Multi core processing

[UCB Ltd]

We have just bought a new Core 2 6600 machine and it is meant to work seamlessly with HDV. Unfortunately I use multiple layers with serious filters and effects on many and this machine hardly copes at all. The old P4 I had struggled much more but I need help choosing an upgrade that will have enough grunt to cope. Q1. Does Edius use multi core processing (i.e. 2 cores or more)?
Q2. Any idea which processor will be adequate without breaking the bank at this stage?

[Rusty]

I used E6300 before I upgraded to Q6700 and it worked fine (well ok) with HQ files. Decient RT performance for HDV projects and unstopable with DV projects.

Are you using RAID?

Rusty

[andrewwhiteley]

Hi UCB Ltd

Hi there

You also need to consider hard drive performance. I suspect that this could be an issue.

For editing with Canopus HQ files, you would do well to consider using fast discs (sata 2 would do) striped in RAID 0 - for more security RAID 10 will effectively give a mirrored back up meaning that the RAID can be rebuilt without data loss should a disc fail etc.

Kind regards

Andrew

[Jerry]

Q1. Does Edius use multi core processing (i.e. 2 cores or more)?
Q2. Any idea which processor will be adequate without breaking the bank at this stage?

You mentioned you are doing HDV. Do you mean native or HQ. If you mean native, you might want to switch to HQ. This will make the system more efficient. The HQ codec works on a processor/hard drive method.


1. 2 Cores max. If you have four cores at a lower speed, that speed is what
Edius uses. But, the quad will work better in PC3 and Adobe products.


2. If you wait a couple of weeks Intel is lowering prices. Keep your eyes on the web July 22nd. A dual core 3.0 chip at 1333fsb
will be going for below $300. You will more than likely have to get
a different mobo for the 1333 fsb.

3. I have the Core 2 Extreme 2.93 overclocked to 3.3. I don't have any
issues with handling multiple layers and filters.

4. To touch on the other post about drives. Yes, you need a raid drive to
adequately move the footage around. I have over 6tb of storage in house.
I get 222mb/s on one of my raids(3.2tb) and around 165mb/s on another (2.5tb).

That speed(222mb/s) will do uncompressed footage.
With the new 1tb drives, 2 of
these should be fine for you for HQ files. There were reports of the
Seagate 1tb doing 105mb/s .

[STORMDAVE]

On my machine, Speed Encoder utilizes all cores. During editing in Edius and using filters etc, this is not the case....Maybe Edius 5 will be multi core optomized.

[Jerry]

On my machine, Speed Encoder utilizes all cores. During editing in Edius and using filters etc, this is not the case....Maybe Edius 5 will be multi core optomized.

Dave,
I have never used Speed Encoder, that throws it back to M2t files, right?
I have been going either to HQ, Lossless or uncompressed for storage or MPEG HD files for Bluray.
And it uses all 8 of your cores in XP? That should be better than realtime!

[STORMDAVE]

I haven't tried Canopus HQ/Lossless yet, but I will let you know.

Speed Encoder does m2t and .mpg, although I wouldn't use it for DVD's in SD projects because I use PC2 for that, and PC2 does not use all cores. ProCoder3 won't use all cores either, obviously, but the "DVD Preview" target should give the same performance as it does for Speed Encoder.

Speed Encoder is almost realtime with HD footage. A 1 minute timeline took about 1 minute and 15 seconds to render.

[tingsern]

Hi there,

I use Canopus HQ and Panasonic DVCProHD codecs interchangeably. I can't see any difference in quality. Some external programs don't understand Canopus HQ codec while some have trouble reading DVCProHD codecs. For example - Sound Forge has problems reading Canopus HQ but no trouble with DVCProHD. I stay away with uncompressed AVI - it is a real pig and hardly any better quality than say Canopus HQ or DVCProHD.

[STORMDAVE]

Well Uncompressed is what it states -- Uncompressed. I doubt a random person will see a difference between Canopus HQ Online and Uncompressed, but to keep the pristine quality of graphics, I always use uncompressed..mind you these are for small files, such as 30 second spots, which usually round out to 1GB in size.

[tingsern]

Understand. However, don't forget the original source from camera is already compressed (DVCProHD, HDV, etc) unless you have the luxury of shooting in tethered mode feeding the data in via SDI.

Even on my Panasonic broadcast monitor, and staring away at 3 feet from the screen, I still can't tell the difference between uncompressed and DVCProHD output. And if I can't tell the difference, folks using ordinary HDTV will be extremely hard pressed to see it.

[STORMDAVE]

I was just refuting your comments about Uncompressed being useless in all situations, unless that's not what you meant. Obviously I know that DVCPROHD or whatever else you're using is compressed already and there is no use for using Uncompressed on such footage, and thus I brought up an example of how uncompressed may be used.

Graphics folks use uncompressed, editing wise it doesn't really make sense to use it. You're better off using a Lossless codec.

[shueardm]

Dave works with After Effects quite a bit, in which case using uncompressed can have quality benefits when doing heavy compositing.

[tingsern]

Sorry for misreading the intent. I didn't realised he meant that he started off "uncompressed". I was thinking more of video camera aspect - not the Adobe After Effects aspect (and graphics creation). In that case, I would agree that staying uncompressed makes more sense here. Especially, if you do wave after wave of alterations over the same image (using AE for example).

[Jerry]

Understand. However, don't forget the original source from camera is already compressed (DVCProHD, HDV, etc) unless you have the luxury of shooting in tethered mode feeding the data in via SDI.

Dave wrote:Uncompressed, but to keep the pristine quality of graphics, I always use uncompressed


I agree, when I do a project I wait until the last thing to add my titles. If they are motion, or pre planned with effects, that file will be uncompressed.
Granted, it will be over either an HQ, Lossless, or uncompressed 8bit YUV
project. It depends on how much work will be done to the original.
You can also capture uncompressed with HDMI and analog(of course not with
Edius).

[robbin]

I have the same cpu you have and had problems with realtime playback. I oveclocked the cpu from 2.4 to 3.4 ghz and that gave me the perfomance gain i needed to be able to edit. Didn't cost anything and beats most cpu for sale today...