Just a "long shot" - but in V12 try to set Preview RAM to 30 MB and Rendering threads to 5 and test again with GPU disabled?

Thank you for your reply,

@ Trainman

I am using a single 'EVGA GTX 670 FTW,4GB'

Have you tried rendering with Vegas pro 9? Maybe it's faster with your system too.
You can download a trial here:
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/download/link?id=4219.1
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/download/updates/vegasfamily

@ ritsmer

Thanks for the tip.

I have set the preview RAM to 30 MB and rendering threads to 5 with the GPU disabled.
But the render speed is exactly the same 62 sec (0:01:02).

V9 still faster = 48 sec (0:00:48)

Are the two rendering templates identical? It could be that some of the presets have changed between 9 & 12. I still have 9 on my system and I will give it a try too although I only got 60i footage but it does come from NX5U too.

Hi there Oldsmoke,

I am pretty sure they are identical.

Render as -> 'Sony MXF' -> 'HD422 1920x1080-50i 50 Mbps'

Yes please give V9 a try, maybe it's faster than V12 for everyone.
I am curious.

Thank you for testing. I would have expected a substantial improvement - but obviously not so on your machine. Sorry.

The GPU acceleration doesn’t seem to add any acceleration during rendering is that right?

GPU accel in video prefs is always active in playback and encoding a file (aka render as). Of course you have to be using some effect/transitions that have GPU accel.

@ ritsmer
Indeed we gave it a shot :-).

@ NormanPCN
Thanks.
Are all the video FX from Vegas 12 GPU acceleration-compatible?

Just renderd out the same clip with 'Saturation Adjust' plugin.

V9 = 50 sec.
V12 = 77 sec (GPU accel enabled).

On my 6-core 980X Vegas 10e uses 100% of the CPU during renders. With GPU OFF, V11 & V12 only used about 60% of the CPU.

After installing a GTX570, my V12 renders now beat my best 10e scores on the types of files I render. I often render more than one file type at once since most clients want a HQ version along with a web version, etc. When I am rendering two files at once, V12 will utilize 100% of the CPU and the completion time for both renders is much faster than 10e rendering the same two VEGs at once...

5 MINUTE HD to BR RENDER (TYPICAL HD PROJECT FOR ME):
V10e = 100% of CPU = 7:52 minutes
V12 = 50%-70% of CPU, GPU ON = 3:55 minutes

I then allowed (2) 1.5 hour VEG files to render at the same time. One was HD to BR and the other was a copy the same project down-converted to DVD mpg2.

1.5 HOUR HD TO BR & 1.5 HOUR HD TO DVD (2 Renders at Once):
V10e = 100% of CPU = 3.5 hours
V12 = 70%-80% of CPU, GPU ON = 2.25 hours

The above renders are from a typical project we do which do not have as many layered events or special effects as the benchmarks.

EDIT:
V9e is slower than V10e on my 6-core because no matter the settings V9e only uses about 60% of my CPU. V10e is the only one that totally maxes-out my CPU and the render times match the % of CPU used... For instance, if V10e uses 100% of the CPU, and V9e uses 60%, then V9e takes almost 2X as long to render the same project.

In comparison, V12e only uses 60%-75% of the CPU but with GPU on, render speeds are significantly better than 10, and over double 9e... Again, this is for the work I do. I start-out with high quality AVID DNxHD, ProRes HQ or even uncompressed AVI. The output is typically back to AVID DNxHD, Blu-ray, DVD, and H.264.

Hi TheRino,

Interesting!

Have you tried comparing V12 with V9?

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/download/link?id=4219.1
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/download/updates/vegasfamily

You are right that VP9 is faster for that particular codec. GPU acceleration doesn't help in VP12 as the codec is not written for it. Try an AVC codec and you will see the difference. What I found interesting is that the file rendered by VP12 reported under MediaInfo to be written by VP10.

Hi OldSmoke,

Thanks for doing the test.

So far only 'Main concept AVC AVCHD 1080 50i' seems to render faster.
If we just put the GPU option aside one would think that V12 should at least render at equal speed as V9.

Some more tests with different codecs:
Rendered clip length = 1 minute.

Main concept AVC AVCHD 1080 50i

Vegas 9 - 60 sec
Vegas 12 - 52 sec
---------------
Mpeg 2 BD 1080 50i

Vegas 9 - 28 sec
Vegas 12 - 37 sec

---------------
Avi HD yuv 1080 50i

Vegas 9 - 45 sec
Vegas 12 - 94 sec

---------------
Pal DV Uncompressed 720x576

Vegas 9 - 28 sec
Vegas 12 - 52 sec

MXF (from Sony) is based on Mpeg 2 even though it is not supported by GPU Accel I wonder why it is rendered slower by V12.

Have you tried other codecs as comparison?

VMP, I only tried AVC codecs by Sony and MC aside from the MFX 422 that you initially used. I am not sure why VP12 is slower but I do remember that VP8 & 9 where quite fast on my old laptop and now on my new one VP11 and 12 are crawling. I might consider to go back to VP 9 on my laptop which I only use to make the initial cuts at site and then transfer the project to VP12. My usual workflow includes HDV and AVCHD files from my Z5U and NX5U; delivery is usual BD, DVD and Internet; luckily those codecs are all GPU accelerated and really fast on my system.

Just thought of something - make certain you have quality settings set to BEST in V9... It's been a while since I used V9, but I think the default settings are only "GOOD" and therefore you are getting faster renders at the sake of quality. I might be wrong but once I set all project settings to identical, V9 is slower than V10e and V12 (with GTX570)...

@ OldSmoke, indeed.

@ TheRhino, Good point!
But I see that V9 & V12 were set to 'good' so identical.