V12- which nvidia boards def work?

vicmilt wrote on 11/11/2012, 12:28 AM
Bought a new computer:
i7 3440
16 Gig ram
Runs v12 great with built in video
Installed GeForce GT 630
Computer crashed on startup at "loading Gpu"
Pulled card - finished job.

Spoke to Nvidia "GT series too weak for Vegas - you need GTX or Quadro"

Installed Ge Force GTX670 - same problem...crash on load at "installing GPU"

Anyone using this board?
Should I trade again for a Quadro?
Or is this a system error?

Thoughts please?
Is there a way to by pass loading GPU acceleration on start up?

Comments

PeterWright wrote on 11/11/2012, 1:52 AM
Hi Vic,

Yes, I have a GTX 670 working ok, and since V12 and W8 I have been able to enable GPU rendering in Vegas.

Not sure where the difference lies...

Peter
fordie wrote on 11/11/2012, 2:15 AM
Sony do state Nvidia boards based on fermi. So technically the 5 series or quadro boards are supported. From what i have read on reviews, there is little to be gained with Cuda using a 6 series board.
I am using a gtx 560ti 480 core and its fine. I did have issues though until i uninstalled all graphics drivsrs and ran driver cleaner prior to reinstalling. I also found the older drivers 280.? Were good with the newer drivers causing lots of crashes. ( newer drivers also caused problems with other software, i will never update them now all is working smoothly)
I must say after the latest vegas update, everything runs well and i have not had one crash.
John.
(happy vegas user )
Grazie wrote on 11/11/2012, 2:44 AM
My thoughts Vic? Nobody here is qualified enough to comment. Well, comment maybe, but not to be able to give a clear spin on this. We're still waiting for SCS to instruct us on the best way forward.

On previous build of VP12 I've had failure with my nVidua card enabled for acceleration, and had got a "new" error message, I'd not seen before, inviting me to disable my card. Now, on B394, I get little or rather NO advantage I can tell with the card enabled.

I believe I have the best set of drivers installed and I do see very fast renders, faster than real time.

As I said, still waiting for a direction on this from SCS.

Grazie.



Grazie wrote on 11/11/2012, 2:55 AM
And that any "evidence" of a better direction, from us, will only be well-meant experiential evidence and NOT based in IT-science coming from SONY.

G

mikkie wrote on 11/11/2012, 9:32 AM
> "Installed Ge Force GTX670 - same problem...crash on load at "installing GPU""

Might consider Process Monitor from sysinternals at microsoft.com -- going through the logs you can make & save while VP is loading you should be able to tell if it's a problem that occurs when or while VP is loading the GPU stuff, or if that's just what you see in the progress report, e.g. it could be whatever loads right after the GPU stuff & VP crashes before it can display anything else. There are also software tools you can use to try & make sure your graphics hardware is working properly, & you can check Windows logs too -- it might or might not show anything when VP crashes, but it also might show a problem with your graphics hardware when Windows loads.

If the problem is your graphics card, hit up the forums where they talk about Nvidia graphics & research driver removal procedures & tools, then install the recommended driver setup per their instructions.
JJKizak wrote on 11/11/2012, 12:25 PM
I use the GTX 8800 512 but it's the old Cuda 1 stuff and I think they are up to Cuda 5 now. Lots of variables in what you want to know.
JJK
dxdy wrote on 11/11/2012, 12:46 PM
My EVGA GeForce GTX 660ti is working fine with VP 12.0 in my it-3770k (not overclocked). Using the Main Concept MP4 template, there is no difference in elapsed time for "CPU only", "Open CL", and "CUDA" for my typical render (1920 x 1080 60i source, lots of chromakey effect). I did have to move up to the Beta 310.33 Nvidia driver.
Grazie wrote on 11/11/2012, 3:41 PM
We should not be needing to futz about like this.

G

videoITguy wrote on 11/11/2012, 3:45 PM
Totally agree Graham, if you by a new video card, don't buy very hi-end - stick with $100 street cards, and if it is GPU oriented, turn-off GPU for heavens sake. AND SCS get your act together and turn-off GPU assist rendering in the code so we can get stability back to our fav NLE. And oh yes stop including flaky plug-ins that are supposed to work with GPU.
BruceUSA wrote on 11/11/2012, 5:17 PM
I am building a new PC soon. I am gonna go with GTX570 and a 3930k CPU. The new 6 series cards don't seems to do well for most people. Basic on that I am stay with the 5 series card.

Intel i7 12700k @5.2Ghz all P Cores, 5.3@ 6 Core, Turbo boost 3 Cores @5.4Ghz. 4.1Ghz All E Cores.                                          

MSI Z690 MPG Edge DDR5 Wifi                                                     

TEAMGROUP T-Force Delta RGB 32GB DDR5 -6200                     

Samsung 980 Pro x4 Nvme .M2 1tb Pcie Gen 4                                     

ASRock RX 6900XT Phantom 16GB                                                        

PSU Eva Supernova G2 1300w                                                     

Black Ice GTX 480mm radiator top mount push/pull                    

MCP35X dual pump w/ dual pump housing.                                

Corsair RGB water block. RGB Fan thru out                           

Phanteks Enthoo full tower

Windows 11 Pro

Highway wrote on 11/11/2012, 6:18 PM
they have a beta driver that u may want to try. it fixed my issue whiched seemed to be the same as yours
JohnnyRoy wrote on 11/12/2012, 7:09 AM
I've been using the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 since Vegas Pro 10.0 thru 12.0 now and it's been solid as a rock. This is one case where you get what you pay for. If you are a professional such as yourself, there is no reason to be using cheap "gamer" cards to do professional video work. If your time is worth money, just get a Quadro 4000 and stop wasting valuable time.

~jr
Grazie wrote on 11/12/2012, 8:05 AM
Jr? How would I know that? How would I know the value of a QUADRO.? How did you know about the value of the QUADRO when you started at VP10?

Cheers

Grazie

paul_w wrote on 11/12/2012, 8:13 AM
And i'd like to add to that, if the Quadro 4000 card is the only acceptable "professional" card for Vegas then SCS should remove their specification for the GTX 5xx range or cards from their recommended spec list - with immediate effect. And may even consider compensation for those of use who made an investment in 5xx cards for v11. Could i have my £300 back please? I wont hold my breath waiting.

Paul.
Former user wrote on 11/12/2012, 8:41 AM
I can't speak to the issues others are having, but I have a GTX 560 Ti with driver ver. 301.42 and no problems with my install of Vegas 12.
vicmilt wrote on 11/19/2012, 10:45 AM
Want to kill myself...

New NVidia GTX 670 board worked perfectly for about a week.

Sometimes needed two starts on Vegas to get it to boot.

Then without any changes or other suspects, it Vegas once again will not load past "initializing GPU accellerated video processing".

Now I DID use GPU accelleration and it sure was fast.

I looked for file io in Task Manager services and it does not exist in my 64bit system. - This BEFORE I even try to boot Vegas (and after crash as well).

It's possible my power supply is too weak (I'm not geek qualified, but it's only 350 watts) - but the computer starts and runs.

Otherwise - Win7 home, i7 3770, 16 gig ram, latest Nvida and Vegas updates.

Do I have to remove the board again? I need the board to work with After Effects, and it DID work with Vegas for about three four days.

How can I turn off the GPU accelleration before or while loading Vegas.

help??
gripp wrote on 11/19/2012, 10:59 AM
Using GTX 560 Ti with drivers 310.33 and not having any problems.
JohnnyRoy wrote on 11/19/2012, 11:01 AM
> "It's possible my power supply is too weak (I'm not geek qualified, but it's only 350 watts) - but the computer starts and runs."

I think you found the problem!

Go to the GTX 670 Specifications page on the NVIDIA site you'll see:

Minimum System Power Requirement (W): 500 W

Personally, I wouldn't build a video editing computer with less than a 850W PSU given the wattage of the new CPU's, GPU's and multiple hard drives that you know you are going to attach.

~jr
Grazie wrote on 11/19/2012, 11:07 AM
1kw here.

G
vicmilt wrote on 11/19/2012, 11:13 AM
Weary sigh... ok -

will it hurt anything to keep using the underpowered supply for the time being?
I'm NOT in the mood to rush out and buy a new one -
plus - are they difficult to replace (for a non-builder, with extreme courage)?

It looks easy enough in the various YouTube videos - and I did add power extensions to power up the GTX board.

What do you think - me or three days and a hundred bucks for a pro?

v
Oh yeah... and HI John and Grazie - believe it or not, I miss youse guys!
dlion wrote on 11/19/2012, 11:22 AM
+1, jr

850W or more, i have a similar system. if you can, go to 32gb ram. and an ssd boot disk.
JohnnyRoy wrote on 11/19/2012, 11:50 AM
> "will it hurt anything to keep using the underpowered supply for the time being?"

Only if you don't mind an unstable system because that's what happens when the PSU is underpowered... i.e., computers reboot or shut down in the middle of a render, etc.

> "plus - are they difficult to replace (for a non-builder, with extreme courage)?"

Is it a home built system or a stock system from Dell, etc.? If it's from Dell, changes are you can only buy the PSU from Dell because they tend to use non-standard motherboard connections to force you to pay a higher price for their parts. (which is why I would never recommend Dell) If it was from a boutique builder they probably used standard parts.

Is it difficult? That depends. There are two or three connectors that go to the motherboard and then the rest is a matter of replacing the power to everything that is currently powered (i.e., graphics card, hard drives, fans, etc.) If you remove each one a wire at a time, you should be able to match them up with the new PSU.

~jr
Grazie wrote on 11/19/2012, 12:07 PM
There's another "unseen" fail: Under-rated PSUs will generate MORE heat than over-rated. It's the nature of electricity. This in turn makes the PC box warm up faster and it will sustain the higher temps while your cooling system attempts to suck<>blow away the excessive heat. And while the fans are doing thus EXTRA work, guess what's happening? There is greater demand on the PSU. And what does that mean? The PSU gets hotter. And what does that mean?.... And so on an so forth. You come along and render OR use more of the GPU to do some sexy FXing and ...... you getting the picture?

Having had my fingers "burnt" with an under powered PSU before, I had my Vix builder slap in a 1kw PSU. Now, when I get all rowdy with Renders and monster FXing, I can hear the massive fan whisper into action for about 6 seconds and then the PC quiets down again. My ole box, the fan kicked in and the next thing you could hear was the next door neighbours banging on the walls complaining about the SCREAMING fan!

Grazie

vicmilt wrote on 11/19/2012, 12:53 PM
Well - turns out I had an older computer that was custom built with a 700 watt power supply.
As you know - it wasn't nearly as difficult to replace as you might originally fear.

So I got it in place - the computer is running just fine - but Vegas 12 still crashes on load up at the same place - "initializing GPU-accelerated processing" - which leads me to the same thing that worked before - removing the Nvidia card.

1 - I can't find the file io service anywhere to turn off GPU loading in Vegas before the load - is there a trick?
2 - Is there a way to disable the Nvidia board without removing it? Vegas 12 seemed to run fine on the built-in video that came with the computer (Intel HD).

All this tech stuff is brutal for a director/editor. I now know WAY more about the inside of computer than I ever wanted to - and it still is not working.