FORUMS: list search recent posts

VP version... pros n cons...?

COW Forums : VEGAS Pro

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Nick McMahon
VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 1, 2015 at 5:03:05 pm

I read lots of posts online from people who get a version of Vegas Pro and some report bugs and problems and as such then have views that one version is better than another, when of course the bad workman blames his tools all too quickly without considering the huge variety of influences that can cause a complex computer software program to act in an unstable fashion and not perform how we expect.

My guess is that 'some' of these people may be having the issues because of hardware configs and not reading the installation instructions which recommend various preferences that need adjusting to get the best stability from the software version...?

So... I'm soon about to buy my first dedicated NLE machine and I'm ensuring I exceed what the minimum requirements are to edit happily in 4k (thanks JR). On that basis, removing hardware limitations, will VP13 suit me best...? or should I continue on with my VP12 for now because I'm still opening the doors to NLE and by the time I get my head around the rest of the huge pile of basic concepts then VP14 will surely be ready to jump into...? (and if I'm slow maybe even 15... lol)

cheers

Nick... BASE1268

3...2...1...C ya


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 1, 2015 at 8:07:20 pm

As you said, it the wacky world of everybody's PC has it's own quirks it's hard to say. Vegas Pro 13.0 has been very stable for me during the short time that I used it, but I did have some serious render problems and bugs like Closed Captioning not working have caused me to go back to Vegas Pro 12.0 for any broadcast production work. Others on this forums use it every day and think it's the best version Sony has produced in a long time.

I would imagine that if you plan to work in 4K you're going to want every performance tweak that Sony has to offer for this relatively new format so I would lean toward using Vegas Pro 13.0 as long as all the features you need don't have debilitating bugs like Closed Captioning does.

BTW, I don't believe you're going to find a definitive answer to your question. I would download the 30-day trail of Vegas Pro 13.0 once you have your 4K editing computer set up and see how stable it is for you on your particular computer before you buy it.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com



Return to posts index

Nick McMahon
Re: VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 1, 2015 at 9:50:50 pm

Cheers John... yes I figured 'try before you buy' on any new machine is a must do, but was interested to hear from the likes of yourself who have high spec hardware and experience with VP13.

BTW... I just missed getting this by £29... it went for £1390 (US$2085) Was used by a cinema 4d graphics business. It woulda needed a stripe RAID 0 and some tweaking ... That'll teach me for trying to get it too cheaply when I shoulda decided on a maximum price and bid that with 5 seconds to go. This same set-up here in the UK from the seller refurbishers are £1895.

MODEL: Mac Pro Mid 2010
CPU: Dual 2.66Ghz 6 Core Intel Xeon Processors
RAM: 24GB DDR3 ECC (6 x 4GB Modules)
GPU1:ATI Radeon HD 5770 1Gb
GPU2: Nvidia GeForce GT 120

STORAGE1: Corsair 32Gb SATA Solid State – System Drive
STORAGE2: 620Gb SATA - Application Drive
STORAGE3: 2Tb Western Digital Green 64Mb Cache – Data Drive1
STORAGE3: 2Tb Western Digital Green 64Mb Cache – Data Drive2
DISK DRIVE: Superdrive DVDRW


Nick... BASE1268

3...2...1...C ya


Return to posts index


John Rofrano
Re: VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 2, 2015 at 12:17:56 pm

[Nick McMahon] "CPU: Dual 2.66Ghz 6 Core Intel Xeon Processors"
Try and get a 2.93Ghz if you can. The single most important contributor to good performance for video editing and rendering is CPU speed. The 3.06 Ghz are going for too much. The 2.93Ghz is the sweet spot. The 2.66Ghz are very common but don't pay too much for one.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com



Return to posts index

Nick McMahon
Re: VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 2, 2015 at 12:48:02 pm

Thanx John... I've been trying to work out which of the 2.66,2.93,3.06 and 3.46 was all round best value versus performance... so now I have to wonder if the universe knew that and made sure I didn't win that bid...lol

Then again if I can buy a system cheaply enough with 2.66 then upgrade to a 2.93 for the right price then that will work just as well.

Just chatting with a Mac Pro geek who works here in London at Create.Pro and he suggests that their testing has shown the R9 280x runs at a more stable temp than the 290 inside a Mac so they don't sell the 290.The R9 allows for 3 generic screens to be added whereas the Mac Pro standard 5770 and even 5870 is rigged to work with 3 but 2 of them have to be Apple monitors.

Do you know... Will the R9 280x offer Open CL and will it increase render performance with Sony AVC codec...? (having read your comments on your website about no Main Concept AVC support with the R9 290)

Post edit :What are your thoughts on using the nVidia 780 with VP12 which offers Open CL and CUDA and apparently works well inside a Mac Pro..?

It also will work decently with FCP, tho not as good as the R9 280x, but my thinking here is the nVidia 780 will be a good compromise when I will no doubt want to begin playing with FCP over on the other side.

So I guess all in all I'd like to find the best value compromise GPU that will work for both VP12 [with render support using CUDA..? (for Main Concept AVC... and Sony AVC?)] AND FCP inside a Mac Pro AND allow at least 3 generic screens to plug in, one of which will be 4k res

cheers

Nick... BASE1268

3...2...1...C ya


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 2, 2015 at 10:47:30 pm

[Nick McMahon] "so now I have to wonder if the universe knew that and made sure I didn't win that bid...lol"
Don't laugh... I actually tell myself this a LOT! :-D
[Nick McMahon] "Do you know... Will the R9 280x offer Open CL and will it increase render performance with Sony AVC codec...? "
Yes, all the Radeon's have great OpenCL performance. That's what AMD has chosen as their standard. I have no idea what makes Sony AVC tick. Even though it recognizes my Radeon HD 5870, it doesn't render any faster with it on or off. :(
[Nick McMahon] "What are your thoughts on using the nVidia 780 with VP12 which offers Open CL and CUDA and apparently works well inside a Mac Pro..?"
NVIDIA has a horrible implementation of OpenCL. They prefer to support their proprietary CUDA architecture. I would not recommend an NVIDA card for Vegas Pro since Vegas Pro uses OpenCL so a Radeon card will be a better choice for Vegas Pro.
[Nick McMahon] "It also will work decently with FCP, tho not as good as the R9 280x, but my thinking here is the nVidia 780 will be a good compromise when I will no doubt want to begin playing with FCP over on the other side."
I don't know. The New Mac Pro's have AMD GPU's so I'm not so sure that NVIDIA is the best choice for FCP X. I have no knowledge about this, it's just a hunch.

One thing to watch out for with non-Mac Edition graphics cards is that they do not have EFI boot screen support. So if something goes wrong or you want to multi-disk boot, you can't with those cards. You will only get a black screen with no boot information until you see the desktop. I've not purchased one because of this limitation.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com



Return to posts index


Nick McMahon
Re: VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 2, 2015 at 11:25:53 pm

[John Rofrano] "One thing to watch out for with non-Mac Edition graphics cards is that they do not have EFI boot screen support. So if something goes wrong or you want to multi-disk boot, you can't with those cards. You will only get a black screen with no boot information until you see the desktop. I've not purchased one because of this limitation"

I was also told that today by the incredibly knowledgeable guy at Create.pro...

So... armed with your answers and going with the 2.93 CPU & AMD GPU I'm bidding on this which ends in about 12 hours.

Mac Pro 2009 5.1 - This was a 2009 4.1 Mac Pro that has been professionally upgraded by a trained technician to a Mac Pro 5.1
CPU: 2 x 2.93GHz 6 core processors
(Geekbench over 27500)
GPU: nVidia GTX 680 2GB
RAM: 32GB DDR3 ECC (8 x 4GB Modules) running at 1333MHz
STORAGE: 1TB 7200RPM HDD
STORAGE: 1TB 7200RPM HDD

DISK DRIVE: Superdrive DVDRW
PORTS: 5 x USB 2.0
4 x Firewire 800
2 x Gigabit Et
hernet
Audio In/Out
2 x DVI
1 x HDMI
1 x Displayport
Wi-Fi 802.11n / Bluetooth Installed
OS X: 10.10 Yosemite

Pending my winning the bid [c'mon universe... :-) ] I can upgrade stuff which I won't hesitate to do for the GPU at this listed price for thr R9 280x!!!.... surely that has to be a miss print...? Does a buisness have to honour such a miss print..? I think I'll buy several

Upgrade options:

Graphics Card
GTX 680 - Included
R9 280X - £50
GTX 780 - £349
An additional power supply is recomeneded or the CPU and GPU will run slower. Available for £59


Hard Drive
In addition to the standard configuration:
128GB SSD - £70
240GB SSD - £135
512GB SSD - £165
1TB SSD - £340


And I'll add a 512gb SSD and run the included HDD's with a software RAID 0 for now until I get some more money and then set up a RAID controller with flash memory

Nick... BASE1268

3...2...1...C ya


Return to posts index

John Rofrano
Re: VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 3, 2015 at 12:44:07 pm

Yea, that GPU should be closer to £150 than £50. As for SSD's it makes a huge difference. The old Mac Pro's only support SATA II so I bought an SSD on a PCIe card that supplied SATA III so I got 2x the speed but even when I had an SSD on the SATA II bus the computer just felt a whole lot quicker.

Good luck!

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com



Return to posts index

Nick McMahon
Re: VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 3, 2015 at 10:29:00 pm

Hmmm... well I missed that one too... but i think I'm now beginning to understand what the various combinations of spec will ultimately go for so I can adjust my bid accordingly next time.

Been looking at the AMD FirePro W5100 today... http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/graphics/workstation/firepro-3d/5100

£277.87

Product DescriptionAMD FirePro W5100 graphics card - FirePro W5100 - 4 GB
Device TypeGraphics card
Bus TypePCI Express 3.0 x16
Graphics EngineAMD FirePro W5100
Memory4 GB - GDDR5
Stream Processors768
Memory Interface128-bit
Max Resolution4096 x 2160
Max Resolution DetailsDVI (Single-Link): 1920 x 1200 / DVI (Dual-Link): 2560 x 1600 / DisplayPort: 4096 x 2160
Max Monitors Supported4
Interfaces4 x DisplayPort , 2 x DVI - with adapter
API SupportedOpenCL 1.2, DirectX 11.1, OpenGL 4.4, DirectX 12, OpenCL 2.0
Package TypeRetail
Manufacturer Warranty3 years warranty


Interestingly are the benchmark tests using this GPU with Adobe PP and Open CL...

http://www.fireprographics.com/ws/mae/adobe/index.asp

Seems like it would be a good GPU at the price if it gives the same performance with SVP...?

My question is will SVP utilise the same kind of performance increase with this GPU...? The W9100 is perfect... but costs silly money for the average guy at US$3.5k !!

Nick... BASE1268

3...2...1...C ya


Return to posts index


John Rofrano
Re: VP version... pros n cons...?
on Feb 6, 2015 at 2:19:09 am

[Nick McMahon] "Been looking at the AMD FirePro W5100 today"
I'm sure that Vegas Pro will take advantage of the FirePro W5100 but not any more than the Radeon line. The W5100 is only about as powerful as the Radeon HD 5770 which is about half as powerful as my Radeon HD 5870. The W5100 does have more graphics memory and 4 DisplayPort ports so if that's important to you then it might be a good fit... it just won't be a "screamer" with only 768 stream processors.

~jr

http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com



Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]