I rendered a 50 minute 1080 24p project last night, it took 10 hours to render.

I rendered as a WMV 6.4mbps project.

anyone else have that kind of render time??

That is certainly possible depending on the source format, the output format, and what effects are used on the project.

Ian, you did not say what you're running. A Pentium 4 might take a day to render your project, and an i7 will take only a fraction of the same amount of time...

sorry, forgot to add that.

I was shooting on the ex3, so it was an MXF format, and there were no effects.

hahaha, forgot that too.

I am running a quad core pentium. no i7 as of yet.

You're rendering time sounds normal to me. Ouch, that is a long time though.

You're rendering time sounds normal to me. Ouch, that is a long time though.

ok, I wont freak about it too much then. but yeah, 10 hours was crazy, and I had two projects to render out.

If you are doing much more of these 1080 projects I can imagine you'll be upgrading your processor!

Yep, 1080 is a long way from DV! :)

This is why I just ordered an octo-core machine. My old editing suite was set up for DV work, and it struggles mightily with the HD coming off my EX1!

If you are doing much more of these 1080 projects I can imagine you'll be upgrading your processor!

indeed I will be. just dont tell my wife!

I usually render over night as I sleep or when I'm out.

I usually render over night as I sleep or when I'm out.

yeah, I rendered the first project when I was asleep, but forgot to check how long it took in the morning. when I saw the estimate for the second project, I got curious.

While it is not HD, I just rendered a 01:35:00 minute project in 00:19:32. I'm still impressed by these i7s.

It's Windows Media Encoder that's taking so long, not Vegas.

Yep, 1080 is a long way from DV! :)

This is why I just ordered an octo-core machine. My old editing suite was set up for DV work, and it struggles mightily with the HD coming off my EX1!

Will Vegas take advantage of more than 4 cores? I thought it was only up to 4 cores?

How about farming or network rendering? Running on Gigabit ethernet, would 2-3 or 4 quad cores (or i7s) be better and yield lower render times? Will Vegas treat each machine like it was a single core/task and will just rely on the results that computer gives out instead of counting cores?

If not, I guess the best recourse now is to go for i7s if you want to get the best speed at this time for 4 cores.

Vegas can use up to eight cores, I believe. Could be wrong, but I think it does. The i7 shows up as eight cores in device manager, and this is likely some of the reason for its efficiency in handling video files.

Will Vegas take advantage of more than 4 cores? I thought it was only up to 4 cores?

How about farming or network rendering? Running on Gigabit ethernet, would 2-3 or 4 quad cores (or i7s) be better and yield lower render times? Will Vegas treat each machine like it was a single core/task and will just rely on the results that computer gives out instead of counting cores?

If not, I guess the best recourse now is to go for i7s if you want to get the best speed at this time for 4 cores.

Yes. modern Vegas can take advantage of more than 4 cores, and you can assign more than 1 thread per core. Yes you can farm/network render too as long as you buy the necessary licenses. I looked at network rendering in my office a couple of years ago, but frankly, my work was more disk intensive than CPU intensive, so it didn't make sense. For someone doing heavy titling, color grading, etc, then it might make more sense.

I am not aware how Vegas handles network rendering. But a quick call to SCS or a post in the forum should take care of your question. Maybe Edward Troxel knows and will see this thread.

It's Windows Media Encoder that's taking so long, not Vegas.

I was about to mention this. WMV encoding is far slower than MPEG2 encoding even on SD based DV material.