Creative COW SIGN IN :: SPONSORS :: ADVERTISING :: ABOUT US :: CONTACT US :: FAQ
Creative COW's LinkedIn GroupCreative COW's Facebook PageCreative COW on TwitterCreative COW's Google+ PageCreative COW on YouTube
FORUMS:listlist (w/ descriptions)archivetagssearchhall of famerecent posts

core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c

COW Forums : Videoguys.com Tech Talk

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Share on Facebook
James Redmondcore i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 7, 2011 at 7:06:37 pm

Several weeks ago I asked about the new i7 Sandy Bridge for Vegas 10c-64 bit in this forum.

Before the recall I rebuilt a system with the Sandy Bridge i7 2600K processor, Asus P8P67 Deluxe motherboard, 12 gigs of ram, Win7 64 bit, Sony Vegas Pro 10c 64-bit.

What I found is that my rendering times are SLOWER than my older Intel Core2, Quad Q9300 @2.5 ghz, 2 gigs ram, Gigabyte, GA-EP35C-DS3R motherboard, WinXP, Sony Vegas Pro 10c 32-bit.

I thought I was going crazy for it seemed like my rendering times had not improved. I went ahead and tested a 1 hr 40 min avi file, no effects, one track, rendering it to mpg (for DVD authoring):

with Intel Quad Core it took 54 mins
with i7 2600k it took 1 hr 40 mins

the ac3 encoding took:
with Intel Quad Core it took 8 min 3 seconds
with i7 2600k it took 32 mins 16 seconds (I did it twice!)

So the rendering times are taking longer!

Any ideas why? Anyone else experiencing similar results?

I built this system to improve my rendering times.

Thanks for your insights and help! James

James Redmond
Dynamic Videos, Inc.
Rogers, AR USA


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

JcschildRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 7, 2011 at 7:32:14 pm

something drastically wrong there..
i can tell you the 2600 is vastly faster for renders.

too many potential issues to even try trouble shooting.

Scott
ADK


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Evan NewsomeRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 11, 2011 at 12:02:12 am

Do you have the most up to date Firmware for your MOBO?
same with drivers for hardware and latest updates for software?

that would be a good start.

I too am surprised you have slower times.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 11, 2011 at 9:43:40 pm

LeeAVP,

I updated the bios for the Asus motherboard, updated video drivers and a few other drivers. The software for Vegas Pro 10 is still the latest version (c), as I have had for a while.

Rendering time now is:

with Intel Quad Core it took 54 mins (from older test)
with i7 2600k this time it took 1 hr 56 min vs 1 hr 40 mins before the updates

the ac3 encoding took:
This time with the i7 2600k it was about 4 min 3 sec minutes so that was faster!!!
with Intel Quad Core it took 8 min 3 seconds (from older test)
with i7 2600k it took 32 mins 16 seconds (I did it twice from older test)

So the ac3 rendering is faster, the mpg is still slow. What could I be missing?

Any other ideas? Thanks, James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Evan NewsomeRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 11, 2011 at 10:23:46 pm

Are you running Win7 32bit?

I don't recall you mentioning video cards.
What does the Vegas Pro 10 say about specs needed? (not sure if VP 10 uses the video card for rendering.)

Double check your BIOS for settings that could be limiting your processor or other things.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Evan NewsomeRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 12, 2011 at 3:19:32 pm

ok so I don't read so well.

was your chip on the recall list?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


JcschildRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 12, 2011 at 6:04:56 pm

the processor was not recalled the chipset on the mobo was recalled..
we have many of these running flawlessly.
(we added a raid card to bypass the onboard sata 300)
its highly unlikely the sata ports on his board are already degrading..

Scott
ADK


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 12, 2011 at 8:40:30 pm

Thanks for your help guys.

yes the chipset on the motherboard is the one being recalled. From what I could find out it has to do mainly with the Sata 300 ports.

I am using win7 64 bit. Vegas 10c.

Specs for the video card are:
Support for GPU-accelerated AVC rendering using the Sony AVC plug-in

I am using a EVGA GeForce GTX580 video board.

I have 3 drives all Sata 300 drives. C drive is connect to Sata 600 ports as well as a render drive e. My source footage is on another drive operating on a Sata 300 port.

Went through bios again and didn't see anything unusual. Reset to default 'optimum' settings to try that. After rendering about 10% still looks like it will be about 2 hours to render...

Scott do you build systems? could I pay you to go through the bios settings?

Thanks again guys. james


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

RJL0365Re: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 12, 2011 at 9:16:15 pm

James,

It is possible that your media source drive could have been already affected by the degrading SATA 3 Gbps port issue, with much-slower-than-expected read performance - to perhaps noticeably below the average transfer rate of the source video itself.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 12, 2011 at 9:52:04 pm

RJL0365, It is possible that it is a sata 300 port problem.

If order to try to trouble shoot that, I've changed my c drive to a sata 300 port, now have my source footage on a sata 600 port as well as the rendering drive.

So far Vegas 10 is estimating the total rendering time as 2 hrs 15 min. So no improvement there...

based on this I would assume that it is not a sata 300 port issue. Wouldn't you agree?

Thanks again, James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 13, 2011 at 12:29:27 am

In the meantime, I install an PCI sata port (300 sata port) and used these 2 ports for source and rendering drives and the c drive on a 300 sata port from the motherboard. Rendering time 2 hr. 18 minutes. So still pretty slow...

Thanks, James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

John QRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 13, 2011 at 12:57:48 am

You might want to check on whether your motherboard is affected by the announced Intel chipset problem.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/31/intel-finds-sandy-bridge-chipset-design-...


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


RJL0365Re: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 13, 2011 at 4:21:38 pm

jredmond108: In the meantime, I install an PCI sata port (300 sata port) and used these 2 ports for source and rendering drives and the c drive on a 300 sata port from the motherboard. Rendering time 2 hr. 18 minutes. So still pretty slow...


Actually, using a PCI card is part of the problem in this re-test. You see, PCI has a maximum theoretical bandwidth of only 133 MB/s to begin with. Worse, in these Sandy Bridge motherboards the chipset does not natively support PCI-Legacy - but instead, PCI support is slapped on using a PCI-e to PCI bridge chip. Unfortunately, the PCI-e to PCI bridge controllers reduce the maximum practical throughput of the PCI slots even further, so that now you have a maximum practical bandwidth of no higher than 70 to 75 MB/s - total. No wonder why you got slow throughput with a PCI SATA card - not only because PCI is slower than a single SATA 3 Gbps port to begin with, but the PCI-e to PCI bridge controller used in the P67 motherboards are only about half as fast as even the PCI slot on an older system.

Also, your results actually worsened when you used the onboard third-party SATA 6 Gbps ports versus what you had gotten from the P67's SATA 3 Gbps ports. This is most likely due to the increased latency within the third-party chipset and the communication with the P67's PCH.

By the way, I did try a similar clip on my older Core 2 Quad system with only 2GB of RAM. That system did not take anywhere near 54 minutes - but instead, it took far longer than that: a whopping 27 hours (compared to the roughly 2 hours on my current i7-950 system and a friend's i7-2600K system). That Core 2 system has been running completely out of memory during the encoding test, and the hard drive (which the Windows page file is located) simply could not keep up with the demands of encoding. (To be fair, I used Windows 7 64-bit and 64-bit software in that Core 2 Quad system, and I allowed Windows to manage page file settings on that system.) The reason why your encodes on the older system were faster is that you are restricted with 32-bit (you are restricted to your installed 2GB maximum, plus up to 2GB of Windows page file space on the hard disk), and the encoding quality has been defaulting to lower-quality settings because that system is simply too weak to handle higher-quality encodes. 32-bit Windows simply cannot use more than 4GB of total virtual memory (installed RAM plus hard-drive-based page file combined) no matter what.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 13, 2011 at 8:05:51 pm

I now removed the PCI sata card,
Put c drive on sata 300 of motherboard,
put source and render on sata 600 port,

Now rendering time 2 hrs. 18 min.

Will reconfigure my old Quad core2 Q9300 @2.50 mhz socket LGA 775 system with win7 and 8 gigs of ram, Sony Vegas Pro 64 bit and test it that way (before I used WinXP 32 bit, with 2 gigs of ram, Sony Vegas Pro 10 32 bit).

Will give an update in a few hours. James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

JcschildRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 14, 2011 at 1:48:46 pm

jredmond108: Thanks for your help guys.

Scott do you build systems? could I pay you to go through the bios settings?

Thanks again guys. james


yes we do phone support.
we added a PCIe raid card to our sandy bridge systems that shipped (or about to ship)

need to call and ask for Eric. he may have to set up a time as we are very swamped.
SB systems are the hardest to set up yet to date.

Scott
ADK


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 14, 2011 at 3:15:44 pm

I tired 2 more tests using the same computer, Quad core2 Q9300 @2.50 mhz socket LGA 775 system

first test with with win7 64 bit, 8 gigs of ram, Sony Vegas Pro 10 -64 bit rendered same 1 hr 45 min file from avi to mpg it took over 6 hrs!

second test with WinXP 32 bit, 8 gigs of ram, Sony Vegas Pro 10 -32 bit
rendered same 1 hr 45 min file from avi to mpg it took over 56 minutes.

So winXP 32 bit and Vegas 10c 32 bit is faster than Win 7 64 bit and Sony Pro 10 64 bit.

I do not understand this....

Will try to call Eric to see if he can figure out what I'm missing.

Thanks, James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Evan NewsomeRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 14, 2011 at 3:46:45 pm

sounds like a Vegas Video problem with it's 64bit program. I wouldn't blame Win7 64bit.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

RJL0365Re: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 14, 2011 at 4:13:06 pm

It, as Lee stated, sounds like a performance issue with the encoder(s) in the 64-bit version of Vegas Pro 10.

Try running the 32-bit version of Vegas Pro 10c on Win 7 64-bit, and see if that makes any difference. Win64 can run 32-bit programs.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 15, 2011 at 4:35:36 pm

I spoke with Eric at ADK (Scott is on the forum and answers some tech questions) and he helped and went through all the settings for Win7 and all the drives. The performance has improved to be about the same as WinXP 32-bit and Sony Vegas 32-bit.

Where he says the bottleneck is with the hard drives. What he recommends ideally is to have raid 0 drive for my source material, and another raid 0 for my render drive. I've ordered a few more drives to get at least one raid for my render drive. I have to think if a raid will work for my source material for most of it is transfered to hard drive on location and that would mean taking a raid with me (some times I fly to the location). So I have to think that out.

I will give an update in a few days when I have the render drive setup as a raid. James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Evan NewsomeRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 15, 2011 at 7:22:36 pm

jredmond108: I spoke with Eric at ADK (Scott is on the forum and answers some tech questions) and he helped and went through all the settings for Win7 and all the drives. The performance has improved to be about the same as WinXP 32-bit and Sony Vegas 32-bit....

I'm curious of which settings in Win7, you changed, that helped you out.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 15, 2011 at 10:15:54 pm

He changed the settings remotely and was going pretty fast. Also changed some settings in the bios and then in win7. He also downloaded and installed some drivers.

I was not able to keep up with him so I can not give a good report on what he changed.

It was worth the $99 tech support call for I was missing a few things.

I will report again once I have the raid installed. James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 19, 2011 at 12:55:29 am

Finally got my 2 idential drives in and create one raid 0 for my rendered drive.

It is now rendering the same avi files to mpg and it took 39 minutes 48 seconds!!! So there is some more improvement using one raid.

Eric said that when I edit MXF files, they will show more speed improvements than the avi files.

So for now I'm satisfied.

Thanks for all your assistance. James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

RJL0365Re: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 20, 2011 at 12:57:58 am

James,

Glad that it worked out in the end. I believe that part of the reason for such slow performance with 64-bit NLEs is that you had been using just two hard drives total in each of your systems - OS, programs and pagefile on C: and everything else on the secondary hard drive. That configuration is less than optimal for most prosumer NLEs because the secondary hard drive now has to both read and write simultaneously, and SATA or IDE does not allow such transfers due to their being only half-duplex (meaning that data transfers can only travel in one direction at a time).


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

James RedmondRe: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Feb 23, 2011 at 2:09:40 pm

Actually for all the builds that I tested and used I had 3 drives, one as my c drive with my operating system either XP or Win7, Sony Vegas Pro 10, and other software, a source drive with all my footage, and a render drive to render out to.

I now have my render drive as a raid. I understand that if I have a raid for my source footage it would speed things up some more. My bottleneck is not the CPU but the drives...

All my settings and drivers were not correct. That is were Eric with ADK helped out.

Hopefully this will help someone else when they install a Sandy Bridge. James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


RJL0365Re: core i7 Sandy Bridge has slower rendering times Vegas Pro10c
by on Apr 3, 2011 at 6:14:17 am

One more minor detail:

For the 12GB of RAM, were you using 2 x 4GB modules and 2 x 2GB modules? Or were you using 3 x 4GB modules?

If the former, the system might have throttled back the memory speed and/or increased the DIMM voltage to compensate for the mixed-density IC chips. If the latter, the system's memory controller might have been forced to run in a "Flex" mode (in which the first 8GB of RAM ran in dual-channel and the remaining 4GB ran in single-channel).


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Share on Facebook


FORUMSTUTORIALSFEATURESVIDEOSPODCASTSEVENTSSERVICESNEWSLETTERNEWSBLOGS

Creative COW LinkedIn Group Creative COW Facebook Page Creative COW on Twitter
© 2014 CreativeCOW.net All rights are reserved. - Privacy Policy

[Top]