pope 0 #1 February 1, 2012 For those that know about such things: Could you describe the ultimate Vegas Workstation (assuming you had the cash to set it up RIGHT) in your opinion? Any information is appreciated, and specifics are helpful. Here are the parameters: -Busy operation, 4 editors churning out approximately 100+ 6-7 min. videos/day. -Goal is for ultimate speed in edit, render. -Optimized for USB delivery (rendering at 720p as mp4's). -Vegas Pro 10 -Production Assistant 2 What's the best Off-the shelf computer? What are the best components if I were to build it myself? ie: CPU, Power, boards, additions etc... Is there anything I need to be sure and consider? Any leads on brands, websites, etc are helpful, as are any of your real life Vegas tandem editing experiences! Thanks so much for sharing your knowledge! cheers! pope Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #2 February 1, 2012 I'll leave it to Parachutist to comment on the "off the shelf" because he does this weekly. However... Run Vegas 11. Upgrade is cheap and the difference in AVC rendertimes is absolutely worth the cheap upgrade. Sony built their own AVC module/decode so they're not relying on MainConcept anymore. Much faster. FWIW, I just had Parachutist spec out a new 'puter for me that is for Vegas 11 and Sonar X3. Turns out the VASST turnkey is pretty much the right answer. One thing I'm loving is that we added SSD's to the boot/application drive on the Elsinore machines. It's much more nimble and more stable. Haven't hit the heat of summer, but I'm betting it's gonna be just as solid. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pope 0 #3 February 1, 2012 I look forward to Parachutist's comments then! Thanks Spot, for the info. When you say "VASST" turnkey do you mean PA2 or is there more to the package that I'm not aware of? If PA2 is all I need, will it require an upgrade for Vegas 11 or will it work as is? thanks! pope Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #4 February 1, 2012 PA2 works in both Vegas 11 and 10. Upgrade on Vegas 10 to 11 isn't very expensive, i don't think. VASST offers a turnkey system complete with templates, etc customized to each DZ. It is a shit-hot, super fast system ready to roll straight out of the box. Chris/Parachutist builds them, tech support is through Sony. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pope 0 #5 February 2, 2012 Thanks Spot. So on the 'snore machines did you add the SSD's to the boot drive only? How would you configure your HD's? SSD boot drive and then fast traditional drives for the rest? SATA externals? Also, I wanted to ask you what else is different about Vegas 11 over 10? What did they take away? What did they add? It definitely sounds faster! Thanks again! pope Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #6 February 2, 2012 SSD on boot only, really enjoying it (so far). Vegas 11 uses a different AVC decoder that is a little more optimized than the Main Concept kernel that everyone else (including Sony) have been using for years. The AVC performance alone is really worth it. Traditional drives for the render-to and backups. We back up weekly to twin eSATA drives that are stored in another building. One word of caution; as you're building your templates, use the legacy titler. The new one sucks donkey balls for how much mem it eats. The old one is perfect for what we do, it can be templated and animated the same as the new one, and it uses no additional resources. The new one is GPU-optimized and unless you have a crotch rocket video card...it just BLOWS (Yes, I've shared my feelings with the engineering team).Access the legacy titler by inserting Generated Media, then choosing the Legacy Title Tool from the options. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parachutist 1 #7 February 5, 2012 Pope, I've been going back and forth on what the best solution would be for your needs. Outputting to typical MP4 takes longer than most any other options, and the reason is lots of data crunching, which (mostly) all happens in the CPUs right now. So you'll need some high-speed multi-core processors, right? But that means more power needed, which translates to more heat. You mentioned the ambient temps there are not low. So in order to get very high speed while keeping the temps reasonable, some creative thermal management would need to be employed (really big heat sinks for the CPUs and likely for the chipset too). That could be done, but it gets complex and the more complex your system is, the more maintenance it'll need. Putting together a system specifically designed for your MP4 outputs would require some experimentation. I'd love to play with a 16 or 32-core server setup and one or two RAID 0 SSD setups to see how the best performance could be reached, but that gets expensive and hot fast. I wish I had a better answer for you, but you're in new territory that hasn't been explored much yet. In the end, I think I'd settle on an 8-core AMD FX CPU (same that we're offering on our VASST systems currently), with a relatively large heat sink. That can stay within reasonable temp specs while rendering files. This configuration is offering good performance for the price, reliability, and the ability to run in a warm environment. Even with a fast system, it will take quite a while longer to render most MP4s than it would to output DVDs (usually about 3x-4x as long). Are you certain you want to move to MP4 on thumb drives? Over here in California I would expect to get lots of support calls from customers wondering how to play that file, or wondering why it plays in poor frame rates on their home computer systems. We have some customers who request raw files from our HD cameras, but we make sure those people will be able to use the files. About half the time when they realize those files can't be played in a DVD player, they change their minds and request a standard DVD instead. regards, Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MorfiusX 0 #8 February 13, 2012 QuoteIn the end, I think I'd settle on an 8-core AMD FX CPU (same that we're offering on our VASST systems currently), with a relatively large heat sink. That can stay within reasonable temp specs while rendering files. This configuration is offering good performance for the price, reliability, and the ability to run in a warm environment. The price on the AMD is definitely better than the Intel's I've been looking at. But from the info I can find, the Core i7 2700k seems to beat the AMDs hands down. Have you compared the two? (I ask because I am getting ready to build two new rendering machines for my DZ with similar requirements mentioned) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parachutist 1 #9 February 13, 2012 Quote The price on the AMD is definitely better than the Intel's I've been looking at. But from the info I can find, the Core i7 2700k seems to beat the AMDs hands down. Have you compared the two? (I ask because I am getting ready to build two new rendering machines for my DZ with similar requirements mentioned) I've read benchmark reviews of comparisons between the two. Yes the 2700k is a little faster, but a good bit more expensive, so it's a cost/performance balance. You'll see in some benchmarks the FX-8150 is right up there with the 2700k: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1751/6/ http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1751/5/ http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1751/7/ or beats the 2700k slightly: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1751/9/ In others the FX-8150 lags behind: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1751/10/ http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1751/10/ Overall I think the FX is providing the best output per dollar right now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Icon134 0 #10 March 3, 2012 The system I have at home is definitely not off the shelf. I agree with DSE that the best upgrade I did to speed up my system in general was to upgrade to a SSD. I'll have to look at upgrading to Vegas 11 when I get back to the states possibly after I get settled in again... I've posted my system specs before but here it is again. (the system is about 10 months old however... and alas... I haven't used it in almost 5 months...) System Specs: - Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R (rev 2.0) - Intel Core i7 [email protected] GHz - Thermaltake Bigwater 760is Liquid Cooled - 12 GB G.Skill Ripjaws PC3 10666 (DDR3 1333) - OS Drive - OCZ 360GB HSDL (which is wicked fast) - Raw Footage (2 TB effective space) - RAID 10+Spare: 4 x 1 TB WD Caviar Black SATA2 + 1 TB Caviar Green as (Spare). - Working Data Drive (1 TB effecive space) - RAID 0: 2 x 500 GB SATA3 (6 GB/s) for Rendering, etc. - RAID 1 - Storage/built in backup storage (2 TB effective) - 2 x TB Caviar Green HDD - 3 ViewSonic 22" - 1920x1080 across the bottom and an an older LD widescreen above them, they're mounted with an Ergotron - ATI Radeon HD 5870 Eyefinity 6 - useful for x-plane spanned across three displays not so much for video editing. - All Loaded into a Thermaltake Armor+ Full Tower case...Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlindBrick 0 #11 March 5, 2012 We just built a new machine: i7-3930K 32 gig DDR 2133 120 gig SSD for boot 150 gig Velociraptor for work disk 1.5 tb HDD for archive 560 Ti gpu H100 water cooler If I had an unlimited budget, I'd have went with an i7-3960x, 64 gigs of RAM, and a 570 or 580 GPU, but I am happy with what I have because past what I actually went with, price decouples from performance with you paying a huge premium for only incremental performance boosts. Probably for the best anyway as ambient temperature is a major issue during the busy season, and I'm not sure we could keep the boxes cool without ducting more of the ac directly to the comps and as it is, we have issues with the heat getting to the editors. One word of caution if you do decide to go with an i7-3930K. Make sure you are running the latest version of your mobo's bios. The 3930K was released in a limited edition with limited funcitonality because of a hardware issue related to server usage. The LGA 2011 mobos manufactuered before Feb 2012 use a bios that's configured for that chip. At the start of Feb, Intel released a new version of the 3930 that fixes the issue in the orignal, unfortunately it doesn't always mesh well with the older bios settings. -blind"If you end up in an alligator's jaws, naked, you probably did something to deserve it." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
