my system should play 2 layers of 640x480 without any glitches or slowdown

Just let it all out, buddy. You're among friends here.
dreamtk
Posts: 153
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:43
Location: Sydney Australia

my system should play 2 layers of 640x480 without any glitches or slowdown

Post by dreamtk »

XP pro
3.2 ghz CPU + 1 gig ram on a shuttle 75G2.

As great as resolume is (and yes it is that good!) it's a shame one needs the new 3.8 ghz CPUS and DDR2 ram with 10,000 rpm HDDS to use 3 layers of 640x480 clips (MJPEG) with Global effects ect... (and even then there's probably no guarantee of 100% smooth playback :( )

not whinging, just sharing thoughts.

[Edited on 30-7-2005 by dreamtk]

VJ Nexus
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 18:42
Location: Kansas City / Chicago

Post by VJ Nexus »

I use 3 layers of 640x480 without any loss. I do show loss with mjpeg, using indeo 5.11 gets around this problem easily though...

My cpu is only 2.4ghz, but it is an athlon 64 with far superior architecture than an intel p4 ht. It carries about the same load as a p4 3.6 with no hyper-threading, which as we know is not a plus for resolume. You should try converting your clips into indeo 5.11 and see if you get better results - at 640x480 you can't really see any quality degredation...

Also, are your hard drives using raid_0?? this is a huge plus, as it joins two identical harddrives, and makes it appear as one, splitting the work equally between them. Essentially both hard drives work half as hard to get the same amount of data streamed. Right now i have two 7200rpm hdds in raid_0 and i'm getting near perfect results at 640x480 - you should be just fine with a little bit of tweaking. It is very important that the two hard drives are Identical! same make, model, everything...

Let me know if any of this helps

Edit: One more thing - I showed an increase of 3-6 fps when I mounted a new HUGE heat sync on my cpu. Keeping my cpu cooler gave me better performance out of resolume, with less little glitches or farts as I call them. I'm smooth as ice now...

[Edited on 31-7-2005 by NexusIntent]

Teriander
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 20:03

Post by Teriander »

NexusIntent, My laptop has Raid_0 but I still have problems :( Soon Im going to take someone's advice about buying an external HD thats firewire.. What do you think about this? I really dont want to spend 200+$ on a new HD. But its the only way to get smooth playback.

Alienware 7700m notebook
dual 3.2 ghz
2gigs of RAM
Geforce 6800 256ram
2 internal 40gig HD raid 0

dreamtk
Posts: 153
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:43
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by dreamtk »

Originally posted by NexusIntent
Let me know if any of this helps
everything you said helps mate BUT i'd love to be able to come back here someday and say:

"NexusIntent buddy, I can run 3 layers of uncompressed video with an effect on every layer + 3 global effects with perfect 24-30 fps smooth playback" hehe

with the amount hardware costs these days... why can't anything do this yet ? :)

[Edited on 1-8-2005 by dreamtk]

SuperficiaL
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 15:48
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands

i dont see why u shouldnt be able to...

Post by SuperficiaL »

i tested my current pc with 3 layers 800x600 with 2 effects, no noticible slowdown...
and that wasnt with raid...
building a system that has raid now ill post some pics and stats when i finish it, if youre interested...

Greetz,
SuperficiaL...

dreamtk
Posts: 153
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:43
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by dreamtk »

that would be great SuperficiaL, especially as i'm in the process of building/researching the best possible SHUTTLE for this software !

I've decided dualcore AMD as it matched the Fx-55 in all Single threaded Applications, and of course excells in Multitasking by 40% i think it was...

The fastest HDD setup will be required. I don't want any excuses with next rig. ;)

continuity-B
Posts: 295
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 18:24
Location: Glasgow

Post by continuity-B »

My laptop has Raid_0 but I still have problems
While a RAID in itself is fast, it seems (from what I can gather) that maybe this benefit is outweighed to a degree by effectively having your OS/system and your clips on the same drive. (anyone got any experience with this?)

If you can be bothered, maybe try un-RAIDing your drives and use them as two separate drives - one with the system and the other for clips. This might be better but depending on the original speed of your drives you still might not have a high enough transfer rate for resolume, in which case you'll want to get an external firewire drive.

If you get an external 72,000rpm fw drive you should defo have no problems anyway.

Anonymous

Post by Anonymous »

i have a firewire externall hdd - my laptop is an hp6100 p3 1ghz 768mb ram running resolume 1.5

i can manage 2 layers 640 x 480 + global effect - no slowdown

3 layers is a bit iffy though

in my limited estimation its the 5400 spin speed on the laptop internal hdd's (you have a laptop with 2 hard drives?) that is stiffing you - also i discovered whewn looking my external drive that usb2 quoted data transfer rates are max NOT sustained where firewire is wouted as sustained - so although the rates look on paper to be slightly slower they are in fact over a sustained period better.

Psykopulp
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 16:52
Location: Switzerland

Post by Psykopulp »

Hi first here's my system:
AMILO 3438G, Intel Centrino 1.86 with 1 gig of DDR2, 2x60 gigz HD in Raid 0 (yes i know RAID in a laptop AWESOME ^___^') a GEforce 6800 go with 256 MB ram and a Firewire 7200 rpm 250 gigz HD. I add a Digital DV or a IR Webcam.

I'm processing Indeo 5.2, MJPEG B and flash files. I must process at 400x300 and output at 800x600 to have no slow downs and EVENTHOUGH i get frame drops to 19fps (25fps normal.. Hey PAL ^__^') if i add some Ist Fast blur or some other effects with 2 or 3 layers.

My files are encoded at 400x300 so quality isn't that bad but i'm looking forward to use 640x480 and 800x600 files.

The solution might be within the new GPU acceleration espacially for all laptops users with our "medium" CPU.

A very nice thing would be to include a configuration anaylser in Resolume so that registred user could get optimisation tips ^__^'

I love RESOLUME please improve it fast :)

User avatar
gpvillamil
Posts: 550
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 03:33
Location: San Francisco, California

Post by gpvillamil »

I think Resolume is more compute-bound than disk-bound, in some cases.

I have an IBM Thinkpad T41p, with a 1.7G Pentium M and a 7200 RPM drive. All my clips are in 640x480 MJPEG. I can play 3 layers of these clips, with tons of effects, at 30 fps - if I set the output resolution to 320x240. If I set the output reso to 640x480, then I struggle with one.

Note that I am playing the *same* 640x480 clips off the HD, so the disk throughput is the same. However, an output resolution of 320x240 works great, but 640x480 does not.

GPU acceleration will go a long way towards removing the CPU bottleneck, so should be a priority...

Post Reply