http://videoguys.com/Guide/E/Videoguys+DIY8+Sneak+Peek+Work+in+Progess+Coming+this+Fall/0x094b1737e0a06c495e5178a167fbdbd7.aspx

Link to their current recommendations. Their "hot rod" system uses the i7/980 with the Asus P6X58E-PRO MB.

My i780x just rendered in vegas 10 (see threads) a 2hrs 52 min
multiple camera project in 1hrs 40 mins.

i7980x is a fantastic processor, mines clocked at 4ghz on 6 cores 12 rendering threads

highly recomended

"i7980x is a fantastic processor, mines clocked at 4ghz on 6 cores 12 rendering threads"

Same here. Have had no probs. I'm using 10e 64bit.

All depends on what you want to spend. There is no doubt that the 980x is the fastest CPU currently available for Vegas. But the 2600k is 30% the price and 75% the of the 980x performance in Vegas. In other applications it's sometimes even faster. So you have to figure out if the 25% additional performance, which is pricey when you factor in a more expensive motherboard as well, is worth the 45% increase in cost.

A very good step down is the 970 which is half the price of the 980 and nearly as fast. You'll give up a tiny bit of performance and save $500.

As for the "Videoguys" telling people to stay away from SB for "PCI buss timing issues" I disagree. They don't post any links or facts. The graphics integrated into the SB CPU's are only used if you have an "H" or "Z" series motherboard and if you choose to use the onboard graphics. I'm using a 2500k overclocked to 4GHZ ($200 CPU) with a Z68 motherboard with zero issues.

The videoguys tend to recommend top of the line component series because they have less problems with them. Now that sounds straightforward right? Well yes and no. That's not because they're a better design, in my opinion,but more that the implementation is of higher quality across the brands that sell them. In other words you can buy cr@ppy Z68 motherboards which may give you problems but most of the 980x compatible boards are of higher quality because they are not aimed at consumers. BUT, if you buy a high quality Asus 7 layer PCB, solid caps motherboard for Z68 it will be as trouble free as any hex core compatible board that is built to similar specs. Again, my opinion based on years of experience and research/reading as a PC enthusiast.

So as always it ends up to price/performance.

If you need the fastest cost no object then go 980x.
970 will save you some money and lose a little performance.
2600k will save you even more money and lose a bit more performance.

So that is my take on 4 cores vs 6. Bottom line you can't go wrong with a 980, 970, 2600, or even 2500 Intel CPU.

Also keep in mind that Ivy Bridge is right around the corner... with Haswell soon to follow.

In our main editing rig we have a 980X 6-core overclocked to 4.0ghz on air. The CPU cost $1000 but we have now had it 1.5 years and no new processors have significantly surpassed its capabilities. The other workstations are mildly overclocked 920 processors and all (3) are Asus P6T6 workstation class motherboards, Corsair 850W or higher power supplies, quality 1600 DDR3 memory, etc. We have been thrilled with the stability of these workstations compared to all previous systems we have owned. Very little down time.

All workstations are in indentical 6 year-old CM Stacker cases and one is empty awaiting a new Socket 2011 motherboard and 8-core processor. Socket 2011 is considered Intel's next high-end chipset to replace Socket 1366. With 2011 pins, I believe it will access memory and the PCIe 3.0 bus much faster than current chipsets. IMO this will eliminate some of the bottlenecks that do not allow Vegas to maximize CPU utilization during rendering.

That said, our 980x runs at nearly 100% during almost any render, even those involving mostly cuts & splices. The key is keeping the source video on one fast RAID and rendering it out to another fast RAID which is on a separate PCIe RAID controller. If you are trying to render HD video from/to single SATA drives or to/from a RAID on the same motherboard SATA connectors, you are using the same PCIe for both input & output which creates a bottleneck...

Therefore, unless you NEED a new rig ASAP, I recommend waiting a couple months and getting a Socket 2011 system. According to my understanding Socket 2011 will be the ONLY way to install an 8-core processor in the future, and you will definitely want one of those as soon as you see their performance in handling video. As a rule we time our upgrades to match the release of a new CPU design/socket as to extend the life of that socket as long as possible. Although more expensive up-front, the long life of a system based on cutting edge components eventually creates the best bang-for-the-buck for us. We are still using some 6 year-old workstations because they were able to handle an inexpensive RAM upgrade to handle Windows 7 & HD video. Had we gone cheaper those systems would now be obsolete....

I would be very, very surprised if PCIe bandwidth was causing any bottlenecks with Vegas. Vegas is and always has been CPU hungry. And now GPU hungry although we don't know to what extent based on the differences in GPU results seen on this forum.

We shall see though. When the new spec comes into play we'll see if Vegas performance with identical CPUs increases.

PCIe buss speeds are usually driven by the latest and greatest gaming video cards, and even then the speed increase is small. Everything else outside of gaming is generally covered by the current spec for many years past the introduction of the new spec. That's just the reality of history.

"I would be very, very surprised if PCIe bandwidth was causing any bottlenecks with Vegas"

I think that's a function of the kind of video you work with. I've sat in on edit sessions where there was 12 cores and rack mounted SAN boxes hooked up with fibrechannel and everything just screamed along. Sure running FCP not Vegas but the only real difference is Vegas doesn't nudge us into using a DI.

My problem is I've been "waiting a few months" for a few years. Sure IB looks attractive but by the time it is on the shelves there'll be something else to wait a few months for. What has made me rethink using the 980 is the actual cost of ownership.
There's an interesting graph that shows the energy required to render a video with Cinebench and the 980 uses the least joules of any CPU, so the real cost comes down a bit over the life of the system.
The other thing is the Gigabyte mobo has IDE so I can recycle any of the considerable number of optical drives I have around.
I'm still torn on this decision, I may just flip a coin. I had thought the choice was obvious, go with SB becuase it was the latest and greatest and the only real alternative was way more expensive and all you got for the money was bragging rights. It's not really all that clear cut at all.

Bob.

I use the 980X on an Asus Rampage 3 extreme board and bios auto overclock to 4ghz without any issues, 12gb ram. Now when you say Sandy Bridge, presume you mean the 4 core LGA1155 board with 1155 pins. The 6 core SB i7 will have 2011 pins, thus you won't be able to upgrade the system. That should be coming out soon, which I would presume would drop the price dramatically for he 990x...and the trusted Asus LGA 1366 boards.

It is tough to wait, and always depends on budget of course.

I wouldn't base your decision though on power consumption though, don't you want speed=time=(save)money?

Take care,
Dan