Vegas render and frame rate test.

OldSmoke wrote on 7/10/2014, 1:09 PM

Use the SCS Benchmark project. If you cant find it anymore here is a link to it http://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bz4okF1D_ux5WWZiZTdHc2J0dnc&usp=sharing

Jerry K wrote on 7/10/2014, 1:21 PM

OldSmoke any chance you might have a link for that test.

Jerry K

OldSmoke wrote on 7/10/2014, 1:23 PM

See my earlier post.

Jerry K wrote on 7/10/2014, 1:59 PM

Okay OldSmoke, once I download the file put it on my timeline I'm good to go. Now if I go to this link:

http://www.hyperactivemusic.com/vegaspro/vegaspro.html

I think the test numbers at this link use the same download file, is that correct? If yes I could compare my numbers with there's and that will give me some idea of how my system compares with different systems.

Jerry K

OldSmoke wrote on 7/10/2014, 2:05 PM

Yes, Jerry this where we submitted our results too and there is already a GTX470 in the list.

Jerry K wrote on 7/10/2014, 2:16 PM

So results on that page should be good for comparisons if the render file matches what you sent me?

Jerry K

OldSmoke wrote on 7/10/2014, 3:55 PM

Yes. But every system is different too.

Jerry K wrote on 7/11/2014, 2:07 PM

I could not find the .veg file for the Sony Vegas render test:

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bz4okF1D_ux5YUxCU0NMeUtOak0&usp=sharing&tid=0Bz4okF1D_ux5WWZiZTdHc2J0dnc

Maybe I'm missing something please help.

Jerry Katz

OldSmoke wrote on 7/11/2014, 3:40 PM

Jerry

Look harder, I am sure it's there now :-)

skosh wrote on 7/11/2014, 6:19 PM

I wanted to try this test as well and see a PDF with the media folder from the provided link. In the media folder there are 8 files and no veg file. I do not see the file either OldSmoke. Can others check and report if they see the veg?

OldSmoke wrote on 7/11/2014, 6:24 PM

I uploaded it up after Jerry mentioned he cant find it, it should be there.

Jerry K wrote on 7/11/2014, 6:31 PM

Okay i'm trying to figure out how to bring the render test in to Sony Vegas. Here's what I see when I open the media folder.

SCS-Benchmark › Media8 items

Background music.sfk1/20/12Andreas Skof
Background music.wav1/20/12Andreas Skof
Mercedes Clip 1 AVCHD 1080p30.m2ts.sfk1/20/12Andreas Skof
Mercedes Clip 2 MPEG-2 XDCAM EX 1080p30.mp4.sfk1/20/12Andreas Skof
Mercedes Clip 3 MPEG-2 XDCAM 422 - 50mbps 1080p30.mxf.sfk1/20/12Andreas Skof
VP11_Title.tif1/20/12Andreas Skof
vp11_type_white1920x1080.PNG1/20/12Andreas Skof
vp11_type_white1920x1080_blue.PNG1/20/12Andreas Skof

What needs to be done to make this work?
No .veg file in the list is that correct? I thought you always needed a .veg file.

Jerry K

skosh wrote on 7/11/2014, 6:35 PM

It is there now however was not when I posted for some reason. Thanks Oldsmoke!

OldSmoke wrote on 7/11/2014, 6:36 PM

The veg files is there, at least it's now. I must have switched off my PC before it was completely uploaded to Google drive... sorry for that.

Jerry K wrote on 7/11/2014, 6:39 PM

Thanks OldSmoke I see it now.

skosh wrote on 7/12/2014, 8:07 PM

Here are the results from the Sony render test on my laptop running Vegas 13.

XDCAM:
CPU: 3:55
GPU: 1:35

MainConcept:
CPU: 4:09
GPU: 3:25 w/4096 preview 3:00 w/200 preview

Preview: 12-15fps

After speaking with Jerry he pointed me to this post http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=889595&Replies=65 and once I changed the RAM preview to 200 the fps was a low of 22 with mostly in the mid 20s and maxed for a fair amount of time. Definitely better than before. Hope this helps someone. It also produced renders for MainConcept GPU 25 seconds faster. I had Dynamic RAM preview set quite high at times(4096) for a longer prerendered preview but did not know how that would somehow affect rendering performance or preview. Even going from 200 to 400 made a huge difference.

Thanks Jerry and OldSmoke.

JohnnyRoy wrote on 7/13/2014, 8:27 AM

> "I had Dynamic RAM preview set quite high at times(4096) for a longer prerendered preview but did not know how that would somehow affect rendering performance or preview. Even going from 200 to 400 made a huge difference."

Try zero (0) as well. I just had a 29.97 project that was playing back at around 18 fps and I set my RAM Preview to zero and it jumped up to 29.97 full frame rate. I have the same question as you... why would RAM Preview affect playback rate that much when it's just supposed to be a cache/buffer to improve frame rate? Very strange!

~jr

Jerry K wrote on 7/15/2014, 10:23 AM

Talking about changing ram size for better playback or rendering time.

Why can't Vegas have playback buffering like youtube, Vimeo and Netflix does for smoother playback or is this just an internet technology?

Jerry K

skosh wrote on 7/17/2014, 7:45 PM

Jerry,

The examples you mention(Youtube/Vimeo/NetFlix) are video that already has been rendered and the buffering is to make sure it plays smoothly.The number crunching to render has already taken place and the only goal is to stream it fast enough. In Vegas or any NLE for that matter you are dealing with various footage that eventually needs to be rendered for the final output. The RAM settings I mentioned deal with the preview on the timeline and the settings can make a very big difference on the timeline for preview as well as rendering. On my machine the sweet spot is 200-250 for a nice preview and render time however bumping that value up if you have RAM allows you to render to RAM various segments which can be useful for a quick preview. For me changing to a larger value for a RAM preview results in a much slower render and preview. If I stick with 200-250 I can render much faster however the preview drops considerably. Hope that helps.