Yes, I have the quadro K2000 (will be replaced to the K2200) and the R9 390X together in the system. Reasons for that were
a) that the quadro can be used for the s3D preview in Vegas
b) that the quadro allows a 10bit preview (what works in Vegas, I have tested that by now)
c) and the R9 390X because to suppor the playback behaviour/preview capacity.

No, my system is based on the 8 core processor i7- 5960X, and the board supports 4x PCIe with 16x (Mainboards ASUS X99-E WS/USB 3.1). So there are few limitations from that side - enough 16x PCIe and enough lanes.

At the moment the R9 390X is in the first slot of the board.


Sure, the R9 290 is a well-known card for Vegas. That is whay I had the idea that the R9 390X should work well too. However, up to now Vegas does not startup when I select the R9 390X but crashes.

That is why I would like to know if somebody else here runs a R9 390x successfully and can confirm that such a card runs with Vegas in real life. Because I do not know if it is an issue of my specific hardware setting, or if it is an issue with the R9 390X.

No, my system is based on the 8 core processor i7- 5960X, and the board supports 4x PCIe with 16x (Mainboards ASUS X99-E WS/USB 3.1)

Well, your system specs did not reflect that, I apologize.

There are couple of users here that do use the R9 390X and I am certain it is not the card but the combination of a Quadro with it's drivers and the desktop R9. The R9 390X has the same Hawai GPU as the R9 290.

Have you tried reseting Vegas? You may loose all your settings but it may be a good idea to try.
You could also try and remove the Quadro card temporarely.

Never mind, I have not updates the profile by now since the new system arrive 3 days ago only.

I have not read so far reports from user that use the R9 390X really. For the R9 290 und R9 290X I have. But not for the R9 390X yet. That is the reason why I ask.

Hmm, yes I can try to do additional tests:
- disable the Quadro and see what happens then
- remove the Quadro and see what happens then

The tests would bring up the information if it is the Quadro really.

But the drawback is that I would like to use the quadro for both s3D and the 10bit output from Vegas. Not so easy.

Reseting Vegas? You mean with CTRL+Shift and start up Vegas? I can give that a try?

[I]You mean with CTRL+Shift and start up Vegas?[/I]

Yes, that's what I meant.

Did you do a fresh install of Windows when you built the new machine?

Did you reinstall vegas on the new machine, or did you use the windows/boot drive from your old machine?

Be sure to remove/uninstall the Quadro card drivers before pulling the actual card out of the system. Then cleanup of the registry with CCleaner after pulling the card, and reboot again. Then try the CNTL+Shift+Vegas start.

Another thing to check: Goto Right Click+START>Device Manager>View>Hidden Devices. Remove/uninstall any greyed out display Adapters. If you had swapped devices around in slots without uninstalling 1st, you may have ghost instances of the device in other slots. Reboot after any uninstalls.

Well, I have continued to perform some tests last night.

Findings:
- if you remove the Quadro, it is possible to enabele the AMD for the GPU support - and Vegas starts now.
- if you have all monitors connected to the AMD card, the Quadro driver seems not be be installed during startup. At least you cannot co into the nvidia controll window.
Also in this setting you can enable the AMD card in Vegas and Vegas starts sucessfull.

Same is true if you have all monitors connect to the Quadro card - the AMD controll window is not available.

- CTRL + Shift + start Vegas does not help really if you have the monitors connected with the Quadro, and enabel the AMD card for GPU support. You have to disable the AMD card in the device manager to be able to start Vegas again. I have not testet yet the hidden device hint of astar.

So it seems to be a driver issue mainly - what can be overcome by using only one card = connect the monitors to one card only.

nvidia 3D vision works now with the Quadro too.

The real pitfall is that I have now been able to test the GPU performance with the R9 390X only. For the 8-core processor and this hardwar used here the playback behaviour becomes WEAKER in the timeline and the numbers of fps is reduced compared to the CPU-usage only. At least as long as I use native GH4 8bit footage. And for Vegas it is better to overclock the processor what works great here.

What a pitty. We have always stated that the GPU-support of Vegas is not as great as it could be. For such a powerfull CPU my findings are that it is not worth the money to invest in a R9 390X - at least not for Vegas. For Catalyse Edit it is another story - here I see a nice performance improvement with the R9 390X card. And maybe also for Resolve (not tested yet).

Some more tests, that I think about:
- pulling the Quadro out of the system and uninstall the Quadro driver - to see if the R9 390X performance will be increased in the GPU-support. Not tested yet, but I am not sure if that will improve the situation really, since my impression is that the CPU is too powerfull (means that the additionl administration to exchange data with the GPU takes out more performane then the GPU-support will add - at least for native GH4 8bit footate out of the camera that I use here at the moment. With effects I am not sure yet).
- If I wish to stick to the Quadro for s3D and 10bit, maybe it would be worthwile to test as second card a GTX570/580/590. Or to exchange the Quado K2000 to the Quadro K2200 - what has more power at least in CUDA-cores (but I know that this is not the most important point to support Vegas).

To the other questions:
- yes it was a fresh installation of win 8.1 64 bit. Have not updated to Win10 by now
- Vegas was also installed fresh

There still could be something wrong with that machine. The GPU does not take over video playback or offload the CPU for video playback GPU support in Vegas handles complex calculations faster than the CPU can alone. You are basically just adding compute performance to your CPU. OpenCL has virtual compute units on your CPU, and the GPU has a set as well, both work together as one item. CPUs work in MFLOPs and GPUs work in GFLOPs for floating point calculations.

You mainly see the most benefit from your GPU when working in 32bit FP modes, and with complex effects for example G.Blur or defocus. Sony Min and Max is especially hard and really works the CPU+GPU OpenCL pairing.

Some codecs are also more optimized in Vegas and will utilize both the CPU and GPU pairing better than others. Straight clip playback may not be difficult enough to exhibit the benefits of the pairing.

Download a copy of "AMD System Monitor" and verify you are getting GPU assist when playing back a clip with Sony Min and Max enabled.

Very true that there still can something be wrong with the setup. I will check out the AMD system monitor, but I think that it would also be worthwile to deinstall the Quadro card and the nvidia drivers, and see what happens then in the playback performane.

And sure, we expect to see the GPU support in playback of things like color corrected clips, tansitions, and so on. My machine runs through a longer simple transition of two UHD 24p clips in 8bit without reducing 24 fps - but with enabled GPU support you drop down in fps stronger!

So sure, playback of pure clips could not be enough - but on the other hand if the system looses performance when playing back native clips only then one may tend to question the pairing of GPU and CPU. Especially if the GPU used (R9 290/390X) is one of the best GPUs for Vegas that we have identified fpr Vegas here over the last years.

Unfortunately I am also aware that the GPU support was not improved in Vegas since some years. So it was a nightmare to see that most of the newer GPU-cards was not supported in a great way - we saw support for the old gtx 500 serie, but how long did it take to come up with support for the gtx 600 cards? And for the latest gtx 900 serie we still have no support at all. So in other words: I do not expect here wonders. But still testing is not finished.

Try a different RAM preview setting. Mine is always at the default 200MB.

Sure, I typically test different internal ram preview settings, since I agree with you that this has a significant impact to the preview performance. I tend to use figures like 0, 16, 125, 250, 500, 1000, 2000, 5000 MB to get an impression about that.

On my new system the sweet spot seems to be about 125 MB - at least for the footage that I use for the first tests. So similar to you. Much higher allocations to the internal ram seems not to improve the performance (even if there are 32 GB in the system).

My impression is that the reduction in the preview performance with an enabled GPU acceleration is more significant, compared o the impact of the internal ram allocation.

Something must be wrong with your system. There is no CPU in the market that would be fast enough to negate the use of a 390X GPU in Vegas; unless there is something wrong with your 390X or Win 8.1, I am on Win 10 already and skipped the whole 8, 8.1 totally.
Which driver are you using for the 390X?

The drivers are the latest Gigabyte drivers for the card
http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=5533#dl
so the 15.20.1046. So that should not be an issue for the performance.

Hmmm, but what else could be wrong? I do not think that Win 8.1 64bit is the issue. I think about to go for Win10 too - with a second system-SSD.

I know that the native GH4 footage is not the best case to test the GPU acceleration (but I have the finding that the fps decreases with native GH4 footage on my machine when I enable the 390X). That should not be - since we will have native footage in our projects and that must work too.

Well, the i7 5960X is a quite fast processor. Even without GPU support a 32 bit floating point project with native GH4 footage runs with the full fps. So I still the possibility that GPU acceleration could not add enough performance in that case.

If that is not true, then the only point could be still the mixture of nvidia and amd drivers. To test that I can pull out the Quadro from the system and deinstall the nvidia driver and see what performance I have then.