Need advice - i5 4460 vs i7 4770 for videos

[Perene]

Guys, I have purchased a camcorder, the jvc gz-ex210, and saving a 2h46m video in the best quality wastes 28 GB. Using sony Vegas pro 11.0 in a q9450 with 3 GB DDR2, Windows 7-32 takes over 18 hours to render that video, after inserting a few audios and a single image.

Currently i am thinking of buying a new PC with 8 GB RAM (at least for now). Still undecided about the CPU, between i5 4460 and i7 4770. I tried searching for benchmarks but have not found anything substantial.

Can you please help me on this? How much improvement I can expect if the i7 is chosen over the i5? Is there an estimate somewhere?

For example, let's say the same task would take 6 hours using the i5. How long will it take on i7? I need to know if the difference $ is worth paying for.

 

[Headfoot]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1198?vs=836

Look at the handbrake results, then adjust for clock speed difference, to form a rough percentage of how much faster the 4770

 

[jpiniero]

Vegas Pro looks like it does support GPU acceleration. I wonder if he would be able to get away with just buying a 290 and maybe some more ram.

 

[Burpo]

It used to take me 14hrs to render a 20Gb Blu-Ray image with a similar X3230 Xeon quad core. Going to X58 Westmere Xeon hex core dropped that render time to a little over an hr. Get the 4770 for the hyper threading.

 

[Ken g6]

Got at least a low-end discrete video card? If so: http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?...3-1231V3B&c=CJ

 

[ClockHound]

Vegas Pro looks like it does support GPU acceleration. I wonder if he would be able to get away with just buying a 290 and maybe some more ram.

Yes, it does. However Vegas 11 is two gens behind and there were issues with its OpenCL implementation. That said even a low end(ish) AMD card will rock the render time. 7700+ Altho, people had great results from the old HD6970.

Also note, must use the Sony AVC codec as the Main Concept codec doesn't actually use full GPU rendering when selected - Yes, Vegas uses it to prep the frame sequence, but Main Concept just uses the CPU.

That said, getting a new machine, always get more threads. Most any video task will use them up, so 4770 it is.

Also, if you upgrade to Vegas 13, it will use Intel's Quick Sync to speed renders, not quite as fast as a GCN core GPU tho...and expect some trial and error tweaking - speed vs quality stuff. Again use Sony's AVC codec - since MC is still GPU-broken in Vegas 13.

You could also search the Sony Forums for Vegas 11 GPU render info:
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/Forums/ShowTopics.asp?ForumID=4

 

[Perene]

I created a project in the last Sony Vegas version, plus:

- Windows last version (8.1, 64 bit)
- i7 4770
- GA-H97M-D3H LGA 1150
- Hyper 212X (CPU cooler)
- 8 GB RAM
- Corsair DDR-3 1600mhz Vengeance - CMZ8GX3M1A1600C10
- SSD Samsung EVO 840 120 GB (used for the render)

It had only a few JPGs and MP3 streams, and 1h 19min.

It took 1h16m50s to render the whole thing. The exact time with help from the R7 265 video card.

It seems the video card will only make a difference if the project has special effects or sofisticated stuff, even with nVidia (CUDA). Or maybe it has something to do with the codec.

This is the generated file:

********
Format : MPEG-4
Format profile : Base Media / Version 2
Codec ID : mp42
File size : 4.38 GiB
Duration : 1h 19mn
Overall bit rate mode : Variable
Overall bit rate : 7 912 Kbps
Encoded date : UTC 2014-11-23 02:04:07
Tagged date : UTC 2014-11-23 02:04:07

Video
ID : 2
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L4.0
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 2 frames
Format settings, GOP : M=2, N=15
Codec ID : avc1
Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding
Duration : 1h 19mn
Source duration : 1h 19mn
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 7 779 Kbps
Maximum bit rate : 16.0 Mbps
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate mode : Constant
Frame rate : 29.970 fps
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.125
Stream size : 4.30 GiB (98%)
Source stream size : 4.30 GiB (98%)
Language : English
Encoded date : UTC 2014-11-23 02:04:07
Tagged date : UTC 2014-11-23 02:04:07

Audio
ID : 1
Format : AAC
Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
Format profile : LC
Codec ID : 40
Duration : 1h 19mn
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 128 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : Front: L R
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Compression mode : Lossy
Stream size : 72.5 MiB (2%)
Language : English
Encoded date : UTC 2014-11-23 02:04:07
Tagged date : UTC 2014-11-23 02:04:07
**********

Anyway, the video card (which uses OpenCL) helping or not, still it takes only a while to create what I want.

Like I said before, it took me several hours to do similar tasks using a Core Quad 9450, 3 GB/RAM DDR-2 and Win7-32 bit.

So far I am extremely satisfied and recommend this CPU.

Thank you all!

 

[ClockHound]

Did you compare rendering, not that you have a spare 3+ hours to find out the difference with and without GPU rendering?

On the first panel of the Sony AVC encode option, did you select the: Render using GPU if available option or Automatic?

Sometimes Vegas will select CPU Only rendering as the default setting.

In my usage, most projects have lots of effects, multiple video files and images and text media generation so GPU rendering results in a massive reduction in render time. That and lots of CPU threads - 12 and counting. ;-)

Happy to hear that your new rig is saving time and thanks for letting us know your results!