How well does Sony Vegas Pro 13 render with an i7 4790K?

alcatrazsniper

Reputable
Dec 31, 2014
58
0
4,640
I'd like to know an expert opinion on the way a program like sony vegas pro 13 would run on an i7 4790K. It's paired up with an Intel 730 Series SSD and a GTX 760 for heavy gaming also. How would it do rendering a 4K video with a decent amount of effects (gaussian blur, cookie cutter, light rays, all that)? How long does it take on average to render a minute of 4k video. I know this processor is very good and I would expect a reasonable amount out of it.

Last note: I'm using a single stick of 8GB of ram @ 1600 MHz.
 
Solution
How long rendering a video takes not all depends on effects but more importantly on framerate, in- and outputcodec. A 30fps 4k video from uncompressed avi or h.264 mp4 to sony avc (mp4) format would need around 3-4 minutes per minute of video length. The I7 4790k does it's job well.
How much performance could GPU acceleration yield in rendering? Say an i7 4790k and a GTX Titan for example. How much faster would it render a minute than without? I don't care about AMD unfortunately, that was not the answer to my question exactly...
 
I was just trying to help since you're running or looking to run vegas pro and weren't aware that gpu acceleration can speed renders up by over 50%. The comment about amd cards was to save you some heartache in the long run. You mentioned a gtx titan which is a $1000 gpu. My $140 hd 7850 will render the same vegas pro 4k video in about 3/4 the time and it sort of puts things into perspective directly related to vegas pro. If you're keen to blow 8x the money for less performance, I support you.
 
I'm not going to buy a Titan, that's just ridiculous. I'm perfectly fine with my 760. Thanks I just wanted to know. It's a little bit surprising to see how vegas favors opencl and AMD over CUDA rendering. I always though Nvidia had a monopoly in everything except bitcoin mining.

Nonetheless thanks for the info. The results are good.
 
Yea usually nvidia holds an edge with it's optimizations and cuda cores but for some reason vegas pro opts for the open cl. Either way, a gpu will help speed things up a great deal over cpu rendering alone and since you already have a gtx for gaming may as well put it to work with vegas and let it pull double duty.
 
How long rendering a video takes not all depends on effects but more importantly on framerate, in- and outputcodec. A 30fps 4k video from uncompressed avi or h.264 mp4 to sony avc (mp4) format would need around 3-4 minutes per minute of video length. The I7 4790k does it's job well.
 
Solution


?? The 4790k may do well in CPU only rendering but a 6000 series AMD card from a few years back will render much faster. I use Vegas a lot - I have an i7 5930k . all six cores are used in rendering but the time to render the video is slashed when using GPU only rendering on the R9 290x. Parallel processing as used in Video rendering is much more suited to GPUs.

I don't game so I don't know much about GPUs in gaming but in Sony Vegas AMD is the card to use. That't not me being biased, that is me giving honest results from using various cards to find the best one for the job.

Not all of this answer was to you so i'm not giving a lecture here, sorry if it seems that way. To answer the original poster I can honestly say the 290x renders in Sony Vegas quicker than any other card I have used .

I will be testing vegas with the Fury x in two weeks and will post results on that. I avoided the 980Ti as it will be slower than the 6000 series AMD card as for some reason later cards (apart from the 290x strangely) are not supported in rendering using Mainconcept.