Sony Vegas Platinum and Pro

Discussion in 'Professional Video Production' started by Mxsmanic, Apr 30, 2011.

  1. Mxsmanic

    Mike Kujbida Guest

    Allow me to re0phrase ushere's comment.
    You have no idea what you're talking about with respect to the 64 bit
    version of Vegas as it most definitely equates to better performance.
    Mike Kujbida, May 8, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  2. I'm curious why (with the same hardware and software, except
    for using Vegas Pro 8 32-bit on XP 32-bit with 4 gigs of RAM
    installed versus Vegas Pro 9 64-bit on Win 7 64-bit with 6 gigs
    of RAM) render times for the same 18-second clip were nearly
    identical, as were timeline playing smoothness (or lack thereof).
    I just wanna know since I did expect improved performance,
    which I did not appear to get... :-(
    David Ruether, May 8, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  3. Mxsmanic

    Mike Kujbida Guest

    David, more CPU power is the only thing that will make a major
    difference in render times.
    Going from 32-bit to 64-bit will improve timeline as well as overall
    Vegas performance but has virtually no effect on render times.

    Mike Kujbida, May 8, 2011
  4. Mxsmanic

    Mxsmanic Guest

    A 64-bit architecture provides direct access to more memory ... and nothing

    This in turn means that all else being equal, applications that run in 64-bit
    mode will show better performance IF they require a lot of memory to achieve
    that performance. In theory, video editors would be in this category, but not
    necessarily at all times or in all situations.

    Rendering is a CPU-intensive activity that depends little on available memory,
    so it would not necessarily show any improvement on 64-bit hardware.

    I would expect to see a different in operations that require moving vast
    amounts of data into, out of, or around in memory. Remember, though, that
    well-written software will eschew the transfer of huge blocks of memory in
    favor of changing pointers, and will optimize the use of memory so that file
    I/O is minimized, so the better the software is, the less difference you'd
    expect to see between 32-bit and 64-bit versions. Poor software that wastes
    memory like there's no tomorrow might improve considerably in performance in a
    64-bit environment.
    Mxsmanic, May 8, 2011
  5. Mxsmanic

    Mxsmanic Guest

    If it has the same code base as the 32-bit version, there are definite
    limitations to the gains that are possible with 64-bit hardware.

    For example, 1 gigabyte of RAM can hold about 5 seconds of uncompressed HD
    video, and that's the theoretical maximum, not the practical maximum. It
    follows, then, that 16 gigabytes can hold about 80-90 seconds of video. So
    with 16 gigabytes on a 64-bit machine, you can hold 70 extra seconds of video
    or so in memory. Out of a 2-hour documentary, that doesn't amount to much.
    You're still not going to be able to skip around and preview different parts
    of the documentary at random with improved performance, because you're going
    to have to do disk I/O, whether you have 1 gigabyte or 16.

    Compression? Yes, you can compress the data in memory, so that you can fit
    more in memory at one time. But then you are trading memory savings for CPU
    power. Any form of compression requires decompression each time you have to
    render something, and you have to render things a lot during editing
    operations (every time you move the scrubber, every time you preview, etc.).
    Plus, you have to find memory for the uncompressed version each time you
    render, so memory management gets more complex, and fragmentation and garbage
    collection get worse.

    There's no magic in 64-bit, in other words. Some operations will go more
    quickly, but others won't change at all.

    The quality of the code is paramount. I recall seeing Microsoft's lame,
    short-lived answer to Photoshop, which they called PhotoDraw (I think), and
    even though it could use more memory, it was 100 times slower than Photoshop.
    Adobe had lots of experience in the careful management of limited amounts of
    memory, whereas the developers at Microsoft did not (at least with respect to
    graphics applications), and it showed. In general, photo editing programs ran
    up against this decades ago, and then video came along and ran up against the
    same problems years later. Video needs orders of magnitude more memory, but
    the principles are the same.
    Mxsmanic, May 8, 2011
  6. Most playback is accelerated by the graphics card hardware.
    In some cases encoding to .xxx format is also done by the GPU.
    In such cases that is the remaining bottle neck.
    64 bits can be wasteful of memory too.
    If your system uses hardware acceleration and encoding,
    then I would expect to see very little difference between a 32 and 64 bit OS.
    Jan Panteltje, May 8, 2011
  7. Yes, but...
    "...render times for the same 18-second clip were nearly identical
    [covered in your response], as were timeline playing smoothness
    (or lack thereof)." It was the lack of improvement with the latter that
    was the more disappointing of the two aspects. I would like to have
    smooth timeline playback, even if the filters must be disabled and
    RAM previews must be made for transitions. This would help a lot,
    and it is *almost* there in my set-up, but it is still too far from "good
    enough" for adequacy for judging timings and flow. Too bad moving
    to 64-bit software did not improve anything noticeably - except for
    providing longer available RAM previews...
    David Ruether, May 8, 2011
  8. Mxsmanic

    J. Clarke Guest

    Are you monitoring RAM utilization in Windows Performance Monitor?

    The major benefit of going to 64 bit is that it allows large amounts of
    RAM to be accessed--if you're seeing significant paging then more RAM
    will probably help.
    J. Clarke, May 8, 2011
  9. Yes, but, "Too bad moving to 64-bit software did not improve anything
    noticeably - except for providing longer available RAM previews..."
    This last is a distinct advantage, and likely why I will stay with Vegas
    64-bit, but I sure was hoping for better timeline playback of AVCHD
    material which I did not get (and an improved CPU and/or an expensive
    CUDA video card is not a possibility for quite a while - even assuming
    that these would help noticeably more than what I have already tried...).
    David Ruether, May 9, 2011
  10. Mxsmanic

    J. Clarke Guest

    Have you looked at paging during other operations?
    J. Clarke, May 9, 2011
  11. Mxsmanic

    mike Guest

    And the right graphics card.
    Even then, it depends on the software.
    Vegas Pro 10 takes some advantage of specific CUDA-enabled Nvidia and
    ATI cards.
    From the Vegas site:
    "GPU-accelerated rendering performance will vary depending on your
    specific hardware configuration
    If you have an older CPU and a newer GPU, rendering using the GPU may
    improve render times."
    mike, May 9, 2011
  12. The Vegas software appears to be pretty well locked. It seems to check
    both harddisk and CPU serial numbers. I just had the bad surprise as I
    wanted to get a larger drive (which is not unusual when you begin to
    process HD videos).
    Laszlo_Lebrun, May 10, 2011
  13. I did'nt get a chance to use Pro. Does it involve the GPU of your
    graphic card to drop down rendering time?

    By the way: I don't care, if the final rendering takes 2 hours or 6.
    I usually sleep longer.

    Regarding the features, I really miss the multi-cam function...
    Laszlo_Lebrun, May 10, 2011
  14. Mxsmanic

    Mxsmanic Guest

    I believe all versions will use the GPU, but I'm not sure. If they use the
    same code base, logically they would, and logically the same code base would
    be used, because that's the cheapest way to write and maintain the product.
    I just do something else while it renders. I've usually been editing for some
    time by the time I render, anyway, so a break is in order by then.
    I see mention of multi-cam features for the Platinum version, but I only have
    one camera, so I've never looked into it.
    Mxsmanic, May 10, 2011
  15. Mxsmanic

    Mxsmanic Guest

    Did Sony fix it for you?

    Things like that aren't too much of a problem for me, as long as customer
    service is reactive. What I don't like is rootkits or other secret software
    being installed behind my back.

    I haven't upgraded any Adobe products since they installed a rootkit in their
    CS line of products. Without realizing it, by including malware in their
    products, they've helped me to realize that it isn't really necessary to
    upgrade every six months to begin with.
    Mxsmanic, May 10, 2011
  16. Ideally one should have invented the notebook with two hard disks...
    Laszlo_Lebrun, May 10, 2011
  17. yes, but it's annoying.
    Tie the software to the processor were OK, but why processor AND harddisk?
    Laszlo_Lebrun, May 10, 2011
  18. Mxsmanic

    Ptas Guest

    A quick question:
    Does that work the same way as Photoshop which is registered on certain
    machine but if you want to move it to another comuter you need to unregister
    and register on new one?


    Ptas, May 10, 2011
  19. Mxsmanic

    J. Clarke Guest

    They have existed in the past. The price was more weight and less
    battery life. Many notebooks today have eSATA ports, that let you plug
    in an external drive with full performance.
    J. Clarke, May 10, 2011
  20. Mxsmanic

    ushere Guest

    ushere, May 10, 2011
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.