Render time slow for V6 vs V5

jeff_12_7 wrote on 12/18/2005, 3:18 PM
Hi,

I did a project in Vegas 6: cuts, fades, titles, track motion, pan cropping, audio compression and EQ were part of it. No compositing. In V6 the render time is killing me. (very very long - over 2 hours)

I copy the project to V5 and it renders quickly. (12 minutes)

Questions:

1) Why is this happening in V6 (version B)?

2) Is there a way when I transfer it to V5 (copy/paste) to include the audio compression and EQ settings from V6 or do I have to tweak the V5 tracks manually?

3) will version C help for this specific problem?

Thanks,
Jeff

(edited for grammar)

Comments

umim wrote on 12/19/2005, 4:50 PM
Why don't you ask SONY?
ForumAdmin wrote on 12/22/2005, 8:03 AM
Please test this in version 6.0c (the current version) and if you don't see huge improvement we'd love to get a copy of your .veg file. You can send that to.

dr.dropout<ATSYMBOL>Sonypictures.com

Please include your system specs as well.

thanks-
YesMaestro wrote on 12/22/2005, 9:44 AM
Jeff, you may want to check out this thread regarding rendering times between 5 & 6. For me, V6 was taking 3 times as long to render over V5. After looking at Dave's findings, I found out that I had 4 render threads and my Dynamic RAM was between 0 & 128. I took Dave's advice and my render times in 6 increased to the point where it is faster than 5 now.

http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=427271&Replies=6

Paul
fldave wrote on 12/23/2005, 11:48 AM
Good to know some people are finding my testing helpful, Paul.
jeff_12_7 wrote on 12/23/2005, 3:55 PM
FLDave: Yes I found your conclusions very helpful!

You say to keep Dynamic Ram at 0 or greater than or equal to 128. I will try this.

I am confused on the number of threads. Should I change this from 4 to 1?

( I just have one processor on my standalone computer. I just work with standard DV.)

[Is the SONY Admin (Dr.Dropout- post above) suggesting that 6c has fixed this so if I download 6c I won't have to do what you suggest with the threads and dynamic ram?]

Thanks!
Jeff
fldave wrote on 12/23/2005, 4:16 PM
I would set threads to 1. I noticed no improvement in setting it higher with my limited video-effects test. I tested on a single cpu - hyperthreaded machine as well as a dual processor machine.

I think that Dynamic Ram reserves a section of RAM for preview, but as I found, it has other negative effects if not set correctly. I would think that reserving too much would be detrimental to other functions, so I try to keep mine at 0 or 128, not 512 or 768, etc.

All tests were done in Vegas 5d and Vegas 6c. So the problems I uncovered have not been fixed in 6c, it is probably a v5 vs. v6 issue.

Forum Admin is probably referring to other performance improvements between 6 and 6c. Try these settings on your current vegas 6 install and see if it helps. Then upgrade to 6c if needed.
jeff_12_7 wrote on 12/23/2005, 6:57 PM
FLDave:

I made the adjustments you mentioned, but it is still slow for some reason.

I rendered a single 30 second .avi clip with nothing done to it.

Render times:

V6b: 11 min 38 sec (so I upgraded to V6c)
V6c: 11 min 41 sec

V5d: 39 seconds

go figure- I am thinking that I will remove V6 off my machine completely, reinstall it and try again. Thanks for your help.

Jeff

[EDIT: I re-installed V6 and got a 44 second render time when my RAM was set to 32mb... got the same when I set it to zero..It's pretty much comparable now which is good because I can use nested timelines again. Thanks.]
fldave wrote on 12/23/2005, 8:06 PM
Interesting that a reinstall would resolve some of the problem. I'd let Dr. Dropout know.