i7 2600k @ 3.4::4.0::4.2 GHZ Vegas 10 Benchmarks

wannabeapilot

wannabeapilot

Well-known member
I had next to no information on what kind of performance i could expect from a core i7 2600k

So I hope these test are useful to someone looking to buy a new computer and wondering about the performance increase.

My previous best computer was a:

q6600 @2.4ghz
4 gb ram @800mhz ddr2
3x samsung f3 1tb hdds

I ran the same benchmark on it and the 1080p render took 1:05:38

that's more than the total time my i7 2600k took to render all 3 versions together

So here are the new Computer specs:

Core i7 2600k 3.4ghz (3.8 TurboBoost)
16gb DDR3 @ 1600MHZ
5x Samsung f3 1TB (2 in raid 0)
windows 7 64bit
vegas 10e 64bit

For this test i used some canon t2i 1920x1080 29.97fps footage (straight from the camera, no transcoding)

no plugins or effects

I rendered the videos with the main concept avc/mp4 codec

So on to the results:

Stock i7 2600k 3.4ghz

9:59 source. Render time 7:56 4mb/s 320kbs h264 480p

9:59 Source. Render time 15:46 10mb/s 320kbs h264 720p

9:59 Source. Render time 25:18 14mb/s 320kbs h264 1080p


i7 2600k OC 4ghz

9:59 Source. Render time 7:00 4mb/s 320kbs h264 480p

9:59 Source. Render time 13:45 10mb/s 320kbs h264 720p

9:59 Source. Render time 22:06 14mb/s 320kbs h264 1080p


i7 2600k OC 4.2ghz

9:59 Source. Render time 6:53 4mb/s 320kbs h264 480p

9:59 Source. Render time 13:11 10mb/s 320kbs h264 720p

9:59 Source. Render time 21:01 14mb/s 320kbs h264 1080p


4.2 ghz is as far as I am willing to push my cpu for the moment.
 
Last edited:
thanks for the test, were you on 64bit or 32 bit vegas? any plugins you used>how many tracks ( i assume 1 source track),thanks
 
thank you, i wounder if you did the same test on 32bit sony vegas, how much render time difference we will have for the same clip..I saw somewhere that the max,is 20% less time between 64 and 32 ,you know anything about that, and if you have had 32bit before, how much is having all that extra ram in the 64bit to help workflow (preview,loading many plugins) compared to 32 bit.I have been for 3 years on 32bit,. and of late thinking of moving to 64 bit, the only drawback for me is the lack of magic bullet support on 64 bit..thanks again
 
sammysammy said:
thank you, i wounder if you did the same test on 32bit sony vegas, how much render time difference we will have for the same clip..I saw somewhere that the max,is 20% less time between 64 and 32 ,you know anything about that, and if you have had 32bit before, how much is having all that extra ram in the 64bit to help workflow (preview,loading many plugins) compared to 32 bit.I have been for 3 years on 32bit,. and of late thinking of moving to 64 bit, the only drawback for me is the lack of magic bullet support on 64 bit..thanks again
Click to expand...

Task manager shows only about 2.5gb of ram being used while rendering at 100% cpu usage so i doubt the change from 32 bit to 64 bit matters much if at all.

I haven't had the chance to work with any intense projects yet (lots of plugins clips effects etc) but when I do ill update this thread :)
 
good idea for a thread! i'm loving my 2600k @ 4.7ghz in Vegas. even cheaper gt430 here....looks pathetic inside my case, but Vegas doesn't ask alot from it anyway...
 
Here is a couple questions, what is your Dynamic RAM preview set at and how many Rendering Threads do you have it set to?
 
krotoflik said:
Here is a couple questions, what is your Dynamic RAM preview set at and how many Rendering Threads do you have it set to?
Click to expand...
i have Dynamic RAM set to 1024. Reason? I don't really know, i've tried 0 and ive tried 4000, and i don't notice a huge difference. I'm running 8gb of Corsair 1600mhz 1.5v RAM. So i settled at 1024mb. I get smooth playback at best/full unless there's a lot of effects.

I set my rendering threads to 8 (obviously with hyper-threading turned on), simply because i never do anything on my PC while rendering, so i like all threads to be pumping. Just a personal preference.

Hope that helps!
 
Chris Light said:
i have Dynamic RAM set to 1024. Reason? I don't really know, i've tried 0 and ive tried 4000, and i don't notice a huge difference. I'm running 8gb of Corsair 1600mhz 1.5v RAM. So i settled at 1024mb. I get smooth playback at best/full unless there's a lot of effects.

I set my rendering threads to 8 (obviously with hyper-threading turned on), simply because i never do anything on my PC while rendering, so i like all threads to be pumping. Just a personal preference.

Hope that helps!
Click to expand...


Your RAM will matter at least for when you perform a dynamic ram preview. If you have 4 cores and you dont do anything while rendering I would crank that sucker up to 16 threads. You can have four threads per core.
 
krotoflik said:
Your RAM will matter at least for when you perform a dynamic ram preview. If you have 4 cores and you dont do anything while rendering I would crank that sucker up to 16 threads. You can have four threads per core.
Click to expand...

sounds fun. might try it! thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top