Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48
Location: Canada
Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
|
Hi Folks,
There's a lot of speculation I've found around here, so I really need some tangible evidence, or response from vmix peeps.
We recently did a bunch of sweet broadcasting with vmix, but we pushed our CPU harder than we originally thought.
We're in the process of designing a solution to address the current and future plans, but I was hoping I could get some real info about how far the parallelism that vmix has.
Let's say we have lots of quadro GPUs, just for the sake of conversation. If we were to throw say... 24, or 48 cores at vmix, for all sorts of things, including a ludicrous amounts of things like instant replays, multicorder inputs (12 or 24 inputs), streaming to say 6 different ingests, etc.
How would vmix, ffmpg and all the components stand up to such level of parallel compute?
I'm hoping it's good, because that's kind of the direction we're heading ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 12/22/2016(UTC)
Posts: 47
Location: Brazil
Thanks: 15 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/20/2014(UTC) Posts: 2,721   Location: Bordeaux, France Thanks: 243 times
Was thanked: 794 time(s) in 589 post(s)
|
Hi
if you don't want us to speculate, then just don't!
Give us your hardware detailed specs and tell us how you could associate "lots of quadro GPUs", "24, or 48 cores at vmix" and enough capture cards to handle "12 or 24 inputs" in a single computer. Then we can talk...
In the meantime, I suggest that you start thinking about multi vMix potential workflows based on NDI.
Guillaume
|
 1 user thanked DWAM for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/24/2015(UTC)
Posts: 370
Location: Netherlands
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 81 time(s) in 72 post(s)
|
I think at a certain point you will get bandwidth problems. Splitting things up between multiple machines seems the best solution to me.
Also, at the moment there are still problems with X99, so until intel launces a new platform for 40x lanes, we are stuck a bit when it comes to buying new systems.
At this time, 5-year old X79 outperforms X99 bigtime when it comes to vMix.
|
1 user thanked Mathijs for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/1/2015(UTC) Posts: 1,151  Location: Houston TX Thanks: 319 times
Was thanked: 263 time(s) in 233 post(s)
|
It's interesting that, depending upon what class of CPU your're buying, the actual compute capability of desktop CPU's hasn't really come on that strong in the past 2-3 generations of CPUs. The quad-core i7-4790K (2014) and i7-6700K (2015) are about equals. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2794&cmp[]=2275&cmp[]=2565 It's not until you jump to the 8-core 6900K (2016, 3x the $) that you see a big performance improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48
Location: Canada
Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
|
Methinks you didn't quite read close enough. Show me an i7 with 24 or 48 cores... I'm talking dual socket Xeon here of course... mjgraves wrote:It's interesting that, depending upon what class of CPU your're buying, the actual compute capability of desktop CPU's hasn't really come on that strong in the past 2-3 generations of CPUs. The quad-core i7-4790K (2014) and i7-6700K (2015) are about equals. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2794&cmp[]=2275&cmp[]=2565 It's not until you jump to the 8-core 6900K (2016, 3x the $) that you see a big performance improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48
Location: Canada
Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
|
When I say speculation vs tangible info, I'm talking about the countless other threads where people just hum and haw and give their opinion, without giving actual examples that are similar. I want something tangible, not an opinion, or info from a credible source (vmix devs) that intimately know how the software is written/works. DWAM wrote:Hi
if you don't want us to speculate, then just don't!
Give us your hardware detailed specs and tell us how you could associate "lots of quadro GPUs", "24, or 48 cores at vmix" and enough capture cards to handle "12 or 24 inputs" in a single computer. Then we can talk...
In the meantime, I suggest that you start thinking about multi vMix potential workflows based on NDI.
Guillaume
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/20/2014(UTC) Posts: 2,721 Location: Bordeaux, France Thanks: 243 times
Was thanked: 794 time(s) in 589 post(s)
|
vMix devs recommend i7 over Xeon.
The real problem is PCI-E lanes btw
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/1/2015(UTC) Posts: 1,151 Location: Houston TX Thanks: 319 times
Was thanked: 263 time(s) in 233 post(s)
|
BloodyIron wrote:When I say speculation vs tangible info, I'm talking about the countless other threads where people just hum and haw and give their opinion, without giving actual examples that are similar. I want something tangible, not an opinion, or info from a credible source (vmix devs) that intimately know how the software is written/works. Perhaps you'd be better off simply asking if anyone has built a vMix host using one or more E7 Xeons? If not, go build it. As has been mentioned, vMix devs recommend i7 over Xeons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/24/2015(UTC)
Posts: 370
Location: Netherlands
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 81 time(s) in 72 post(s)
|
Quote:The real problem is PCI-E lanes btw PCI-E lanes and memory bandwidth. Quote:I'm talking dual socket Xeon here of course... A dual Xeon setup at this moment will use the C612 chipset which is in fact X99 plus support for multi CPU. So you will have the same performance problems of people with a X99 board with a i7 or Xeon. I would advice very much against investing in a big setup that is based on that platform. I would wait until 2018 at least to see what Intel Kaby Lake comes up with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48
Location: Canada
Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
|
That's weird man, why? Also, some of the CPUs I'm looking at can do 40x gen3 lanes each. DWAM wrote:vMix devs recommend i7 over Xeon.
The real problem is PCI-E lanes btw
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48
Location: Canada
Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
|
One of the systems I'm looking at would be c602 actually. What problems exactly have people been seeing that you're referring to? Mathijs wrote:Quote:The real problem is PCI-E lanes btw PCI-E lanes and memory bandwidth. Quote:I'm talking dual socket Xeon here of course... A dual Xeon setup at this moment will use the C612 chipset which is in fact X99 plus support for multi CPU. So you will have the same performance problems of people with a X99 board with a i7 or Xeon. I would advice very much against investing in a big setup that is based on that platform. I would wait until 2018 at least to see what Intel Kaby Lake comes up with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48
Location: Canada
Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/24/2015(UTC)
Posts: 370
Location: Netherlands
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 81 time(s) in 72 post(s)
|
Quote:One of the systems I'm looking at would be c602 actually. What problems exactly have people been seeing that you're referring to?
Check THIS thread. It is also discussed in a vMix Fun Time Live show, but I don't know which one. Maybe someone else does?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48
Location: Canada
Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
|
Yeah I read that thread front to back and there's no conclusive evidence saying that the X99 chipset behaviour would be the same as C612 or C602... so not really seeing how the X99 stuff is relevant at all to C612 or C602 chipsets. Mathijs wrote:Quote:One of the systems I'm looking at would be c602 actually. What problems exactly have people been seeing that you're referring to?
Check THIS thread. It is also discussed in a vMix Fun Time Live show, but I don't know which one. Maybe someone else does?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 4/16/2013(UTC) Posts: 406 Location: Iowa Thanks: 281 times
Was thanked: 32 time(s) in 29 post(s)
|
FTR, I am running an ASUS P6T deluxe v2 motherboard (2008) that I originally built with an i7-920 quad core, now running with a Xeon x5680 hex core released in 2010 that I got off ebay for $150 used in 2015. The system currently has 18GB memory, and is running nVidia GTX 980 graphics, and includes a 4 port dedicated USB3 card for communicating with 4 1080p web cameras.
The Xeon processor basically doubled the performance of the original i7-920 in benchmarks, and honestly, I couldn't be happier about the new live it's given my old motherboard. I had considered spending a couple k in updating, but after weighing the difference in performance, I can't justify it.
On April 12, I ran this system at an event and had 4 web cams, a USB3 video capture card, an Amcrest IP2M-841b PTZ cam, and a total of 66 inputs configured, I only noticed a couple dropped frames.
I'm still quite happy with the performance of this system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/20/2014(UTC) Posts: 2,721 Location: Bordeaux, France Thanks: 243 times
Was thanked: 794 time(s) in 589 post(s)
|
This discussion would certainly be more productive if you could indicate precisely which components you are talking about?
Are you planning to use an Asus Z9PE-D8 WS Motherboard for example?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/24/2015(UTC)
Posts: 370
Location: Netherlands
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 81 time(s) in 72 post(s)
|
Quote:Yeah I read that thread front to back and there's no conclusive evidence saying that the X99 chipset behaviour would be the same as C612 or C602... so not really seeing how the X99 stuff is relevant at all to C612 or C602 chipsets. Then throw your money at it and find out yourself. I can imagine it is not nice to hear this after you got the idea to build a system like this, but I'm only trying to keep you from being disappointed after spending a lot of money. I'll stop doing that now and go into "told you so" mode. You don't have to listen, it is just my best advice. Do what you want with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48
Location: Canada
Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
|
Listen to what? Your "advice" is speculation. That's not advice. The thread is explicitly about the X99 chipset, and shows no indication of impacting other chipsets. Part of what I do is System Architecture, and this kind of lack of information wouldn't stand custard for a reason not to go in that direction. So go be what you're gonna be. Mathijs wrote:Quote:Yeah I read that thread front to back and there's no conclusive evidence saying that the X99 chipset behaviour would be the same as C612 or C602... so not really seeing how the X99 stuff is relevant at all to C612 or C602 chipsets. Then throw your money at it and find out yourself. I can imagine it is not nice to hear this after you got the idea to build a system like this, but I'm only trying to keep you from being disappointed after spending a lot of money. I'll stop doing that now and go into "told you so" mode. You don't have to listen, it is just my best advice. Do what you want with it.
|
1 user thanked BloodyIron for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48
Location: Canada
Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
|
Thanks! What was your CPU usage during that particularly demanding example? madness wrote:FTR, I am running an ASUS P6T deluxe v2 motherboard (2008) that I originally built with an i7-920 quad core, now running with a Xeon x5680 hex core released in 2010 that I got off ebay for $150 used in 2015. The system currently has 18GB memory, and is running nVidia GTX 980 graphics, and includes a 4 port dedicated USB3 card for communicating with 4 1080p web cameras.
The Xeon processor basically doubled the performance of the original i7-920 in benchmarks, and honestly, I couldn't be happier about the new live it's given my old motherboard. I had considered spending a couple k in updating, but after weighing the difference in performance, I can't justify it.
On April 12, I ran this system at an event and had 4 web cams, a USB3 video capture card, an Amcrest IP2M-841b PTZ cam, and a total of 66 inputs configured, I only noticed a couple dropped frames.
I'm still quite happy with the performance of this system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
Important Information:
The vMix Forums uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
More Details
Close
