I saw that but it's not accurate. For example it says:

"•GeForce GTX 4xx Series or higher"

...but that's not true as gpu encode acceleration does not work with the NVidia 670. So I'm wondering if a more accurate list is out there, that would save me the hassle of buying 10 graphics cards, testing them all and returning all that don't work. I know they don't support the 670, but do they support the 650? 660? 680?

Pete: How do you know for certain that NVidia 670 "not supported'.??
Do you understand what keeps Nvidia 670 from being supported? Would like an in-depth response, please.

frankly sony's handling of information regarding gpu's in general is awful. the list is neither comprehensive, and nowhere is there any guidance as to what combination of gpu / cpu / driver gives the best results. ie a 560 in a i7/950 would be SLOWER at rendering, etc.,

it seems this whole area (judging from the posts hereabouts) is simply a matter of experimentation - which wouldn't be such a bad thing if it weren't for the costs of the cards ;-(

I've just put together a new i7-3770k system with a bottom line Nvidia 650 card. GPU acceleration for rendering is supported. E.g. a 1 min 1080-60P AVCHD clip renders at best quality to the Sony AVC Bluray preset in 1:55 with CPU only. Encoding with the GPU reduced it to 1:40--not great, but a small increase for this card. What is important is to turn OFF GPU acceleartion support in your Video preferences. Using it slows down timeline performance, as well as render performance--even if you select CPU only.

The 650 does support 3 monitors, which is really nice. I use 2 desktop monitors and a 40in LCD TV as my preview device. Must say that this is the feature I like most about the card.

wwaag

In a once-off test I found render time slightly longer with GPU enabled. My card seems to be "supported" but there is no point using it.

Just a heads up for all the readers of this thread- there can be a considerable amount of anecdotal tales of woe about using GPU in the latest versions of VegasPro by SCS.


KNOW THIS - if you care to investigate almost any other software by any vendor recently developed (in 2010-2012) with GPU enable as a promoted feature - you will find equally damning tales. THis is an industry wide problem for the most part and that is where SCS falls into the category of this business.

Uh my 670 does GPU acceleration under Vegas 12. It never worked under 11...even under the last update (which really seems odd).

Ah but the difference between Sony and say Adobe is SUPPORT!. Adobe acknowledges the known issues and works to fix them. In the time that Vegas 12 has been released I have recieved TWO updates to After Effects CS6.

Sony obviously reads these forums because they occasionally reply. How hard is it for them to say here is a list of currently qualified Video Cards and the recommended driver.

I did a new build with everything geared towards running VP11 (at the time in late June, there wasn't much info regarding which specific cards were or were not working)...I had 3 hardware failures right out of the box. First my raid broke, and the GTX670 I was running had issues where my monitors would go black and then come back up at various, non-heavy usage times, and then my 1200w power supply had a massive failure. My thought is that the power supply was the instigator of the other two failures, but no real proof of that. Prior to the power supply going out, I replaced the GTX670 with an older GTX470 and have not had another graphics problem since, and have been running pedal to the metal in VP11 ever since with GPU rendering. My new replacement power supply and GTX670 card will arrive next week and I will try them out again, but for sure, the GTX470 (EVGA) is a good fit for VP11, IMO.

Been using my new GTX 670 with Vegas 12 and it is supported.
In my tests ran so far the GTX 670 render times are faster than those with CPU only.....No crashes thus far....

Interesting, the 670 does not work for me under both Vegas 11 and Vegas 12, both of which I have installed. The 560ti when I had it worked great on Vegas 11, it sped up my Main Concept mp4 render times by 4x. So a one hour render on my overclocked i7-2600k cpu alone would take just 15 minutes with my 560ti. I changed to the 670 for 3 display support and now my gpu renders are back to being identical to cpu times. So a one hour cpu render now also takes exactly one hour when using Cuda on Vegas 12. On Vegas 11 the response is a bit different, when trying to render with Cuda it just instantly errors out and says "An error occurred while creating the file, the reason for the error could not be determined."

Hence I presumed that the 670 was not supported since I haven't been able to get Cuda encoding assist with it on both Vegas 11 and Vegas 12 with the last three 670 driver revisions.

Pete, thank you for your response to my question earlier about reporting your experience in depth. When forum members can post with more detail than a few spot lines - we all share and learn a lot more.

Conclusion- GTX670 is supported and NOTE.. no more or less than any of the other recommendations.

I have recently installed a GTX 630 with 4 GB of RAM but have not been able to test it yet because my case fan died and while I ordered a new one three days ago, amazon.com has not even shipped it yet. :(

Anyway, once I have my system running again, I will post the results of my test.

@ Pete: You are likely losing some GPU power while trying to render and run 3 monitors.

I can verify in Vegas 11 that the GTX570 and GTX660 both work fine with the 306.23 driver, waiting to test the driver released this week BTW I also have Virtu MVP enabled which boost performance by using the intel HD4000 graphics.

I also have the least amount of crashes with dynamic ram preview set to zero.

>>>So a one hour render on my overclocked i7-2600k cpu alone would take just 15 minutes with my 560ti. I changed to the 670 for 3 display support and now my gpu renders are back to being identical to cpu times<<<

Pete - I just ordered a 660ti card and have the same CPU. So I'm wondering, based upon what you're saying, it would seem that a GTX 570 would be much faster than the i7-2600k for rendering. however, the GTX 670 seems to render at a fraction of the 570, which is the same as the CPU. As such, if you don't need 3 monitors, would it be a correct assumption to say that the GTX 570 is a much more powerful card for CUDA rendering in Vegas 12 over the GTX 670?

Well guys how did it end up with your 660ti card? I just went from GTX 460 to GTX 660 and MSP12 went from 2-4x rendering acceleration to erroring out until I updated my build but now GPU rendering is the exact same speed as CPU rendering, over 10 minutes for a 2 minute 1080p video that used to take me 60 seconds on the 460 with GPU.

Well, the Sony website does mention that cards based on Fermi architecture are supported and that seems to be true until today. Most of the 600 series cards are based on Keppler GPUs and those do have issues with Vegas; some lower end 600s are still Fermi. Whether the issue with the Keppler GPUs is related to drivers not supporting Vegas or just simply not being designed for NLE but rather gaming, is not really clear.

I have a Kepler core. It's disheartening that they just released the 896 build and still haven't fixed this. The kepler products have been out since 2012.

GPU acceleration is the only reason I bought Vegas Video.

I think I found the sweet spot for Vegas GPU support with the help of Old Smoke and others .. namely the GTX560ti .. Cost right now is only $169 from Newegg .. Great value..:

My first crack at GPU acceleration

Yeah I'm still using my old 560ti, I could never get the 670 to work. The 560ti works great and seems to be fully supported by Vegas, gives me real time playback on the timeline even with color correction and sharpen filters applied which is awesome. I figured there was no point in waiting on Sony to support the 6xx series of cards. Looking forward I'm hoping Sony supports the gpu in Intel's upcoming Haswell cpu's.