Tabulate Sony Vegas 12 speed without / with GPU - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 22 Old 07-29-2013, 10:51 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Did you ever wish there was a database showing Vegas 12 speed with various CPU/GPU options in actual use?

Data for this is currently sparse and typically not helpful to make a specific upgrade decision.

I'm building this tabulation, and would appreciate that all Vegas 12 users volunteer to help.

Objective: Users apply the resulting tabulation to predict performance before upgrading
Project: Generate a table of CPU / GPU performance with Vegas 12, scientificly from many users

Vegas 12 users - here's your chance to help others, and compare your results.

Every Vegas 12 User's measurement is important, from the most modest, to the fastest and most radical hardware.

This simple project takes as little as ten minutes.

Who has the fastest render time???

I am not affiliated with any vendor of hardware or software specified to be used in this benchmarking.

Vendors are encouraged to help and be included in the tabulation. Which CPU and graphics cards work well together, at the various price points?

Everyone is encouraged to be accurate. This is science.

Summary of steps for all those helping
  1. Use Vegas 12 with the 117MB test file I provide
  2. Run a particular "Render As" from the Vegas 12 File drop down menu.
  3. Vegas provides a built in "Elapsed time" readout, making the benchmark simple. No stopwatch is needed.
  4. Share your results, privately or publicly, including info of your CPU / GPU / Video card
  5. I will tabulate and post the results
  6. The exact procedure is shown in the following post

Privacy - You can "privately message" me with questions or results, or post them here publicly. I will not release any details about the "persons" that shared these results with me that did not also post them in the forum, but I will post the results in the tabulation unless you tell me not to. I will not contact you except to personally thank you and for a follow up question about your results, if needed.

The data will be collected and tabulated for a relatively short period of time, so get your results to me promptly.

Important - Use only my test file and only the specific "render" shown in the next post. Doing it this way results in scientific investigation which makes sense.

I'm also interested in tests done each possible way for your system
  • Using CPU based accelerator if applicable
  • Using your plug in PICE graphics card
  • With PCIE graphics card pluged in and not enabled for Vegas
  • Without any Graphics card plugged in, using on board/chip Graphics.
  • OR instead of unplugging graphics card, see post #21 below to temporarily disable the driver

I have seen systems where (4) above is faster than (3). Computers and software have no end of surprises. Some CPUs may do the render faster than the graphics card. It is understood that using a different approach may change the image quality slightly, even with the same render settings. You may use any configuration of hardware to do the measurement, provided they use Vegas 12 build 670 or later, use my test file, and also use the specific render listed.

If you have something non-standard, by all means let me know in your test results. This includes anything you want to tell me about, such as fast memory, Overclocking of CPU or GPU, water cooling, etc.

About the file I provided:
- It's from my Sony TD10 3D camcorder, containting a slow pan of memorabilia with background piano music from Strauss. It's a clip of about 30 seconds in 3D mode resulting in a 117MB file.

About the the "Render" method chosen - this is the same MVC H264 method used by Vegas to produce a bluray disk, but exludes the audio and iso building part of the process. The video encoding is the most time intensive part. Other effects aren't included.

See the following post for specific instructions on how to make a measurement.

"With Liberty, HDTV and Justice for all."
Richard Adams
Richard Adams is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 22 Old 07-29-2013, 10:52 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Here's the procedure to collect the benchmark for your own system

Note: I'm doing the tabulation of results. You only need to send me your particular results.

Even if you think you already know how, please following these instructions,

  1. Download and unzip test file from link below. The unzipped file is named "Adams_V12_BMF.m2ts"
    Here is the link for the test file which is a 117MB zip file:
    http://st7.us/bf1.zip
  2. Have Sony Vegas 12 installed and updated, preferred build is 670
  3. Close all other applications and programs
  4. Open sony vegas
  5. Do the following:"
    > FILE - Drop down
    > NEW
    > In the "New Project" selection window
    > Select Template "HD 1080-60i (1920x1080, 29.970 fps)
    > Select Stereoscopic 3D mode: Anaglyphic (red/cyan)
    > Press OK (to complete the new project selection)

    > FILE - Drop down
    > OPEN
    open the downloaded test file named "Adams_V12_BMF.m2ts"

    > FILE - Drop down
    > Render As...
    In the "Render As" Select "output format"
    > Sony AVC/MVC (*.mp4, *.m2ts, *.avc)
    > MVC 1920x1080-24p, 25Mbps video stream

    Make sure you picked the "Sony AVC/MPC" not another
    > Press the Render button
    > Enter a location for the resulting file, or use default
    The resulting files size is about 62MB

When the task finishes, the "Approximate time left" will be 0, and the "Elapsed time" will show the minutes and seconds that your machine took to do the job.

Write down the minutes and seconds to report back to me with the following.

Please approximate the following form info.

Partiulcar "system information" about you system can be found by typing "info" in the widows start menu search bar, and then click on "system information"

Date: ___________
Time: ___________
(From System Summary)
OS Name: ___________
Version: ___________
System Manufacturer: ______________
System Model: _____________
System type: ______________
Processor: ________________
Installed Physical memory: _______________

(From Components > Display)
Adapter Description: ________________
Adapter Ram: ________________
Driver Version: ________________

In Sony Vegas 12
> Help - drop down
> About Vegas Pro
Read where it says "Version 12.0"
Provide Build number such as "670" _____________

In Sony Vegas 12
> Options drop down
> Preferences
> Video (Tab)
> GPU acceleration of video processing: ___________
(read out your current selection)

Render time (Elapsed time for Render) : ________________

Size of your result file in exact bytes for verification: __________________

Any other helpful comments about your system such as overclocking speed or if this is a home built system you can provide your motherboard make and model number and particular memory used.

You may do the test several times to see if your results are consistent.
  • I'm also interested in tests done each possible way for your system
  • Using CPU based accelerator if applicable
  • Using your plug in PICE graphics card
  • With PCIE graphics card pluged in and not enabled for Vegas
  • Without any Graphics card plugged in, using on board/chip Graphics, if applicable
  • OR instead of unplugging graphics card, see post #21 below to temporarily disable the driver

Note: If you change the "GPU selection" in Vegas, please exit Vegas and and restart Vegas for the new selection to take effect.

Thanks in advance for contributing promptly.

"With Liberty, HDTV and Justice for all."
Richard Adams
Richard Adams is offline  
post #3 of 22 Old 07-30-2013, 10:21 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Richard- Your study is noble but unfortunately, it cannot be used as any real world comparison between different systems because there are too many variables that can influence the outcome not included in your study. At best it could be used as a "contest" as to whom has the faster system. smile.gif

One of the most obvious missing variables that can greatly affect the speed of the render is the media storage read / write time, including sector access time. If you did consider this part of the render system, I apologize having missed it in your report form. In my own tests I did well over a year ago, my original goal was to improve timeline playback but I discovered, by accident, a significant improvement in render times when not just media storage speeds were improved, but also how the temp files in the rendering process were allocated ( another variable you didn't consider in your proposal)

For example- In my own study, I found that a particular render of a project took 8 hours to complete, was reduced to approx 7 hours by going from a 3 Mbs SATA2 to a 6mbs SATA 3 hard drive for media storage. Then reduced to 5 hours when I switched to an SSD OCZ Vertex4 SSD for media file storage and finally, switching all my working drives in the system to the Vertex4 SSD drives for C drive, media source drive, and temp file drives (3 separate SSD drives) With this 3 SSD storage system, the final render time was down to 4 hours, about half what the original mechanical hard drive yielded. Plus, the original goal of realtime playback of 2 3D video clips with a dissolve could be played in realtime in full HD with these changes.

I think it is fairly obvious that improving component performance will reduce the render times, but absent a 100% duplicated system, trying to achieve 100% duplicated results would hardly be expected. So that begs the question, what does one hope to see in such a study besides a fun contest?

Here is a possible different approach to achieving the kind of information you desire, that is to make improvements on one's own system.

Recognizing there are already many studies that evaluate the hardware performance comparisons between models and brands that are performed in one platform so all other variables are constant. Some of these studies actually use tests inside software such as graphics cards running Vegas. Maybe a source catalog of these different test studies, such as links to Tom's Hardware and similar so one can select the best performing components. Then a step by step as to what minimums must be met to achieve a particular goal vs. cost to achieve. There will be rules of thumb that work such as when to decide to upgrade the CPU vs. the GPU in the system. Sometimes you can just swap out the CPU but others the decision may mean a complete rebuild of the system from the MB up, including new RAM. Here, the GPU may be a better route. I found studies from the GPU manufacturer helpful in deciding what model of graphics card would maximize my Vegas performance, based on the present CPU and MB. But that new GPU required faster file delivery to get the expected performance, thus the SSD array.
Don Landis is offline  
post #4 of 22 Old 07-30-2013, 10:41 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Don, you are correct that there are other factors besides those I asked for in the compilation.

My own benchmarking shows that since the encoding time is long, that other variables such as hard drive speed have a much lessor effect. I ran this using a system which was all SSDs and a system which was all 7200RPM hard drives. The difference was only a few percent.

The tabulation is not going to be a promise that a person using the same hardware would get the same results. It is intended to show a trend. It would help reduce instances of extreme dissatisfaction where people find little benefit from buying an expensive $$$ video card just for Vegas. I can give you links to those instances if you'd like.

Don, please download the file and run it with Vegas 12 using the particular "render as" listed. Please let me include you in the tabulation.

I recall you had already tuned up your system a while back to do this.

Results sent to me by PM will not disclose the person who submitted them.

Thanks for considering my request.

"With Liberty, HDTV and Justice for all."
Richard Adams
Richard Adams is offline  
post #5 of 22 Old 07-30-2013, 12:05 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Richard- Yes, there are systems that an SSD or several separate SSD's will have little affect over speed because the bottleneck in the system is the CPU or GPU/CPU not the hard drive. That was the case of my older Vegas computer, long since recycled.

Speaking of Bottlenecks, there is a really nice tool you can customize that will run in a side bar that will analyze your processes and storage drives, CPU's GPU's etc to let you know in real time where a bottleneck is slowing down your system. It also has a timeline so a "last few minutes" can be reviewed. When I get ready to run your test, I will get you the link to the bottleneck analyzer. That is a tool I have been running during my renders here to alert me when there is a problem.
Don Landis is offline  
post #6 of 22 Old 07-30-2013, 12:23 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

Richard- Yes, there are systems that an SSD or several separate SSD's will have little affect over speed because the bottleneck in the system is the CPU or GPU/CPU not the hard drive. That was the case of my older Vegas computer, long since recycled.

Speaking of Bottlenecks, there is a really nice tool you can customize that will run in a side bar that will analyze your processes and storage drives, CPU's GPU's etc to let you know in real time where a bottleneck is slowing down your system. It also has a timeline so a "last few minutes" can be reviewed. When I get ready to run your test, I will get you the link to the bottleneck analyzer. That is a tool I have been running during my renders here to alert me when there is a problem.

Excellent. I'm looking forward to it.

"With Liberty, HDTV and Justice for all."
Richard Adams
Richard Adams is offline  
post #7 of 22 Old 08-03-2013, 12:12 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 112
So, what did you think of the Bottleneck monitor?
Don Landis is offline  
post #8 of 22 Old 08-03-2013, 10:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TrickMcKaha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,016
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
When I built my system for 3D editing, I tested Vegas rendering with and without using the gpu acceleration. (I'm using an NVidia 460 with 2 gigs of ram on the card.) I found no faster rendering with the gpu acceleration enabled in Vegas compared to simply using the cpu only for rendering. Obviously, everything else in my system stayed constant.

My cpu is an Intel i5 - nothing spectacular but capable.

I haven't tested with Richard's test file, but I'd be interested to hear from anyone who finds gpu acceleration in Vegas to give any advantage in rendering times.

But also, I have not upgraded to Vegas 12, so my finding could be specific to the earlier versions of Vegas. I bet not, though.
TrickMcKaha is offline  
post #9 of 22 Old 08-04-2013, 12:32 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Trick- I use an AMD ATI Firepro V8800 which was recommended by SCS as the top performer for Vegas render and playback speed when it was released. Vegas V12 has some minor improvements in timeline playback and render speed as well. V12 also requires 64 bit OS My render times are typically 2.5 times faster with the Open CL GPU as opposed to with it shut off. That is dependent on the actuual task and varies slightly. The Firepro cost $1500 when I bought it but today you can find it for half that. It has 1600 stream processors which is considerably more than the nvidia card. My basic CPU is an i7 as well. Other important factors for speed are to run separate SSD drives for OS, temp storage, and media files. This way read/write can be done without waiting. I also have each of these drives on separate controllers.
Don Landis is offline  
post #10 of 22 Old 08-04-2013, 09:44 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Several topics here include 1) updating my test steps slightly, 2) The bottleneck program, and 3) some preliminary results.

My test steps above need to be updated to set Vegas 12 into 3D mode. If this is not done and the user's Vegas 12 defaults to non-3D mode, the 25mbps option of rendering will not appear.

To set this up, before loading my test file, do >File >New >select 1920x1080 29.97Hz, and select Anaglyph as stereoscopic mode. Then load my file.

The particular kind of stereographic mode selected (anaglyph for example) will not change the rendering time, but will allow the 25mbps option to appear.

Don, thanks for the bottleneck program although I am apprehensive that it is supported by ads. That could be annoying. I am already running various monitoring widgets, including from the motherboard manufacturer. This will have an effect on the rendering results, though I am not going to put people through the tribulations of tuning up their performance.

TrickMcKaha, Don and others, preliminary results show that the Firepro board Don mentioned is a good performer, but there are more economical ways to achieve even faster speeds, which my results will show when tabulated and published. I'd be interested in seeing the render time using my test file with the Corei5 with and without the 460 GPU. Thanks..

"With Liberty, HDTV and Justice for all."
Richard Adams
Richard Adams is offline  
post #11 of 22 Old 08-05-2013, 10:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TrickMcKaha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,016
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

... My render times are typically 2.5 times faster with the Open CL GPU as opposed to with it shut off. ...

Wow. That goes to show what can be achieved when you optimize a system.
TrickMcKaha is offline  
post #12 of 22 Old 08-06-2013, 01:07 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
TrickMcKaha, Don and others, preliminary results show that the Firepro board Don mentioned is a good performer, but there are more economical ways to achieve even faster speeds, which my results will show when tabulated and published.

I might note that the Firepro V8800 WAS the fastest card for Vegas Pro use 2.5 years ago when I learned about it. It is now a 3.5 year old technology. Today, there may be several faster performers and in a quick search the price point today for the V8800 is down to $499 in some outlets. I would also warn that you can't use benchmarks often published in the gaming world to call a video card best for Vegas Pro applications. It is really difficult to get good benchmark studies for our use. That is why I approached the engineers at SCS. In 2011, Sony was pushing the V8800 as the best of the best. When I built this computer, I tried 3 different graphics cards and for 3D playback and rendering none were satisfactory improvements over the CPU. However, we have to also consider that Vegas Pro was also of questionable quality to properly utilize the GPU as well. I believe that issue has been resolved.

I'm looking forward to seeing what cards you come up with, Richard, that are faster and better price point than the current price ( $499) of the V8800. If significant, I may consider upgrading since I would have a home for the V8800 in another computer. I will not consider spending over $500 for an upgrade since timeline playback now is fine and rendering times for my most robust timelines is quite reasonable.

Also, Richard, I reran the tests with your setting as anaglyph and it made no difference here either. I didn't think it would since the render is going to MVC anyway.

I am curious as to how many datapoints your study will include. I think Wolfgang and Joe Clark are both using faster CPU's than my i7. I'm curious as to how those CPU's affect the timing.
Don Landis is offline  
post #13 of 22 Old 08-06-2013, 10:23 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Joe Clark and Wolfgang - which CPUs are you using with Vegas?

"With Liberty, HDTV and Justice for all."
Richard Adams
Richard Adams is offline  
post #14 of 22 Old 08-06-2013, 11:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wolfgang S.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vienna/Austria
Posts: 1,133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 16
For me it is an i-7 2600K, overclocked to ~4.3 Ghz, 16 GB Ram. GPU GTX 570, together with a Quadro 2000D for the s3D preview with nvidia 3D-vision.

Kind regards,
Wolfgang
videotreffpunkt.com
Wolfgang S. is offline  
post #15 of 22 Old 08-07-2013, 09:59 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfgang S. View Post

For me it is an i-7 2600K, overclocked to ~4.3 Ghz, 16 GB Ram. GPU GTX 570, together with a Quadro 2000D for the s3D preview with nvidia 3D-vision.

Wolfgang, would you please consider to run the Vegas 12 render benchmark from this thread, with and without the GTX570 enabled? Thanks.

"With Liberty, HDTV and Justice for all."
Richard Adams
Richard Adams is offline  
post #16 of 22 Old 08-12-2013, 11:13 AM
Member
 
JOAT09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Richard, Do you have an email to send the results of your inquiry?
Regards
J.O.Alda
JOAT09 is offline  
post #17 of 22 Old 08-13-2013, 07:11 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Click on his name above and select send a private message.
Don Landis is offline  
post #18 of 22 Old 08-14-2013, 07:16 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOAT09 View Post

Richard, Do you have an email to send the results of your inquiry?
Regards
J.O.Alda

For this project, I can provide my email in a private message when needed.

"With Liberty, HDTV and Justice for all."
Richard Adams
Richard Adams is offline  
post #19 of 22 Old 08-15-2013, 03:14 AM
Member
 
JOAT09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi Adam, my results

gpu. quality. time. size.(KB) avc size (KB) mvc activity of GPU*
CPU only good 1,40 60.789 38272 25%
CPU only better 1,40 60.789 38272 25%

Yes good 1,35 68.687 43.565 18%
Yes better 1,34 68.687 43.565 18%

* the performance of catalyst gives a value of activity


surprises:
1st rendering quality good or the best no effect on the time
2nd GPU activity is lower when rendering with GPU
3rd the size of the final files is different.

OS Name: W7x64 updated

Processor: I7 3770K 4300MHz
Installed Physical memory: 8Gb
storage Revodrive 3x2 as C
GPU AMP HD 7950 PCI3 3.0 size 3072 Mb

Catalisyst 12.10
In Sony Vegas 12 "670"

greetings and good use

J.O. Alda
JOAT09 is offline  
post #20 of 22 Old 08-15-2013, 07:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TrickMcKaha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,016
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I do plan to measure on my system, but haven't yet.
TrickMcKaha is offline  
post #21 of 22 Old 08-15-2013, 09:31 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOAT09 View Post

Hi Adam, my results

gpu. quality. time. size.(KB) avc size (KB) mvc activity of GPU*
CPU only good 1,40 60.789 38272 25%
CPU only better 1,40 60.789 38272 25%

Yes good 1,35 68.687 43.565 18%
Yes better 1,34 68.687 43.565 18%

* the performance of catalyst gives a value of activity


surprises:
1st rendering quality good or the best no effect on the time
2nd GPU activity is lower when rendering with GPU
3rd the size of the final files is different.

OS Name: W7x64 updated

Processor: I7 3770K 4300MHz
Installed Physical memory: 8Gb
storage Revodrive 3x2 as C
GPU AMP HD 7950 PCI3 3.0 size 3072 Mb

Catalisyst 12.10
In Sony Vegas 12 "670"

greetings and good use

J.O. Alda

Thanks for posting your measurements.

I have heard that fast render times with CPU only can be increased by disabling the graphics driver.

This is done by temporarily uninstalling the graphics driver software.

To do this, use Control Panel > Add / Remove programs > uninstall (Nvidia or AMD) Graphics Driver.. Then do not reboot the system. As soon as the graphics driver is uninstalled, Windows will ask you to reboot the system, but do not reboot, since a re-boot can re-install the driver.

When the graphics driver is uninstalled, the display still works, but it will revert to an EVGA display resolution such as 1280x1024

Before rebooting, run the Vegas 12 render benchmark. Make a note of the speed and see if it is different than when the "GPU is off." So far I have two reports that the render time is much faster than "CPU only" by doing this. This seems to confirm that the GPU has some use even when it is "OFF," but uninstalling the driver gets around this temporarily for the benchmark test.

After completing the render benchmark, re-install the Graphics driver software.

Thank you for reading and considering this,
Richard

"With Liberty, HDTV and Justice for all."
Richard Adams
Richard Adams is offline  
post #22 of 22 Old 08-20-2013, 11:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wolfgang S.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vienna/Austria
Posts: 1,133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Adams View Post

Wolfgang, would you please consider to run the Vegas 12 render benchmark from this thread, with and without the GTX570 enabled? Thanks.

I have overseen that. But I can try to do that during the upcoming weekend, even if I am not sure if I find the time. You know, I am not at home during the week, and hat makes the weekends very short to me! smile.gif

Kind regards,
Wolfgang
videotreffpunkt.com
Wolfgang S. is offline  
Reply 3D Source Components

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off