The Vegas Creative Software Support Community – Find help here
VP17(321) Computer not enough cores or bug/setting to fix?
wrote on 10/17/2019, 10:55 PM
I can playback a single 4k60p file at 60fps fine on vp17, but playback of same file on 3 tracks slightly offset give 1.5fps. VP17 doesn't use all my CPU, about 60%. I have slow I7 6700 4 core cpu, but vegas is not maxing out my CPU, so is it really slow computer/not enough cores fault?
My six-core machine plays some UHD-60 FPS at full frame rate.
Six cores and an NVMe drive doesn't fall to 1.5 FPS, though.
See my signature for full machine specs.
wrote on 10/18/2019, 1:51 AM
You have your display on Best/FULL also. I was using preview/half. Yet you have no problems. I just noticed in that screen cap of mine, cpu frequency dropped to 2.7ghz. I'ts an i76700 with base frequency of 3.4ghz, and boost to 4ghz. I don't think cpu should ever drop below 3.4ghz when under load unless it's been thermally throttled
I have to check if it's my own hardware problem to fix now, and run some thermal throttling tests. Maybe 60% cpu is enough to throttle so it does not go above that, although i'm sure I've seen other software near 100% for prolonged periods. Need to rule out throttling first though
For optimal performance, Magix recommend the following minimum system requirements. Processor: 6th Generation Intel Core i5 (or AMD equivalent) or better. 2.5 Ghz and 4 Core minimum. For 4k, 7th Generation Intel Core i7 (or AMD equivalent) or better. 3.0 Ghz and 8 Core minimum
I'm confused by the requirements For 4k, 7th Generation Intel Core i7 (or AMD equivalent) or better. 3.0 Ghz and 8 Core minimum As far as I can see the 7th generation i7 has 4 physical cores but 8 logical cores.
Here is a screenshot from the task manager CPU performance of my i7-4790K during 1 minute of intensive 4K editing in V17 (no proxy files) 60mbs XAVCS. It shows there are 4 cores but 8 logical processors. This is in Preview (half) at 25fps. It doesnt look unduly stressed, so it works ok but maybe not optimal. In Good (Full) it will preview at 25fps but on a cross-fade dips down to 17fps.
wrote on 10/18/2019, 8:43 AM
I've done my thermal throttling test, and my computer holds up during a 5 minute 100% cpu stress test, and can maintain 3.68ghz 100%cpu with no thermal throttling. To me this says there's something wrong with VP17. It doesn't work with 4 core cpu's to such an extent that my processor which is on power optimisation mode actually reduced clock speed to 2.7ghz to save power due to VP17's inability to utalise cpu
My understanding(from memory) is that if software doesn't need the cpu at high frequency it reduces clock in balanced mode, and high performance mode never reduces clock below base frequency even if nothing is using cpu. Hmm yes I should do test again in high performance mode
but playback of same file on 3 tracks slightly offset give 1.5fps
What exactly is "slightly offset?"
You are not spanning frame boundaries, are you?
wrote on 10/18/2019, 10:07 PM
If I have the track duplicated 3 times and in sync I get 60fps, no slowdown, but when aligning tracks with frame offset (1 second as example) such as can be seen in @john_dennis picture I get the slow down. I thought maybe with all frames synced VP17's transparent cache builds faster and sticks, but with the offset there's too much data to cache (just a wild guess to explain)
I also forgot to explain I had transparency set to 33.3% on each of the 3 tracks. I did this as 100% was more likely not to see the slowdown,
I also forgot to explain I had transparency set to 33.3% on each of the 3 tracks.
So, rather than decode and display each frame in time without intrusion, your Vegas machine must now render every pixel in each frame in realtime and attempt to preview it to the absolute maximum your combined hardware will allow.
You seem to have high expectations. Perhaps if you think of your media as no longer being video the very second you touch it, it will help.
Ok, Mr. CPU, let's recode frame #1 for preview:
8 x 4 x 256 x 3840 x 2160 = 67,947,724,800 CPU calculations. Yes, thats 68 trillion.
Ok, now for frame #2 ...
wrote on 10/18/2019, 10:50 PM
Yes, I saw the problems with transitions, they are computationally taxing, so I creates equivalent of a long tripple transition to test. I have tried playing the clip with frame offset on loop with media player, 3 at a time. This was to make sure it wasn't Nvdec that was being over taxed. They played fine with no slow down.
I wonder if VP17 is different to previous vegas's in that it's computational ability is more dependant on parallelisation across many physical cores, and it can't utalise all the power of my cpu due to only having 4 cores. If vegas was running at 90+ percent and I see timeline slowdown all makes sense, but 40-60% cpu and slowdown? I still hope it's something technical that can be fixed or there is a work around
On ark.intel.com I found that your i7-6700 is very much equivalent to my old i7-3770(k) except for the die shrink and the on-die video adapter. I ran the same test on the 3770k with the following results:
Vegas Pro 14 without an add-in video adapter. GPU acceleration was not available under these conditions.
Single track (upper tracks muted)
Three tracks (10 frame offset, ~75 opacity on top two tracks)
My conclusion: This CPU is not enough to process that kind of video source without some help from a GPU. Notice that I actually did achieve ~100% CPU utilization.
Did you ever identify your GPU?
wrote on 10/19/2019, 1:14 AM
My gpu is Nvidia Gtx1070
I agree with you that 4k60p on my cpu is not useable on the older vegas's without gpu decoding (only intel QSV available). Playing a single file, just as in your example is too much, and CPU does what you would expect, maxes out. Everything makes sense
But GPU decoding on Vegas17 does allow me to play these files at 60p in PREVIEW/HALF and allow limited editing. This 3 track transition example makes the editor unuseable, BUT unlike the older vegas's it only uses half the cpu.. I do notice that GPU decoding is at 55%, which is exactly what is expected for decoding 3x4k60p files simultaneously (It is same in Resolve), al the frames decoded, but they're not all being processed by vegas on cpu side
This is Resolve doing the same test with 3x 4k60p files. Cpu is lacking, as the load is high but unlike vegas it plays at 60fps and you do see the expected high cpu use. Resolve (studio) always had the advantage over vegas in that it did discrete gpu decoding but now you see both software utalising gpu the same at 55%, but timeline performance and cpu utilisation is much lower than expected on Vegas17