Comments

srode wrote on 5/23/2009, 7:05 AM
Perhaps competion for resources in the XP32 bit vs Vista 64 bit - 64 bit may use more of your ram / resources for the not Vegas work freeing up resources for Vegas to use - hard to imagine almost a 50% reduction in time required though. Seems odd. If you add your system specs to your profile it would help.....
LarsHD wrote on 5/23/2009, 7:09 AM
System spec.
=======================
Asus P5KR mobo
Q6600 CPU
8 GB RAM
Vista 64 OS drive
WP 32 OS drive
nVidia 8800 GTS 512 Ge Force
WD 10000 rpm Raid-0

Source footage:
1920x1080 30 fps from 5D2
Normal workflow = transcoding to Cineform 1920x1080 - now instead using 960x540 uncompr AVIs during editing, then exchanging those for fullsize uncompr AVIs when rendering.
farss wrote on 5/23/2009, 7:12 AM
The 8GB of RAM could well mean that under Vista 64 all or a lot of your video is already cached compared to running under XP. With longer projects I seriously doubt you'll see anything like that speed difference.

Bob.
LarsHD wrote on 5/23/2009, 9:09 AM
Well, Vegas hasn't been using more RAM in Vista 64 than it had under WP 32 bit so maybe it is something else.

Deducting the "base RAM" that the OS etc is occupying I can't see that more of the video files are loaded in ram.

Also, these files 1920x1080 are several GB so the hard drives are involved - it's not sitting all in RAM waiting to be processed.

I think this is something else...