I'm not using network rendering. I did some speed tests when it first became available and it decreased my workflow even with a fast network.

I setup my workflow patterns during the Vegas 4.0 days and have found that keeping 3 computers working on 3 separate projects is the best way to utilize my time.

I know Spot gave the specs for an awesome dual Opteron System, but its still out of my price league to have the latest greatest. If I upgrade one machine at a time to what is the current best bang/buck for Vegas, I find overall I am better off. I just don't know what is the best bang for the buck with all of the new processors out . . . I haven't been following the upgrade scene for the past 6-8 months.

Unfortunately there are no Vegas benchmarks for dual processor and multi-core systems. Spot may have results for dual core dual Opteron, although they may not be particularly useful.

Here are rendertest.veg results I've compiled. Quick summary:
Intel and AMD processors basically run neck to neck when you compare "equivalent" processors. Intel is generally a few percent faster (i.e. mythical 3.1ghz Pentium would be a few percent faster than an AMD64 3100+). There's really no such thing as equivalent processors.

Current processors to get would be:

Pentium 5xx series or socket 754 Prescott (which do not follow the numbering scheme) - There are many results for this processor line below.
A little higher power consumption than AMD- your electricity bill is bigger and you may need a beefier CPU (probably not, although it would be the case with Pentium D).

Pentium 6xx series - higher cache (likely improves rendertest.veg result a few percent), higher cache latency (will make the system slower by zero to several percent), higher price tag for same clock speed. Supports 64-bit. Probably not worth buying.

Pentium D- Unknown performance. Because Pentium Ds do not have a dedicated memory controller (unlike AMD dual cores), a 2X2.8ghz dual core Pentium D may even perform worse than a single processor 3.0ghz system.
Almost double the energy consumption of a single core CPU.

AMD64: It's really confusing because there are a few processor lines which all perform difference. A 3200+ will perform faster than another because of this.
socket 939, the new stuff, supports dual channel memory operation. socket 754 does not. dual channel likely makes a few percent difference.

Venice core (S939) - I don't think there are any results, but many benchmark review sites find these are the best bang/buck.

San Diego (S939) - more cache than Venice core and more expensive. Cache does not make that big a difference. My guess is that a Venice core processor is better bang/buck.

AMD X2- dual core version of AMD64. Performance unknown, but should be at least as good as a single core CPU.
Debuts at higher clock spees than Pentium D.

Dual processors: Vegas 5 doesn't take advantage of them unless you run 2 instances. No rendertest.veg results for Vegas6, which should take advantage of dual processors and dual cores.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*75s - P4 3.6ghz overclocked from 3.0 Pentium. A new 5xx-series 3.6ghz should be as fast or slightly slower.
SOURCE: Stormcrow@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=396239&Replies=57

78s- AMD64 3700+ (san diego core??? [2.2ghz, 1MB cache], vegas 6, dual channel RAM)
SOURCE: Charley Gallgher@ http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=45178&page=2&pp=15

*78s- P4 3.2 overclocked to 3.8ghz (Northwood core???, 800FSB [it's overclocked, so the FSB is actually higher])
SOURCE: jamcas@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=256422

79s- AMD64 3400+ (unknown core, Vegas 6)
SOURCE: Charley Gallagher@ http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=45178&page=2&pp=15

89s- 3.0E Pentium Prescott (865 chipset, dual channel RAM, Vegas 5)
SOURCE: Glenn Chan@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=396239&Replies=57

90s - 2.8ghz Pentium (Prescott)
SOURCE: TalawaMan@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?Forum=4&MessageID=262716

90s - Opteron 246 2.0ghz X 2 (dual channel memory, old 2004 core, *VEGAS 5*)
SOURCE: rohde@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=256422
*Please keep in mind Vegas6 has optimizations for dual processors. As well, rendertest.veg make skew results in favor of single processor systems.

93s - AMD64 3200+ (2004, so probably old core)
SOURCE: PH125@ http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=256422
99s is Sid Phillip's report in the same thread.

95s - AMD64 3000+ (2.00ghz, 512kb cache, single channel, socket 754, 2004 core)
SOURCE: ibliss@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=256422

114s - Pentium-M 1.7ghz laptop
SOURCE: The_Jeff@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?Forum=4&MessageID=262716


Athlon XP: There are results if you look around. They aren't as fast as Pentiums or AMD64.

Platforms that support dual channel can run a few percent slower when running memory single channel. See Glenn Chan's (that's me) benchmarks at
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18841
Systems with 2 pairs of identical RAM may also perform slightly faster.

Northwood-core Pentiums are about 6% slower than Prescott-cores (the 5xx series). Northwoods are typically faster at everything else, and consume less electricity.

Overclocked systems are not necessarily stable. As well, they may perform slightly better or worse than a stock system running at the same clock speed. Overclocking on Intel/Pentium platform implies an increase in FSB speed, and an increase or decrease in RAM speed (depends on the RAM they use).

Vegas 6 results may differ from V5 results. see http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=396239&Replies=57
Johnmeyer writes:
My results on the old render test, using a 2.8 GHz P4, no hyperthreading:

Vegas 6.0b 1:46
Vegas 5.0d 1:43


---

These results are for the original rendertest.veg, not the new one. You can download it from:
http://www.vasst.com/resource.aspx?id=35443070-0b67-4a2e-807c-a7f431ebd02d

Various hardware review sites out there have benchmarks for MPEG2 encoding with the Main Concept Encoder (which is what DVD architect uses supposedly).

In terms of performance, here's how everything fares:

Single core Pentium 5xx
Single core Pentium 6xx
Pentium D (yes, it is slower...)
AMD X2
AMD64 with SSE3 (i.e. san diego, venice cores)
AMD64 without SSE3

No idea how well dual processors do.

The Rhino : I know Spot gave the specs for an awesome dual Opteron System ....

could you please point us to the specs? thanks

Your decision gets trickier if you want to consider total cost of ownership. Big factors:

A- Electricity. Pentium D >> Pentium / AMD X2 > AMD64 (sorry, not sure how well AMD X2 fares in relation to Pentiums)
If you pay for electricity and leave your computers on 24/7, the difference between a Pentium D and AMD X2 may be around $40. There's a large # of factors involved though, which gets complicated to calculate.
cost of electricity, hours idle (and power consumption at idle), hours load (the gap widens a lot here, because Pentium D consumes A LOT of electricity at load), power factor, PSU efficiency (you can cut your bill in half if you get a Seasonic PSU with active PFC- this halves the difference), how many years you use the computer

B- The parts you need to run that processor.

Pentium D requires the newer chipsets, which may be more expensive. It implies pciE video card and DDR2 RAM.

Pentium D needs a more powerful power supply.

With, AMD64 probably go S939.

C- Economics. There are typically more deals for Intel-based systems because the large OEMs sell them and they typically are the ones with deals on their systems.

---
US Only: Best value is likely a hot deal on a Dell system. On the low end, it's cheaper than buying the parts to build an equivalent system (and it assumes your labour is free). The Dimension 3000 has extremely limited upgradeability, so it may not be suitable for video editing (officially, only two HDD bays; no video card slot). Look for a deal on a 4700/4800 on sites like gotapex.com, bensbargains.net, etc. Read the forums too.

If you want a little more performance, get a custom system with a 5xx series Pentium.

If you don't do MPEG2 encoding, an AMD64-based system will be very comparable and will be around the same price (may be slightly cheaper or more expensive). Venice core is likely the best bet... go for raw clock speed over cache.

AMD X2 might also be worthwhile. The 4200+ is priced around the same as a Pentium 560J and looks like it may perform around the same or a good deal faster?

To guestimate performance, divide clock speeds among the same processor line/core.

Ultimate performance:
Likely 2-way/4-way/8-way dual core opteron (8-way would be 16 cores). You may hit diminishing returns though... we'll see how Spot's machine does.

Wow glennchan, that's some great info.

US Only: Best value is likely a hot deal on a Dell system
If you are looking at Dells, a good value is the Dell outlet. Particularly, if you are just going to have these machines render. You could get
two Dell 8400's with 3.4 pentiums and 1 gig of RAM for under your budget.
I have not looked closely at new pentiums, but these are Pentium 4 Processor 550 with HT Technology (3.40GHz, 800 FSB, 1MB)

The systems in the outlet section change all the time, but right now I see a
good prices on Dell workstations. You can get Precision 370 with Pentium 4 Processor 3.60GHz, Intel EM64T,2MB/800 with 512 RAM for $780 and a 370 with a Pentium 4 Processor 3.80GHz, Intel EM64T,1MB/800 with a gig of ram for $1130

This is without monitors. You would have to add a media drive or an external hard drive.


Endless, Spot's system is discussed in this thread

Thanks to everyone so far for some great ideas. Some of the links you provided also helped me locate forums with similiar discussions. I found where people are posting their RenderTest results at DVInfo and this is helping greatly. I will probably wait until a few Vegas users post their Athlon X2 results and then make my decision.

BTW, because I have all of my components in several hearty CM Stacker cases with reliable power supplies and other components, I am not considering Dell, etc., although I have snagged a few of their systems for friends and family who were looking for an upgrade.

Wow those CM Stacker cases are out of control.

I wish I had 11 drive bays. How many fans are you running and what's the noise like