My cpu is a C2D 2.66 GHz, 4 GB RAM and a NVidia GT240 system.
Text titler (VMS11) is not as simple, but far more powerful in terms of animation than VMS10. Reminds me of a cross between proDAD's Heroglyph and Boris Graffitti. Haven't tried the NewBlue titler yet. The new VMS titler doesn't seem to have as many templates to start from as some others (eg Heroglyph).
Video preview for 1920x1080 AVCHD is much improved. Before on an initial view in the timeline, it would skip 20 frames or so at a time. No real skipping was seen in VMS 11. Big improvement.
New render dialogs. I guess it makes it easier for those new to the software. I didn't see much gain from it (behind the windows are the same advanced windows).
A quick render test for 30 s 1920x1080/60i AVCHD (stereo) to the same template - VMS 10 (3min 38s); VMS 11 6min 10s (cpu) and 4 min40 s (gpu specified). These seem to be borne out in various reviews already popping up on the internet. VMS11 is slower encoding than VMS 10. Also, regardless of choice for VMS 11 (gpu or cpu), CPU utilization was between 70-80%. Seems strange to me as I would have thought with cpu rendering that it would go to ~100% usage. I sure hope they get an update to address that! I can't imagine the HDD writes are the bottleneck.
Need to find a tutorial on making anaglyphic 3D video with Vegas to see where that leads me.
Feel free to post post other general observations re: VMS 11 vs. VMS 10 in this thread.
Text titler (VMS11) is not as simple, but far more powerful in terms of animation than VMS10. Reminds me of a cross between proDAD's Heroglyph and Boris Graffitti. Haven't tried the NewBlue titler yet. The new VMS titler doesn't seem to have as many templates to start from as some others (eg Heroglyph).
Video preview for 1920x1080 AVCHD is much improved. Before on an initial view in the timeline, it would skip 20 frames or so at a time. No real skipping was seen in VMS 11. Big improvement.
New render dialogs. I guess it makes it easier for those new to the software. I didn't see much gain from it (behind the windows are the same advanced windows).
A quick render test for 30 s 1920x1080/60i AVCHD (stereo) to the same template - VMS 10 (3min 38s); VMS 11 6min 10s (cpu) and 4 min40 s (gpu specified). These seem to be borne out in various reviews already popping up on the internet. VMS11 is slower encoding than VMS 10. Also, regardless of choice for VMS 11 (gpu or cpu), CPU utilization was between 70-80%. Seems strange to me as I would have thought with cpu rendering that it would go to ~100% usage. I sure hope they get an update to address that! I can't imagine the HDD writes are the bottleneck.
Need to find a tutorial on making anaglyphic 3D video with Vegas to see where that leads me.
Feel free to post post other general observations re: VMS 11 vs. VMS 10 in this thread.