From reading here, at it's heart, internally it's a 20yo editor, and think about what CPU's existed back then, it may not be able to effectively access all the cores and modern instructions of new CPU's, all it's modern features are built upon and around the ancient internals. Having said that I noticed with VP21 it uses half the GPU power of VP17, which should mean's it's faster for some, and HEVC playback is faster for some files.

But given all that if you're talking like for like, hardware decoding and encoding, same resolution and frame rate, same effects it could come down to the more modern render engines of other NLE's. Something like rush that's not a pro editor may have cheats such as rendering caches it creates to help playback, rather then processing again on export, and may do something unusual such as what Capcut does - the moment you hit export button on timeline Capcut starts rendering your video even though you haven't chosen the codec or various settings related to the encoding. It guesses in most cases you will use the default template for your project, this leads to apparent instant encoding, but it's not really, it just seems like that.

If Adobe rush isn't pulling tricks like that, then it's just the more efficient modern render engine.

If that is the case, why isn't Vegas doing this? This is apple to apples with rendering, one 45 second ( adobe rush) one 5 minutes ( vegas pro20) It is a no brainer which one anyone would use. Makes me flustered that a program I have been using for 10 years still cant keep up others.

They are apparently FINALLY modernizing the render engine so it will compete with other NLE's speed wise. No idea when it will be complete. I"m hoping release of VP22

Honestly, I have about had it with Vegas. I started using the program 10 years ago and have updated to every version, probably at least $2000G in upgrades over the years and they still cant get it right. Adobe Premier Rush came WITH my Photoshop and Lightroom for under $11 a month lol

Comparing NLE to a free widget isn't exactly "apples to apples".

What else, besides rendering, can Rush do - can it do surround? DCDMs?

It is not a widget it it the complete program that came with Photoshop and Lightroom. I love it for speed ramps, it is 100x better then Vegas for this. It is a complete editing software with transitions, titles, color correction etc. Honestly I love it, makes my editing so much faster. It is a mobile and desktop video editing app for creativity on the go. Wherever you are, from your phone to your computer, you can shoot, edit, and share high-quality videos. Fun, intuitive, and fast.

Use what works for you.

I find VEGAS with GPU encoding more than fast enough for rendering what I do.

I use GPU encoding also Roger, but like I said 45 seconds compared to 5+minutes is a big fail for me.

Rush has only a few % of the editing capabilities of a full featured editor like Vegas, and very limited output format support, aimed entirely at social media streaming. If it fits your editing needs, by all means embrace it.

Yes, it renders faster than Vegas on my machine, but nowhere near the 6.7x factor you reported further up, actually about 1.4x.

I use GPU encoding also Roger, but like I said 45 seconds compared to 5+minutes is a big fail for me.

 

Try the projects in my signature and see if your times are comparable to those with similar hardware. If not there may be settings we can improve.

Normally I render 1:1 or faster in VEGAS, so closer to 1 min than 5.

Hello, The sample project rendered at 6:28 with bitrate at 48,000,000 bps / 24,000,000

Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-9700K CPU @ 3.60GHz   3.60 GHz 64 gig Ram Windows 10 64 bit

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3Gb Display Driver

Thank you,

Kim

How do I use Neat Video and Mercalli Stabilizer in Adobe Rush? Besides, Adobe Rush has a serious problem. It won't even navigate to the folders I have my videos saved in. On top of that, Adobe has discontinued the "sync to cloud" feature.

I do not know how you use those programs in Adobe Rush. I am new to Adobe and it works great for me. I usually upload my already finished video from Vegas to Rush and then do all my speed ramps and more cuts to finish it.

@Robert Johnston  ... your question re Neat Video and Mercalli is unrelated to the OP's issue re Vegas Pro rendering time, so it would have been better to have started your own post about Neat and Mercalli. In any event, how to use 3rd party plugins in an NLE other than Vegas Pro is a question that would need to be posted on that other NLE's forum.

In short, both Neat and Mercalli release products for use in specific NLEs, so you would need to look at those companies product webpages and see if they offer a version for Adobe Rush and you may possibly have to purchase another version of Neat or Mercalli in order to get functionality in an NLE other than Vegas Pro if your current versions are specifically designed for Vegas Pro.

I"m hoping release of VP22

Sooner, actually... it isn't going to release all at the same time, but rather in increments, and some of those increments are much closer than you might think.

Since Derek is being more specific than I thought I could be, I'll quote him:

We had hoped to release it much earlier than this, but the video engine work is taking longer to stabilize than we had planned. The update is coming and it should be a very good one.

We are wrapping up things on this update and hope to have it available in the next 4 or 5 weeks.

Keep in mind, this is just one part of the total planned work to be done on the video engine, which will likely continue well into VP22, maybe even beyond, but does bring with it stability and performance improvements.

@Dexcon  I respectfully and mostly totally disagree. I don't need to start a new topic as I'm not using Adobe Rush, except for last night when I came across this post and installed it to see what the speed issue was about. Anyway, it occurred to me that the more features a NLE has, the more code the programmers need to add to accommodate all the features it has as well as accommodating plugins from 3rd party vendors by tweaking code. Adding one "IF" or "Switch" statement can greatly increase the time a section of code takes to determine what to do with a frame of video. But nevertheless, when I ran Adobe Rush, it was very fast compared to Vegas. Then I tried Resolve, and that was even faster than Rush. But I still use Vegas, it's fast enough for me, and one can still process stereoscopic 3D with it.😃😃
 

VEGAS is running on a 20+ year old code base, and is only just now beginning to get fully modernized. Up until now, since Magix bought it, the focus has been on modernizing its features, but not so much its performance. Now they are getting fully under the hood and rewriting the video engine itself. As I said, this won't launch all at once, but rather in sections, and this next update will be some of the first performance improvements you can expect to see, sometime within the next month or so. Your mileage may vary, but I'm seeing very noticeable gains in the video formats I edit with. That's all I can say about it, you'll get the chance to test it yourselves soon, and when you do, keep in mind this is just the beginnings of the work being done on the video engine.

Glad to hear it, it should of happened YEARS ago LOL. I hope they get it before I retire lol

I do not know how you use those programs in Adobe Rush. I am new to Adobe and it works great for me. I usually upload my already finished video from Vegas to Rush and then do all my speed ramps and more cuts to finish it.

Here's a speed ramp in Capcut, notice how long it takes to to process the speed ramp in optical flow, but then notice the instant encode. So what is obviously happening is that Capcut is not fully processing from the original file on encode, it's a mix of original file plus processed caches. That's what is possibly happening on Adobe Rush to make things so fast for you.

It's not that this is necessarily bad, but in pro editors it's always up to the user to choose render cache quality and to choose to render from cache(or not). Consumer based editors may not wish to burden to the user with such complexities, but you have to trust the editor is not reducing quality with it's unknown caching method.

Glad to hear it, it should of happened YEARS ago LOL. I hope they get it before I retire lol

Sony left VEGAS to die for years... by the time Magix bought it, it was so far behind the competition, that they had to focus on getting its features modernized as best they could with a skeleton crew of developers. Now VEGAS has proven itself, and become a core focus of Magix, so it finally has the resources it needs to start tackling a full on rewrite of the video engine. The development team has grown significantly in the past couple years. We're just now seeing the fruits of that.

For the reasons Todd mentions above, there may be some apps that can encode slightly faster always, at the expense of quality, but speed improvements are indeed on the way.