and support any card that is OpenGL capable. Some may support CUDA. Still others might use OpenCL. It's up to the 3rd party. I believe that all Sony FX use OpenCL/OpenGL.

So GPU acceleration in Vegas Pro is not just one thing. It is at least 3 things.

~jr

Ok...from these 2 wonderful people and post i learned a lot and need to copy/paste that to remember next time...

I also saw a post from megabit about GTX 1080 no GPU load... then i thought is mine (Sapphire R9 390 8GB) even using my GPU ( it is on in preferences) for timeline preview, i have now for testing Trixx and AMD monitor installed and loaded a bunch of video tracks with 1080p clips...i only see my CPU go up, this means it is not using at all for timeline preview (so OpenCL)? confused...

EDIT:

As this is all new for me the GPU usage in Trixx and AMD system Monitor does stay at 0% in GPU USAGE, i just see a button in Trixx "hardware monitor" and when i play in VP13 the GPU Core clock and GPU Memory clock goes to 100% (no idea what it all means), so even more confused as the main BIG Trixx stays at 0% and AMD monitor don't do a thing either...

You will only see a difference when you apply FX or do compositing, playback of an unchanged event or track doesn't require OpenCL. I use HWinfo64 to check the load.

NormanPCN is correct it is overkill. But like OldSmoke said I'd rather have the backup power in case I need it. in my case my existing psu is only at 20%. With the new card it would have went to pretty close to 40%. I plan on doing a couple of upgrades in the future that will add even more to it. SO I prefer to be future proof and we have quite a few brown outs, black outs and spikes here so you always need to get high quality psu's and battery backups.

You will only see a difference when you apply FX or do compositing, playback of an unchanged event or track doesn't require OpenCL. I use HWinfo64 to check the load.

Ah ok, thank you will copy/paste that to, as my memory is not what it used to be :) i will take a look at HWinfo64 also

I have been dithering as to what card to chose. I have an old NVIDIA Geoforce GTS 450 installed which does not seem to be helping much with VP13 on my new PC. I want to improve Preview quality mainly, as my renders are as rapid as I need using my PC processor. I think I have to plump for a new card with RADEON graphics and the following fits my budget (the max amount I can justify) - Sapphire AMD RX 460 Nitro+ 4 GB GDDR5 Memory PCI-E Graphics Card. A cheaper alternative was this Sapphire: AMD R7 240 4Gb DDR3 PCI-E Graphics Card at around half the price.

I've been looking for something with Radeon graphics which should provide an upgrade for me from my current card. Given that VP13 only seems to support older technology, would I be wasting my money on the more expensive card?

Amazon links are here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01J1J7WOM/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_S_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=QUON6X3G55CF&coliid=I1BK76YRDZ5HSW

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sapphire-DDR3-PCI-E-Graphics-Card/dp/B00FLMKI9A/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1475163206&sr=8-1&keywords=Sapphire+R7+240+4GB+DDR3

Thanks.

John

The RX 460 has 896 stream processors, a quater of what my Fury X has and there are other short commings. What is your typical project nowadays and in the future? If you do not intend to work with native 4K, there could be other options. Changing your GPU to a strongetr one may also require a better power supply.

I'm an amateur working with AVCHD 1920 x 1080 / 50i. I note my exisiting card has 192 CUDA cores. Is that the same as stream processors? As you can tell, I'm completely out of my depth here. 

I'm going to open up my PC case tomorrow to check that card will fit and I will also check out the power supply.

I have been dithering as to what card to chose. I have an old NVIDIA Geoforce GTS 450 installed which does not seem to be helping much with VP13 on my new PC. I want to improve Preview quality mainly, as my renders are as rapid as I need using my PC processor. I think I have to plump for a new card with RADEON graphics and the following fits my budget (the max amount I can justify) - Sapphire AMD RX 460 Nitro+ 4 GB GDDR5 Memory PCI-E Graphics Card. A cheaper alternative was this Sapphire: AMD R7 240 4Gb DDR3 PCI-E Graphics Card at around half the price.

I've been looking for something with Radeon graphics which should provide an upgrade for me from my current card. Given that VP13 only seems to support older technology, would I be wasting my money on the more expensive card?

Amazon links are here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01J1J7WOM/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_S_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=QUON6X3G55CF&coliid=I1BK76YRDZ5HSW

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sapphire-DDR3-PCI-E-Graphics-Card/dp/B00FLMKI9A/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1475163206&sr=8-1&keywords=Sapphire+R7+240+4GB+DDR3

Thanks.

If I was that tight on a budget and wanted the most bang for your buck then the R7 370 would be your best. It's a little more than the R7 240 but it has better specs. Most would say anything more than that, yes it would be too much when your talking Vegas. I don't know this from exp. but from shopping around lateley. I went with the RX480 4 gig.  But I picked the RX 480 mostly for future proofing. I don't game much except for legacy games. And who know maybe Magix will surprise us and revamp vegas to work with the newer tech. Ya, I know don't hold your breath!!

I'm an amateur working with AVCHD 1920 x 1080 / 50i. I note my exisiting card has 192 CUDA cores. Is that the same as stream processors? As you can tell, I'm completely out of my depth here. 

I'm going to open up my PC case tomorrow to check that card will fit and I will also check out the power supply.

The way I read it they are different processes. But wait for the guru's to comment.

Yes, they are different processes. AVCHD 1920x1080 50i is your source and thats doesnt require much "horespower" but I would still try and get the proposed R7 370. How about a used GTX580? That would do you nicely, keep on Nividia and allwo for faster rendering to MC AVC, if that is something of interest to you.

Thank you for all the info and suggestions. I shall do some more looking.

OldSmoke: I am surprised to see an NVIDIA (GTX580) suggested. An NVIDIA card had been my first choice but, having read much stuff on here, I ended up with the clear idea that AMD graphics would be more effective with VP than NVIDIA. What is it I'm missing here?!

PS An R7 370 is just about within my budget. Don't tell my partner though. It's going on my credit card! There are MSI, Sapphire and XFX versions on Amazon....??

There are MSI, Sapphire and XFX versions on Amazon....??

So far I know, the differences between them are warranty period, procedure, etc.

Currently I'm using Digital Alliance brand of Radeon RX 470. Previously using Sapphire Radeon HD5750

OldSmoke: I am surprised to see an NVIDIA (GTX580) suggested. That had been my first choice but, having read much stuff on here, I ended up with the clear idea that AMD graphics would be more effective with VP than NVIDIA. What is it I'm missing here?!

The GTX 580 is a very specific recommendation as the last card that supported CUDA GPU-accelerated rendering in the MainConcept AVC encoder. Meaning the switch shown below, which is only revealed in VP14 by modifying the internal preferences:

A GTX 580 also sufficient to run your desktop across multiple displays, and cheap on eBay etc. cuz it's old.

If GPU-accelerated MainConcept AVC rendering doesn't concern you, and you plan on general GPU-acceleration of GPU-enabled FX etc. by enabling the switch shown below, then the AMD cards are a better bet than NVIDIA because of their superior OpenCL implementation (Vegas uses OpenCL, not CUDA for that). Personally I leave it off because of the undesirable side-effects (instability, artefacts) and because my HD6970 card is old. If I had a powerful recent card I might experiment again by enabling it for some things such as cutting but disabling it for render.