I found this brandnew threadripper test with vegas for those who are interested.

To sum it up: It does not really work unfortunately ;) on a high-end-machine. makes me doubt if i purchased the right product...there are also tests with other software with the same system...

That reviewer's poor playback is more about AVC getting decoded by VP15's new so4compoundplug than about his CPU choice. It's a pity that he didn't know how to disable it, or chose not to. If he'd done that, his AVC playback would have been much smoother. I commented so on his YouTube video in my best German. Anyway it won't harm his Edius sales.

@fr0sty, how much of your RAM gets used when you're busy?

Nick, I disagree for two reasons:

1) He has tested also XAVC I or ProRes footage in his test, and this type of footage does not use the so4 plugin. But the preview is not better here (not only in his test but also here with me).

2) it is not up to a tester that he has to know that such a plugin has to be disabled. Vegas is delivered with that plugin, and it is fair enough to test Vegas as it is delivered.

What is missing in this test is another point: he runs 8bit footage in the 32bit floating point mode - and has not tested the 8bit mode with UHD preview resolution at all. That is a more significant weakness in this test what is the fault of the tester.

And it is not the AMD processor only. The behavior with XAVC I and ProRes is not much better on my 8-core system.

So all together Vegas has a preview issue, compared to the other products tested by him (he has done the same tests for Edius, Resolve and Adobe). Unfortunatelly that is also true.

Nick, I disagree for two reasons:

1) He has tested also XAVC I or ProRes footage in his test, and this type of footage does not use the so4 plugin. But the preview is not better here (not only in his test but also here with me).

Vegas' MXF (XAVC-I/L) decoder and ProRes decoder also have playback issues and need improving. But actually his FS7, URSA & Shogun tests were not catastrophic.

However my point was about AVC (& its non-MXF variants). His GoPro HERO6, GoPro HERO4, Xiaomi Yi and GoPro HERO6 (again) tests are crippled by the so4comoundplug decoder. If he'd disabled it then it would have been a totally different story with those formats. These were my tests:

His Sony/Panasonic camcorder and GH5 tests might also be worse with so4compoundplug than compoundplug.

2) it is not up to a tester that he has to know that such a plugin has to be disabled. Vegas is delivered with that plugin, and it is fair enough to test Vegas as it is delivered.

I agree and I don't blame him for that at all. But still a pity that he misses a hugely-significant factor, and so is not showing Vegas at its best.

The FS7, Shogun and URSA footage are catastrophic, since it is not possible at all to achieve the full frame rate for UHD 50p, even not for a single stream.

That is both true in his test but also on my overclocked 8core Intel GPU. To edit my FS7 UHD 50p footage, typically I have to switch my project settings from UHD 50p to UHD 25p and set the preview quality to preview/half in many cases.

For sure that is not about showing Vegas at its best, but unfortunately that is the actual reality.

The FS7, Shogun and URSA footage are catastrophic, since it is not possible at all to achieve the full frame rate for UHD 50p, even not for a single stream.

OK, I agree. But they weren't 😱 😱 CATACLYSMIC 😱 😱, like some of his AVC tests. 20-30fps is better than 1fps.

I re-phrased my comment above, to clarify that so4compoundplug most critically affects certain AVC formats, not all, which are GoPro, DJI & Xiaomi. I also added a table of my own findings.

@LMNZ The consensus on this forum over the years has generally been that clock speed is more important for Vegas than large numbers of cores.

Also consider that Intel/QSV support is strong in VP15, and apparently GoPro/DJI/Xiaomi AVC does not perform so badly with QSV acceleration of video processing as with other modes (haven't tested that myself). So a CPU with integrated Intel graphics would be a good choice.

A CPU with Intel graphics and more than 4 cores has only just appeared; the i7-8700K, which has 6 cores. That in theory should be a good performer with VP15.

For long-GOP AVC footage the i7 8600K should be a good choice. QSV works here great. For footage like XAVC I or ProRes - not supported by QSV - an i9-7900X with 10cores is more interesting maybe.

@fr0sty, how much of your RAM gets used when you're busy?

Vegas rarely ever maxes out my RAM. I'll do some tests with my next edit to determine exact usage.

In Vegas CPU speed is more important than cores / threads. I have a 16/32 thread system but only running at 2.9/3.3 Ghz. I never see CPU usage above 40% even when rendering.

Agree that the new 8600K seems a perfect fit with Vegas: lots of cores and very high cpu speed.

Agree that the new 8600K seems a perfect fit with Vegas: lots of cores and very high cpu speed.

It sure makes for a good budget system. My issue with that CPU is the PCIe lane limitation, 16 only. With one GPU installed you have already occupied all PCIe lanes and can run very easily in a resource sharing situation which slows everything down. It's important to read the manual of such a system to check how resources are shared.

I was thinking about the 8700K actually with 12 threads, but yes what you stay is still valid.

In Vegas CPU speed is more important than cores / threads. I have a 16/32 thread system but only running at 2.9/3.3 Ghz. I never see CPU usage above 40% even when rendering.

Agree that the new 8600K seems a perfect fit with Vegas: lots of cores and very high cpu speed.

The question is not only about rendering - here we have seen in Vegas Pro 15 significant improvements based on either QSV but also NVENC. But the major question will be about the preview performance in future.

And with my XAVC-I UHD 50p slog footage, I see in an ACED 1.0 Project that all my cores tend to become utilized up to 100% (and that with an 8-core i7 5960X overclocked to 4.2 Ghz) in the preview. And I tend to work with a preview/quaterly only, and end up with something about 8-10 frames per second only.

So to be able to edit such a Project, we will need an improved preview performance really.

Maybe processors like the AMD threadripper will be supported in future better, maybe not. Today the core utilization is week. For Intel we should see 18-core processors in 2018, even if they will be more expensive.

As said, the i7 8600K will be great - for Long GOP footage since QSV will help here. But not for footage like ProRes or XAVC-I. Here we will simple need more cores that are utilized in a great way.

hey thank you everybody for your input and discussion :)
a pity that there is no easy fix to this at this point since the coffee lake cpu seems interesting but i don't know when they re gonna be sold in shops again...but i want to finish some projects now ...with a certain look ;)
@fr0sty i use a lot of fx like vegas color correction, color balance, fill-in lights, gradient-radial, hitfilm vibrance...but even without fx it s gettin way too slow and unstable - the more files are in the project the worse it gets.