Vegas, EX1, and Computer specs

Kim Olsson · December 24th, 2007, 06:10 PM

Erwin, in nVidia 8800, There is already 2x dvi and one TV-out...
So you can use two monitors and one TV on this card.

For vegas, quad is the best right now...

It is of course better to have the best, but for what price? What use will you have for such a fast hard drives? What do you think you will boost on ?

Tell more about what kind of projects you are going to make. And if this will be your work and so on....

Matthew Chaboud · December 26th, 2007, 04:20 PM

I'm just too tired from having to get on an early flight after a late Christmas night.

So, I have a lot of computers that pretty much do nothing but run Vegas. There are perks to 8-core hardware, but they aren't as great as one might hope.

One of the perks of dual-socket hardware (4 or 8 core) is that you see dual memory controllers on the current platforms (on-board on Intel, in-package on AMD). This improves memory performance, which is something that can end up being the limiting factor in Vegas performance.

Vegas only uses one engine-thread for rendering while playing back, but many sections of this engine are multi-threaded internally. Many of the effects, transitions, and compositing portions of Vegas take advantage of multiple processors (even 8) during playback and rendering. An 8-core machine was the first place that I saw Vegas pull-off full HD crossfades and also the first place that I saw Vegas playing back 8 streams of HDV at full-rate. At the time, my 4-core hardware couldn't do this trick.

Vegas also has threads rendering audio and threads reading/decompressing video. Whether rendering or playing back, there are always multiple threads doing these jobs on multi-core hardware (at default preferences and settings, of course).

So, what is it worth?

Against a single core, you can consider these numbers (pulled out of my hat):

Best observed:
1 core: 1x (duh) -- 2 cores: 2x -- 4 cores: 4x -- 8 cores: 6x

Typically observed:
1 core 1x -- 2 cores: 1.5x -- 4 cores: 3x -- 8 cores: 4x

You have to decide if the trade-off is worth it. If it were actually my money, I'd be between hot dual-core or lightweight quad-core hardware, the rest spent on other critical-path components like memory and disks.

Your budget may vary.

Jason Bodnar · December 27th, 2007, 07:41 PM

Thanks, Matthew! Good info.

December 26th, 2007, 04:20 PM	#17
Matthew Chaboud Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Chicago, IL, USA Posts: 93	I'm sorry for not reading the entire thread... I'm just too tired from having to get on an early flight after a late Christmas night. So, I have a lot of computers that pretty much do nothing but run Vegas. There are perks to 8-core hardware, but they aren't as great as one might hope. One of the perks of dual-socket hardware (4 or 8 core) is that you see dual memory controllers on the current platforms (on-board on Intel, in-package on AMD). This improves memory performance, which is something that can end up being the limiting factor in Vegas performance. Vegas only uses one engine-thread for rendering while playing back, but many sections of this engine are multi-threaded internally. Many of the effects, transitions, and compositing portions of Vegas take advantage of multiple processors (even 8) during playback and rendering. An 8-core machine was the first place that I saw Vegas pull-off full HD crossfades and also the first place that I saw Vegas playing back 8 streams of HDV at full-rate. At the time, my 4-core hardware couldn't do this trick. Vegas also has threads rendering audio and threads reading/decompressing video. Whether rendering or playing back, there are always multiple threads doing these jobs on multi-core hardware (at default preferences and settings, of course). So, what is it worth? Against a single core, you can consider these numbers (pulled out of my hat): Best observed: 1 core: 1x (duh) -- 2 cores: 2x -- 4 cores: 4x -- 8 cores: 6x Typically observed: 1 core 1x -- 2 cores: 1.5x -- 4 cores: 3x -- 8 cores: 4x You have to decide if the trade-off is worth it. If it were actually my money, I'd be between hot dual-core or lightweight quad-core hardware, the rest spent on other critical-path components like memory and disks. Your budget may vary.

December 24th, 2007, 06:10 PM	#16
Kim Olsson Major Player Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 263	Erwin, in nVidia 8800, There is already 2x dvi and one TV-out... So you can use two monitors and one TV on this card. For vegas, quad is the best right now... It is of course better to have the best, but for what price? What use will you have for such a fast hard drives? What do you think you will boost on ? Tell more about what kind of projects you are going to make. And if this will be your work and so on....

December 27th, 2007, 07:41 PM	#18
Jason Bodnar Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Seattle WA Posts: 376	Thanks, Matthew! Good info.