Threadripper 1950x + rtx 2080 : Poor Render Time on Vegas Pro Plugins

Comments

eikira wrote on 4/19/2019, 6:38 PM

The original video is an realtime output from Unity 2019.x from the Unity Recorder Asset (Official,free).

1080p 60 fps, compressed i think but not sure. The original clip are included within the .Zip.

ok. yes i see it now. (mediafire is a horrible sharing tool. create a seperated google drive account for stuff like that =) )

since i never use raytrace or lighttrace plugins, i cant comment on that if they worked in the past better. i have a rtx 2070. your project does not really fire my GPU up (2-4%). it clearly shows that these effects are CPU only and probably old a.f.

it took me 2 minutes for 5% of videorendering. means it will be about 40 minutes for that thing to render fully.

i am running a 6core intel 6850k at 4GHz (no QSV avaible). and since my cpu is faster than yours it becomes pretty obvious these effects are most probably designed on SingleCore only.

65 minutes 3.4GHz 1950x AMD
40 minutes 4.0GHz 6850k Intel

 

just write a ticket. there is probably no solution here other than to change the effects by the software developers. and the chance that this will happen soon is not that high. =(

maybe look out for third party effect solutions? like RED Giant etc. who may have same effects (or better ones) but with utilizing more of your machines power or even GPU?

Musicvid wrote on 4/19/2019, 6:43 PM

Well, you can expect it, but not all this week..

They may have to dig up a couple of graves to find who wrote this stuff; it wasn't all Magix.

eikira wrote on 4/19/2019, 6:56 PM

They may have to dig up a couple of graves to find who wrote this stuff; it wasn't all Magix.

Yes, you are right. Even if they want to fix that, it would be no easy task.
One more reason to bring up a all new performance VEGAS Pro and put in real now code and self made effects suited for the MC and GPU enviroment of the users. I mean we all spend a good amount of more or less decent computers. We could be more efficient if the software is really up to date.

Marc-Gauvin wrote on 4/19/2019, 7:01 PM

I bet they looking at the new shift in the video making industry. They already made a huge step with the Nvidia Encoding, so they are aware they are left behind. I hope Sony Vegas 15 will get these new refreshed plugins and Nvidia creators drivers soon. If i was Sony Vegas Pro; i will merge with Unity 2019 to take the turn with them and leverage their experience with video-editing within unity itself. That would be awesome and efficient. Anyway; Hollywood is already there. The Mainstream customers still unaware but not for long.

Eagle Six wrote on 4/19/2019, 7:24 PM

@Marc-Gauvin could be, but most likely there will not be any more updates to Vegas Pro 15, the last build being 416. Maybe in Vegas Pro 16, as I understand there is a new release coming soon. And, just for the information, Sony doesn't care, It's now Magix Vegas Pro. The last version Sony released was 13.

System Specs......
Corsair Obsidian Series 450D ATX Mid Tower
Asus X99-A II LGA 2011-v3, Intel X99 SATA 6 Gb/s USB 3.1/3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
Intel Core i7-6800K 15M Broadwell-E, 6 core 3.4 GHz LGA 2011-v3 (overclocked 20%)
64GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200
Corsair Hydro Series H110i GTX 280mm Extreme Performance Liquid CPU Cooler
MSI Radeon R9 390 DirectX 12 8GB Video Card
Corsair RMx Series RM750X 740W 80 Plus Gold power pack
Samsung 970 EVO NVMe M.2 boot drive
Corsair Neutron XT 2.5 480GB SATA III SSD - video work drive
Western Digitial 1TB 7200 RPM SATA - video work drive
Western Digital Black 6TB 7200 RPM SATA 6Bb/s 128MB Cache 3.5 data drive

Bluray Disc burner drive
2x 1080p monitors
Microsoft Window 10 Pro
DaVinci Resolve Studio 16 pb2
SVP13, MVP15, MVP16, SMSP13, MVMS15, MVMSP15, MVMSP16

Chief24 wrote on 4/19/2019, 8:29 PM

+1 Eagle Six: Thanks for reminding the dis-satisfied customer that the "correct version of Vegas Pro 15 is MAGIX, and not Sony!" Really tired of so many people doing this, it really is infuriating.

But, I also downloaded the posted zip file, and ran the project on my machine as well. Non-overclocked 1950x, with a Gigabyte GTX1080, CRD 419.37 driver and got about 56-57 minutes. Also showed my GPU and CPU percentages as others with similar. Though, I did open the "Performance Tab" for Task Manager/Resource Monitor, and it looked like all the Physical and Virtual Cores of the CPU were being leveraged. Yet, upon further inspection, you would see that the CPU cores are constantly Up and Down, due to the "Source" footage; hence meaning that the processor is not only trying to "render", but also has to "DECOMPRESS" the provided source, then have to "RECOMPRESS" everything. And like BruceUSA mentioned, he has the basic same setup, but "Kills It" with that Radeon Frontier Edition card.

Also wondering why so many come here telling us how bad Vegas Pro/Movie Studio run compared to all the other programs out there, yet they continue to use it? Sorry, but Unity is for Game Development, same as Unreal Engine, and you don't see anyone coming here complaining about Frostbite Engine doing so much better in rendering!

Provided people are actually following true reviews of recent hardware, would notice that AMD has definitely Upped their Game for rendering. Seems that a lot of the recent videos I have been viewing on YouTube from the tech channels I follow, continue to have a lot of issues with the "Adored Adobe Suite" and their nVidia cards. Lots of artifacts showing throughout the videos. Just saying. Me, I know my GTX 1080 is needing some cleaning, and a replacement shortly in this rig (first Enermax Liqtech cooler leaked on it). So, debating still on whether to "Take the Green Pill, or Red Pill". Can't find a really good Radeon VII video editing review, and don't think we will see one until after COMPUTEX by Techgage (Rob Williams, E.I.C.). Or, maybe just go with a Polaris based RX580 to get me through the next few months, and wait to see what the Intel GPU brings us?

Self Build: MSI X399 Gaming Pro Carbon AC/1950X @ stock; 64GB Corsair 2666 Mhz; OS-Intel 750 800GB, Project Media-Samsung 960 EVO 1TB & 970 EVO 1TB; (2) Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD for various (Magix Xara Photo & Graphics Designer Pro 16), Render, Other Assets; Sapphire AMD Radeon VII; (2) Samsung 28 Inch UHD 3840x2160; Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit (1809); (2) Intel 660p 2TB PCI-e on Asus Quad M.2x16; Magix Vegas Pro 15 Suite (416), Magix Movie Studio Platinum 15 Suite (157); Canon EOS 80D; GoPro Hero 5+ & 6 Black & 7 Black; Sony FDR AX-53 HandyCam; Sound Forge Studio 12.6; Creative SoundBlaster Zx sound card; Magix Music Maker Premium 2019

Marc-Gauvin wrote on 4/19/2019, 8:55 PM

Yes, i will use raw video for my next test. I was simply trying what Vegas Pro can achive with Unity default recorder presets. (Default Export with Unity Recorder Asset). I'm pretty new with Vegas Pro, just upgraded from Vegas Pro edit 14. Was used to render from Vray and 3d max or Unity. Honestly, i didn't planned to use it very often, i was trying to getting something of it to justify my purchase. That's why i was trying the included FX.

And no; Unity or others games engines aren't only for game designer, not anymore. Netflix is a revolution in the media diffusion and 4k resolution for AAA stuff are more than common now. That's mean Realtime Rendering is the thing for the wider target audience. A bigger market than theater movies who get their content ripped and streamed all over the net. That's why Netflix change the whole thing and the demand. That's why Hollywood doesn't need that much 14k resolution anymore. Netflix doesn't need it. The video editing industry need to adapt itself to these new reality. Specialize into Ultra Wide resolution for theater or merge with Realtime 3d rendering engine like Unity or Unreal Engine or Others for 8k resolution or less.

As for the optimisations for Nvidia cards, there are no doubts, these rtx card can deliver crazy realtime results in game engines, idk what happen there but it look more like an commercial thing than an hardware issue. Intel used many shady tactics versus AMD in the past. Nvidia aren't immunised against drivers sabotage or ''lack of support'' commercial strategy.

Idk if the lastest Nvidia Creators drivers solved the issues with adobe suite but it does with Lightroom, as Lightroom figure on the Nvidia Creator Drivers Webpage among others softwares which are optimised for RTX card. I need to keep up to date on this.

 

Musicvid wrote on 4/19/2019, 8:55 PM

@Chief24

+1

It is amusing to see "best quality" and "fastest hardware render" discussed to death by those who believe they are not mutually exclusive.

My production renders are CPU only, since my deadlines are over for this career. So, the question becomes, how much am I willing to spend for faster rough cuts and test renders? Well, not much.

Why, I remember when it was about the best product, not bigger, harder, faster "equipment." Imagine a great video...

karma17 wrote on 4/19/2019, 9:28 PM

For some reason, I always feel like Kung Fu Panda who says, "What do you mean end Kung Fu? I just got Kung Fu!" One thing is for sure everything is changing fast. I use Octane Render for 3D stuff and Vegas primarily for rendering the PNG sequences.

JN_ wrote on 4/20/2019, 3:17 AM

@Marc-Gauvin I agree Marc that leveraging the new hardware better for even non gaming within VP would be nice.

The creator ready drivers example benchmarks I saw mentioned the usual industry NLE suspects, not a mention of Vegas.

Its been mentioned on other threads that theres an apparent issue with Nvenc encoding, a sort of pause, render some, pause again. I don’t remember this being there at the early days of Nvenc in VP. I mention this because I would prefer if existing issues were addressed before moving to new frontiers. I have seen this issue on my laptop and PC, maybe its a driver issue, or poor Nvenc implementation.

Anyway thanks for bringing this all up.

 

Last changed by JN_ on 4/20/2019, 3:19 AM, changed a total of 2 times.

 

Desktop and Laptop basic specs ...

Both run Win 10, has latest updates ...

Running latest ver. of Vegas Pro with latest updates.

VP13 B453 also.

Vegaseur and Pluraleyes installed on both ...

Quicktime 7.79.80.95

PC ...

i9 9900K, Intel Graphics 630. Nov 2018.

Mem. 32gb DDR4

Graphics card .. Nvidia Rtx 2080 Ti

Nvidia Graphics driver .. latest Studio driver.

Latest Intel Graphics driver

 

Laptop ... (Acer Predator G9-793-77AC)

CPU .. i7-6700HQ Skylake-H

Memory ..16GB DDR4 

Graphics card .. Nvidia GTX 1070, latest Studio driver.

ryclark wrote on 4/20/2019, 6:20 AM

Maybe Magix NAB 2019 announced tie up with FXHome will eventually bring a raft of newly coded fast FX to Vegas. 😄

bob-h wrote on 4/20/2019, 9:02 AM

@Marc-Gauvin I agree Marc that leveraging the new hardware better for even non gaming within VP would be nice.

 

Software like Davinci Resolve 16 will even take advantage of the Nvidia RTX tensor cores to help acceleration

Maybe Magix NAB 2019 announced tie up with FXHome will eventually bring a raft of newly coded fast FX to Vegas. 😄

That would be nice but over the years the only thing slower & less efficient than VegasPro that i've used has been Hitfilm.

mintyslippers wrote on 4/20/2019, 11:17 AM

The pause render pause render for nvenc could be down to Vegas using the old nvenc API where it would have to copy and get the processor involved. The new rtx cards can do it all on card now but the software needs to be coded to use it.

eikira wrote on 4/20/2019, 11:24 AM

The pause render pause render for nvenc could be down to Vegas using the old nvenc API where it would have to copy and get the processor involved. The new rtx cards can do it all on card now but the software needs to be coded to use it.

One could agree with that, but i clearly got a performance boost by the creative drivers from nvidia and STILL this start stop behavior.

mintyslippers wrote on 4/20/2019, 11:29 AM

The pause render pause render for nvenc could be down to Vegas using the old nvenc API where it would have to copy and get the processor involved. The new rtx cards can do it all on card now but the software needs to be coded to use it.

One could agree with that, but i clearly got a performance boost by the creative drivers from nvidia and STILL this start stop behavior.

You will do until Vegas is codes to use the new API. It's software dependent. Not drivers. Old API when using nvenc does a copy encode copy encode thing. New version does away with the copy

eikira wrote on 4/20/2019, 1:09 PM

You will do until Vegas is codes to use the new API. It's software dependent. Not drivers. Old API when using nvenc does a copy encode copy encode thing. New version does away with the copy

that is obviously not true. if it would have nothing to do with drivers too, i would not get better performance... might be that it still uses the old API, but to say it has nothing to do with drivers is almost silly.

i was one of the first to report about the new creative drivers here, and not everybody got the same experience, but i got a bump in performance even before reading the drivers notes.

mintyslippers wrote on 4/20/2019, 1:34 PM

I never said the drivers wouldn't impact it. I said the new NVenc method dannyoneill the Turing gpu needs a software update to take advantage of it

Musicvid wrote on 4/20/2019, 6:25 PM

You are right, look like the plugins are to blame. But it's a major feature for Sony [sic] Vegas Pro

Back to topic, has the original question been reframed and offered as a feature request?

I'm all for it, and the result may affect my decision whether to get a faster editing laptop.

TheRhino wrote on 4/21/2019, 7:20 PM

Look like Vegas Pro is optimised for Intel CPU and Amd GPU.

A LOT of (current) programs are not optimized for Threadripper, so a 9900K performs better for nearly all the apps I use daily, including Vegas... In fact, I still have a couple of proprietary apps that do not work well with AMD...

I just upgraded a 4.0ghz 6-core Xeon workstation to a 5.0ghz 8-core 9900K & am very happy with the 2X performance gain on almost every common (CPU) render I do. Rendering from a (2) drive M.2 RAID0 to either a (2) drive M.2 RAID0 or (4) SATA RAID10 I get 70-90% CPU usage. But more often, I open (2) instances of Vegas and render a high quality intermediate codec plus a MP4 at the same time which utilizes nearly 100% of the CPU.

I am still using onboard video because I want to see what GPUs the next release of Vegas supports... I have a Radeon RX 570 in another system and an older Nvidia GTX 580 that worked well with the older MainConcept MP2 codec, but I haven't tried either in the new 9900K system...

Last changed by TheRhino on 4/21/2019, 7:22 PM, changed a total of 1 times.

Workstation D with $1,350 USD of upgrades in April, 2019
--$500 9900K @ 5.0ghz
--$140 Corsair H150i liquid cooling with 360mm radiator (3 fans)
--$200 open box Asus Z390 WS (PLX chip manages 4/5 PCIe slots)
--$160 32GB of G.Skill DDR4 3000
--$350 refurbished, but like-new Radeon Vega 64 LQ (liquid cooled)

Renders Vegas11 "Red Car Test" (QSV) in 13s-14s when clocked at 5.0 ghz
(note: BOTH onboard Intel & Vega64 show utilization during QSV renders...)

Source Video1 = 4TB RAID0--(2) 2TB M.2 on motherboard in RAID0
Source Video2 = 4TB RAID0--(2) 2TB M.2 (1) via U.2 adapter & (1) on separate PCIe card
Target Video1 = 32TB RAID0--(4) 8TB SATA hot-swap drives on PCIe RAID10 card

10G Network using cheap Mellanox2 Adapters
Copy of Work Files, Source & Output Video, OS Images on QNAP 653b NAS
Blackmagic Decklink PCie card for capturing from tape, etc.
(2) internal BR Burners connected via USB 3.0 to SATA adapters
Old Cooler Master CM Stacker ATX case with (13) 5.25" front drive-bays holds & cools everything.

Workstations A, B & C are 6-core 4.0ghz Xeon 5660 or I7 980x on Asus P6T6 motherboards.

OldSmoke wrote on 4/21/2019, 7:44 PM

A LOT of (current) programs are not optimized for Threadripper, so a 9900K performs better for nearly all the apps I use daily, including Vegas.

Bold statement and sure doesn’t reflect the truth either. There quite few users in here that use Threadripper successful and their systems are super fast, just ask @BruseUSA.

Proud owner of Sony Vegas Pro 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 & 13 and now Magix VP15&16.

System Spec.:
Motherboard: ASUS X299 Prime-A

Ram: G.Skill 4x8GB DDR4 2666 XMP

CPU: i7-9800x @ 4.6GHz (custom water cooling system)
GPU: 1x AMD Vega Pro Frontier Edition (water cooled)
Hard drives: System Samsung 970Pro NVME, AV-Projects 1TB (4x Intel P7600 512GB VROC), 4x 2.5" Hotswap bays, 1x 3.5" Hotswap Bay, 1x LG BluRay Burner

PSU: Corsair 1200W
Monitor: 2x Dell Ultrasharp U2713HM (2560x1440)

BruceUSA wrote on 4/21/2019, 8:06 PM

A LOT of (current) programs are not optimized for Threadripper, so a 9900K performs better for nearly all the apps I use daily, including Vegas.

Bold statement and sure doesn’t reflect the truth either. There quite few users in here that use Threadripper successful and their systems are super fast, just ask @BruseUSA.

As far as Vegas is concerns. My system will absolutely decimate your 5ghz 8 cores 9900K in TL and rendering. Don't believe? .All you have to do is doing some searching here. You will find many samples and screen shots that show the Vegas performance that your 9900K can't touch it.

eikira wrote on 4/21/2019, 8:26 PM

As far as Vegas is concerns. My system will absolutely decimate your 5ghz 8 cores 9900K in TL and rendering. Don't believe? .All you have to do is doing some searching here. You will find many samples and screen shots that show the Vegas performance that your 9900K can't touch it.

i would like to test that some time later. i ordered a 9900k. the price was in consideration. the intel cost me about 520 usd and the TR 1950x would cost me about 820 usd. the cheapest top of the line chipset mainboard would cost me for the TR about 310 usd, for the intel i pay about 190 usd. so 420 usd is not nothing, but would it be worth the price because of the maybe much more performance...

probably in cpu only rendering your cpu should beat the 9900k, but the question is how much faster.

OldSmoke wrote on 4/22/2019, 8:24 AM

but would it be worth the price because of the maybe much more performance...

The combination of a high end Threadripper with a high end AMD card is certainly worth it depending on your projects. If you do a lot of 4K60p or 4K multicam and so on, you will certainly appreciate the extra performance in the timeline as well as rendering. For HD work you may not see too much difference but again depending on the complexity of your project. However, a high end AMD or Intel chip does not offer QuickSync if that is something you are interested in. And to be fair, you would have to compare prices between a socket 2066 and a threadripper, the 9900 is a socket 1151 CPU with limited PCIe lanes.

Last changed by OldSmoke on 4/22/2019, 8:28 AM, changed a total of 1 times.

Proud owner of Sony Vegas Pro 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 & 13 and now Magix VP15&16.

System Spec.:
Motherboard: ASUS X299 Prime-A

Ram: G.Skill 4x8GB DDR4 2666 XMP

CPU: i7-9800x @ 4.6GHz (custom water cooling system)
GPU: 1x AMD Vega Pro Frontier Edition (water cooled)
Hard drives: System Samsung 970Pro NVME, AV-Projects 1TB (4x Intel P7600 512GB VROC), 4x 2.5" Hotswap bays, 1x 3.5" Hotswap Bay, 1x LG BluRay Burner

PSU: Corsair 1200W
Monitor: 2x Dell Ultrasharp U2713HM (2560x1440)

Marc-Gauvin wrote on 4/22/2019, 8:58 AM

A LOT of (current) programs are not optimized for Threadripper, so a 9900K performs better for nearly all the apps I use daily, including Vegas.

Bold statement and sure doesn’t reflect the truth either. There quite few users in here that use Threadripper successful and their systems are super fast, just ask @BruseUSA.

As far as Vegas is concerns. My system will absolutely decimate your 5ghz 8 cores 9900K in TL and rendering. Don't believe? .All you have to do is doing some searching here. You will find many samples and screen shots that show the Vegas performance that your 9900K can't touch it.

A part from the Radeon Pro or the FirePro GPU, what youve done to get better results with your 1950x ? I saw the OC to 3.99ghz but what else ?