Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Edius X and AMD 5950X and 5900X CPUs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Thanks for your input on the SSD storage route. I have been running a 2x 6TB drive RAID 0 for many years but it only gets up into the mid 300's MBPS which is too slow for a lot of HQX files. Perfect for anything else. To include Ron's info, I have kind of given up on CPUs keeping up with the video industry needs. Resolutions are changing very fast and clearly single core speed has hit some sort of wall around 5Ghz. I don't think we are going to get the old "13 layers of DV even with the smoke filter" level of dominant performance with our systems anymore. With the industry headed more towards RAW or RAW light, it seems we will be in this situation for a long time. So my thinking is to accept a transcoding workflow for anything more than one camera, less complex edits. This workflow is actually very inclusive of lower powered systems as long as there is bandwidth available for the fast storage. Which points to AMD or Intel enthusiast level machines.

    Part of this move is the joy of editing with HQX files. I have noticed the editing goes much quicker as everything associated with the timeline is instant.

    Regarding NVMe drives and 2TB vs 4TB SSD - One could get a PCIe card that allows for multiple 2TB drives for pretty low cost. I just did some looking around on Newegg and I think my best value setup is 1 x 1TB Samsung NVME ($140) for my "Video Projects" folder which is where I put all things Edius except source files and 2 x 2TB Sabrent NVME ($220 each) for the exported HQX files. This gives me reliability for my video projects files on the Samsung and lower cost but similar speed for the HQX files. The drives plus the cost of the PCIe card are equal to less cost than a single 4TB Samsung NVMe. Plus I gain a TB for the HXQ files.

    I built my current X7900 system in 2017, so a 5950X system with the above storage setup might be a move to keep things current and avoid any meltdowns! I have run my current setup fairly hard in those years with a lot of overnight chugging. My guess is that a 5950X build would be quite a bit faster than my x7900 on export. Timeline would probably be faster but with HQX, it would not matter as much. I am surprised the 5950x is out of stock this far after release.
    Asus Prime X299-A - Intel i9 7900x all cores @4.3GHz 2 cores @4.5GHz - 32GB RAM - NVidia GTX1070 - Edius 9 WG - BM Intensity 4k - Boris RED - Vitascene 2 - Windows 10

    Comment


    • #17
      Whenever I get back to my hobby of shooting theatre which is not likely until everyone has had a vaccine shot here. Converting 2 hours from 3 camera to HQX is not anything I want to do when Resolve will run fine from h264 UHD files. The problem is EDIUS takes time to convert to HQX for 6 hours of video. I know I could do it over night but why when there is another solution rather than convert large files into even bigger files having to place on fast drives maybe separate for each camera for speed. EDIUS has to solve this problem because others have done so. It's a bit like towing a trailer with your car. If it isn't powerful enough and you really want to tow the trailer then you buy a truck or a more powerful car. HQX was a wonderful solution when CPU etc were really slow and decode was not well written for some codecs. Not true anymore. I am sure EDIUS designers know what they have to do to compete they just seem slow to do it though. Timeline playback is dependent on decode capability and GPU's solve this issue especially if one can use more than one at a time. I wait in anticipation of EDIUS doing this before the competition move so far ahead it will be difficult to catch up.
      Ron Evans

      Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 NVME OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro, Shuttle Pro2

      ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS X, 9.5 WG, Vegas 18, Resolve Studio 17


      Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2

      Comment


      • #18
        I see the only solution as transcoding IF one wants to stay within Edius. For me, going to Resolve is not a solution or an option I want to pursue right now. My faith in Edius having a GPU solution was kind of broken with the release of Edius X. We can say that GPU assist has been around for years now and Edius X was the perfect time to introduce the new ways. But they did not and silence on the topic is following up the release.

        Granted, I am looking into these options for long, multicamera shoots like yourself. Edius is fine for everything else imho. If I know I will be editing through a big project, going to HQX overnight saves a lot of time later in the edit process.
        Asus Prime X299-A - Intel i9 7900x all cores @4.3GHz 2 cores @4.5GHz - 32GB RAM - NVidia GTX1070 - Edius 9 WG - BM Intensity 4k - Boris RED - Vitascene 2 - Windows 10

        Comment


        • #19
          Understood. I have used EDIUS for a long time and used Vegas for audio. The introduction to Resolve as many was for colour and only really came with solving particular colour issues with the GH5's. I have used HQX on just one of the GH5 source tracks to do multicam with 1/2 preview and it sort of works. Now however both Vegas18 and Resolve 17 can do multicam with source UHD files. A little frustrating ? Still prefer the multicam in EDIUS though so I too am a little stuck. However the CUT page in Resolve is introducing a totally different approach to multicam that is interesting especially with the new Speed Editor keyboard.
          Ron Evans

          Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 NVME OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro, Shuttle Pro2

          ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS X, 9.5 WG, Vegas 18, Resolve Studio 17


          Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2

          Comment


          • #20
            It is interesting that the multicam feature in Edius (brilliantly simple) is what has been a large reason many of us have stayed with the program. Other NLEs just do not have as intuitive approaches. I tried Resolve 16 and have Premiere CC and when I try to dig in I just do not care for their end to end approach. They are fine and the programs have more to offer than Edius overall but the logical and straight forward approach of Edius is just so much better imho. Make Edius snappy and quick and it is awesome to work in.

            I would prefer if they would add the waveforms in sequences that has been asked for forever in my planned approach as having the original and HQX layered in a sequence and then editing that sequence future proofs the edit when the HQX files are deleted. Why that can't or hasn't been added/fixed is beyond me. GPU assist, lack of sequence waveforms and the jacked up 3rd party plugin support are my big three problems with Edius. I expect3ed all of them to be "fixed" with Edius X but no dice. As Dave mentioned in the initial post, it is hard to make hardware decisions when you do not know when or if the program will evolve. GV said Edius X was going to be a huge re-write which we all took as a chance for these three to happen. Now that they have not, I am kind of scratching my head as many others about the future development of the program. Building the fast drive setup allows me to find a content place using Edius X as it is, rather than what we want it to be.

            I thought GPU assist with NVidia has a blind spot when it comes to 10bit 4:2:2 footage anyway? Like the formats is supports does not include 10bit 4:2:2. I am probably wrong as I do not know much about it.
            Asus Prime X299-A - Intel i9 7900x all cores @4.3GHz 2 cores @4.5GHz - 32GB RAM - NVidia GTX1070 - Edius 9 WG - BM Intensity 4k - Boris RED - Vitascene 2 - Windows 10

            Comment


            • #21
              Yes multicam is the reason I stay with EDIUS For single track I would go with Vegas or Resolve. The reason is EDIUS does not collapse the tracks when in multicam and I can see immediately what is going on. Since I have two tracks of GH5 UHD in my 1920x1080 edit I always go back and use layouter to crop/pan/zoom. I can do a version on each of the GH5 tracks enable or disable and see the one I like. Not easy or possible in either Vegas or Resolve at least I have not found it easy ! Yes it is easy in both to change the selected camera but some how to me not as easy as pressing one button on my Shuttle Pro V2 in EDIUS. So my desire is GPU assist ( and /or better CPU utilization ) since I do not use sequences or plugins( other than Neat occasionally )
              Ron Evans

              Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 NVME OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro, Shuttle Pro2

              ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS X, 9.5 WG, Vegas 18, Resolve Studio 17


              Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2

              Comment


              • #22
                The information I have says Edius X underlining structure is being revamped to a database system that will allow many more features to be implemented in the future. This new version is supposed to be released in late spring. Whether the new version 10.2 will have any GPU improvements is still unknown to me but it is supposed to come.
                Edius 8 Workgroup, Intel 3770K, Asus P8Z77-V Motherboard, 32GB DDR3 1600 ram, SSD for C, external Raid box with WE RE4 1TB drives Raid 0 for video assets. Overclocked 4.3ghz, Asus GTX 660 ti, water cooled system. Windows 10 Professional 64bit

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Bassman View Post
                  I see the only solution as transcoding IF one wants to stay within Edius. For me, going to Resolve is not a solution or an option I want to pursue right now. My faith in Edius having a GPU solution was kind of broken with the release of Edius X. We can say that GPU assist has been around for years now and Edius X was the perfect time to introduce the new ways. But they did not and silence on the topic is following up the release.

                  Granted, I am looking into these options for long, multicamera shoots like yourself. Edius is fine for everything else imho. If I know I will be editing through a big project, going to HQX overnight saves a lot of time later in the edit process.
                  Hi Tim.

                  Your method of editing with HQX is definitely the best way to edit in Edius if absolute performance is necessary.

                  Sure, as Ron has rightly said, if you’re using H.264/5 and can edit it because you’ve got QS, then this is the preferred choice for most people as you are going from camera to edit in the time it takes to dump your cards onto your PC’s media drives. Indeed, if I’m in a rush and it’s a simple edit I actually edit the media for certain cameras straight from the SD card.

                  However, here’s some things to consider that make the HQX workflow the best option. This assumes that any transcoding has already been factored and isn’t an issue, as is the case in any professional workflow such as TV, film etc.

                  You will already know all this stuff Tim but it may be stuff for others to consider.

                  1. HQX isn’t the best codec for Edius just because it’s Edius’ own production codec. It’s because the codec is intra-frame and is as close to the format of Edius’ YUV frame buffer as any compressed codec can be, so requires less processing to expand it into the YUV video buffer compared to heavily compressed or inter-frame codecs. Given the storage space and size, a completely uncompressed YUV codec will have a bit more edge as far as performance is concerned. Also, and not that I’ve tried them much but I’d imagine that the likes of Avid DNX and Apple ProRes, or at least certain flavours of them, should be close to HQX in performance for certain YUV variations of them and given no extra issues with the containers (MXF and MOV can be taxing on their own regardless of what’s in them, and demuxing can be problematic).

                  2. When using H.264/5 camera files you’re almost exclusively using an inter-frame variation of these codecs. Don’t forget, H.264/5 can also be intra-frame and this is regardless of the container but even as an intra-frame variation and despite the lack of temporal compression, data compression is still used that’s also very taxing on processing resources. Plus there’s also other elements of the H.264/5 codecs that make them taxing to decode and that’s regardless of the inter or intra-frame variations.

                  3. in order to use H.264/5 in Edius, the codecs have to be temporarily decoded into the YUV video buffer space. This is the same for any source. This process obviously requires processing to decode it, which is usually where the QuickSync process comes into play.

                  4. When editing HQX or any other codec, as in point 1, that’s already as close to the YUV frame buffer as possible. You will notice these codecs reacting very fast in the timeline with no real noticeable latency. There will always be latency but when that latency is so low, or sub frame, you won’t feel it in the transport functions of the edit. Obviously, as soon as you go beyond what your system is capable of for real-time response, filters, fades etc. then the latency effectively becomes the time it takes the YUV video buffer to recover and respond.

                  5. Unlike the response characteristics of HQX etc. as just mentioned in point 4, things are quite different with H.264/5. With H.264/5 there can be a considerable delay, latency, when the codec is being decoded by the system, usually QS, and being formatted for Edius’ YUV frame buffer. I’d imagine that the biggest taxation here is the conversion from inter-frame, although other elements of the codec as mentioned due to decompression, will also take time. Even when an Edius system using even just a single track of H.264/5 hasn’t reached its processing limit, you will feel latency in the timeline. Most people may not notice it so much when simply starting and stoping with just one track but this becomes quite evident to pro editors. I have a friend who’s been editing professionally for over 40 years and he notices such things very easily. Even for those of use who aren’t as susceptible to such timing/latency variations, like me. Try scrubbing and doing typical JKL movements with H.264/5, especially backwards, and you’ll notice just how bad H.264/5 responds.

                  6. I may be wrong here as I’m going from memory but I don’t seem to remember noticing such issues with MPEG2, even inter-frame MPEG2. It definitely would have been there but maybe the difference was because I’d have been editing HD and with H.264/5 I’m always editing at least 4K/UHD. Although MPEG2 and H.264/5 are all very similar, mainly inter-frame type codecs, I don’t think typical MPEG2 was as complex or resource taxing as H.264/5, so maybe MPEG2 is a bit more responsive.

                  7. It’s also worth noting that certain post applications are better than others at dealing with the decoding and latency issues of H.264/5. Unfortunately for us, Edius isn’t the best at this.

                  So, the bottom line. HQX is a much better option for editing in Edius and will give you more performance, sometimes way more performance, compared to most nearly any other codec, especially the inter-frame codecs such as H.264/5. Even on my i9 9900K I’m able to edit a single stream of 8K 60FPS HQX in real-time, something that can’t be done with H.265 on the same system. Here’s an example https://forum.grassvalley.com/forum/...9-in-real-time

                  Anyway Tim, on a side note, I’m off to cancel that second 5950X as I’m still getting nowhere with a delivery date on that one either. I think I’m just going to have to reign myself in as far as this new system is concerned, especially chasing after components that may not even work that well with Edius. Looks like Intel’s 11th Gen will be out before any meaningful stock of the new AMD CPUs.

                  Cheers,
                  Dave.
                  "There's only one thing more powerful than knowledge. The free sharing of it"

                  If you don't know the difference between Azimuth and Asimov, then either your tapes sound bad and your Robot is very dangerous. Kill all humans...... Or your tape deck won't harm a human, and your Robot's tracking and stereo imagining is spot on.

                  Is your Robot three laws safe?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Hey Dave,

                    Thanks for your points. I am looking at hardware myself. The HQX driven approach comes from the realization that the only thing that has been a constant with Edius over the years is the performance of HQX files. If one wants to commit to Edius and often has complex edits along with multicamera shoots, the tried and true method is and will always be HQX conversion. I have avoided it forever and to be honest, scraped through edits which would have been improved had I taken the time to convert. I say this from an end quality of my work perspective. When things are instant you tend to play things back in realtime more often and without hesitation. Actually watching what you are making along the way is key to creating a consistent and high level product imho.

                    Regarding the 5950X vs anything Intel... I do not know what to think right now. The 5950x appears to be a great value and combination of single and multi-threaded performance. I can't see a reason why it would not be a great performer in Edius unless there is still some kind of hidden Intel mojo that Edius is coded for. The motherboards are certainly more generous than Intel systems. It is tough for me to support Intel these days as they seem to be corporate sleep walking. But, they are the 800lb gorilla. My little HQX scheme will require more PCIe lanes as I will use NVMe drives and eliminate some spinners. Intel's 16/20 lane approach over the years is just too little and with the move away from cables and drives, really looks restrictive. I have confidence the AMD chips will hit the market somewhat soon as the company seems to be firing on all cylinders right now. I will probably hold with my current system and upgrade the storage. Then see what Threadripper does in the new generation. My focus for system performance will be more on encoding (output) speed as simple jobs will be fine on any of the choices, complex jobs will be HQX (fine on any system) and that leaves exporting performance. I am not sure how far pushing up the thread count will lead to better encoding times. The 5950x might be at that sweet spot.

                    Great discussion. Talking out loud has helped me realize what would benefit my work the most which happens to not be a new system at the present time. I am surprised Jerry has been silent on this topic.
                    Asus Prime X299-A - Intel i9 7900x all cores @4.3GHz 2 cores @4.5GHz - 32GB RAM - NVidia GTX1070 - Edius 9 WG - BM Intensity 4k - Boris RED - Vitascene 2 - Windows 10

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I thought it pertinent to submit my layers test in Edius pdf in this discussion as I use a dual XEON E5-2699 18 cores per CPU 72 threads with Edius.

                      There is an enormous difference in CPU load in playing back material on the desktop as opposed to in Edius which is many times higher. I do understand that real frames have to be made on the fly from compressed codecs which utilises processing power.

                      CPU hogs are Layouter, Matrix, and PCC especially necessary when shooting SLOG3 for HDR. PCC GPU acceleration checked stops any idea of UHD playback in real time but it seems to work in SD which makes me wonder if the GPU memory allocation is correct in the code.

                      Premire Pro fares not much better in UHD as I soon run out of GPU grunt with a GTX 1080TI in multilayer, and when researching the latest GPU's they really are only 30% faster for a lot of money so I conclude a dual GPU system is best for Premiere Pro.

                      GV do a very expensive 4K turnkey system which has little information in the PDF on the hardware inside. From the pictures it is a Supermicro X11 DAi-N motherboard which takes two W32XX 24 core CPU. It has an NVIDIA RTX Quadro 6000 and a Kona 4 capture/output card.

                      With the BClock on my system at 104.9MHz I score a Passmark of 35,068 which is 87% of twice 20,000 passmark for each processor.

                      Taking the same argument forward to the GV turnkey, the CPU are 30,000 passmark giving 52,000 overall.

                      Yet we have the AMD Threadripper 3990X at 64 cores and a high turbo speed which doesn't seem to suffer from the throttling issues on all cores on turbo that Intel has.

                      a bare bones system of that configuration would be about £5k about a fifth of the cost of the GV turnkey system and 2.5 times the passmark of my present system.

                      Mike


                      Attached Files
                      Sys4: Z10PE-D16WS MB 2xE5-2696 Xeon 64 active logical cores. EWG9. 64G RAM. Aorus GTX1080Ti. 55" Q7 1500 NIT HDR 4K TV/Storm 3G Elite/Decklink 4K 12G/8CH audio monitoring, Yamaha RXA-870 A/V. Sys1-3 EWG8 + RX-E1+HDBX1000 MIP in HP xw8600 2 x X5492 CPU 8 cores, 8Gig RAM, Quadro FX3800. All sys Fibre to central media pool - 5TB Axus Yotta RAID + QLogic Fibre Switch. Central VCR rack plus YUV & audio to viewing room with Yamaha AX1 7.1 100 watt per channel amp with 1000W sub 63" HD 3D Samsung TV

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Even using HQX my system will still not play more than 2 tracks of UHD HQX at full preview it needs to move to 1/2. At HD project it is fine with HQX version of the UHD files. I am sure you can check Dave but another program that will not be mentioned will play more than 5 tracks of pips native UHD h264 files on my system and what is sad it will also play more tracks of UHD HQX than EDIUS X.

                        At the moment I think AMD is the way to go for systems if you are going to use HQX as this will give more PCI lanes for drives etc since you actually have more PCIe 4.0 than Intel offers at PCIe 3.0. We have to assume that the future is using GPU power so fast access will be the key for performance. That is if the software uses it.

                        Ron Evans

                        Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 NVME OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro, Shuttle Pro2

                        ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS X, 9.5 WG, Vegas 18, Resolve Studio 17


                        Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by createmedia View Post
                          I thought it pertinent to submit my layers test in Edius pdf in this discussion as I use a dual XEON E5-2699 18 cores per CPU 72 threads with Edius.

                          There is an enormous difference in CPU load in playing back material on the desktop as opposed to in Edius which is many times higher. I do understand that real frames have to be made on the fly from compressed codecs which utilises processing power.

                          CPU hogs are Layouter, Matrix, and PCC especially necessary when shooting SLOG3 for HDR. PCC GPU acceleration checked stops any idea of UHD playback in real time but it seems to work in SD which makes me wonder if the GPU memory allocation is correct in the code.

                          Premire Pro fares not much better in UHD as I soon run out of GPU grunt with a GTX 1080TI in multilayer, and when researching the latest GPU's they really are only 30% faster for a lot of money so I conclude a dual GPU system is best for Premiere Pro.

                          GV do a very expensive 4K turnkey system which has little information in the PDF on the hardware inside. From the pictures it is a Supermicro X11 DAi-N motherboard which takes two W32XX 24 core CPU. It has an NVIDIA RTX Quadro 6000 and a Kona 4 capture/output card.

                          With the BClock on my system at 104.9MHz I score a Passmark of 35,068 which is 87% of twice 20,000 passmark for each processor.

                          Taking the same argument forward to the GV turnkey, the CPU are 30,000 passmark giving 52,000 overall.

                          Yet we have the AMD Threadripper 3990X at 64 cores and a high turbo speed which doesn't seem to suffer from the throttling issues on all cores on turbo that Intel has.

                          a bare bones system of that configuration would be about £5k about a fifth of the cost of the GV turnkey system and 2.5 times the passmark of my present system.

                          Mike

                          Hi Mike.

                          Thank you for sharing all that valuable information, I think your tests are proving the general consensus about working HQX/H.264/5 inter/intra. Although some things are still a little puzzling. Here’s some observations, these aren’t necessarily questions for you Mike, just stuff that others may want to consider.

                          1. Given these are Xeon CPUs and most likely don’t have QS. I’m actually quite surprised that there’s not a bigger difference between H.264 and HQX. Although this could be an indication of Edius only having a finite usage of available resources.

                          2. Given the CPU, core and thread count, I’d have also expected more processing ability of the HQX files.

                          3. As per point 2. What is Edius actually favouring, cores/threads or clock speeds? I ask as I’ve seen similar HQX results on a single CPU that was clocking over 5Ghz.

                          4. As per points 2 and 3. I’m still of the opinion that nothing has changed in Edius 10 with respect to multiple CPU and high core/thread usage.

                          5. When doing PiP, multichannel etc. What are the results like when using multiple different video clips. I could be wrong but it looks like some of these tests are using the same clip for PiP/multichannels.

                          It would seem to me that Edius 10 is still not using all available recourses beyond a certain point and it looks like it still favours a single high frequency CPU and only so many threads/cores. It definitely looks like it doesn’t scale, or at least scale anything like we’d want/expect, linearly.

                          It’s still not really clear what would be favoured either, between Intel and AMD. Although and once again, I suspect this would be down to speed and not necessarily cores/threads, although there still maybe other difference between the two CPU types that we are not aware of that Edius may favour.

                          Lastly, and it can’t just be me that’s getting very annoyed, but. Why is there absolutely no GV input with any of these types of posts? Seriously, and yes I’m gonna sound like a broken record again, but. There is absolutely no information what so ever on the GV site with regard system requirements for Edius 10 except for one tiny piece of info about AVX2 and any previous system guides are now out of date. Plus, there’s also issues with Edius 10 when using previous system specs as a guide for system builds.

                          If it’s just me being annoyed by this lack of information from GV then please let me know and I’ll keep my trap shut about it in future forum posts. But right now I can’t be the only person struggling to find all the information about Edius 10’s compatibility requirements, so I can build a new PC for it.

                          BTW, Mike. Is that beach shot from New Brighton looking over to Liverpool? It does look very familiar.

                          Cheers,
                          Dave.
                          "There's only one thing more powerful than knowledge. The free sharing of it"

                          If you don't know the difference between Azimuth and Asimov, then either your tapes sound bad and your Robot is very dangerous. Kill all humans...... Or your tape deck won't harm a human, and your Robot's tracking and stereo imagining is spot on.

                          Is your Robot three laws safe?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            If you are only interested in using EDIUS then I think the absolutely fastest performance will be with an overclocked Intel CPU with QS. I believe this will be faster than any PC using dual Xeon's or AMD because of the QS decode and the fact that the software , like a PC game, prefers single thread high clock speed as the primary. To improve I think will require a complete re write and that maybe is why it is taking so long as this new approach must take advantage of both high core count CPU and GPU use for decode, encode and filters. I think that is a big job and maybe why it is taking so long. At the moment on my Threadripper I do not think EDIUS X is any better and in some ways it is not as good as EDIUS 9. Both version are slow in comparison to either Vegas or Resolve even using HQX. I no longer have CS6 on this PC as it is on my second 4790K system. On that system EDIUS is much faster than Vegas or Resolve as it has QS and Vegas and Resolve do not have a discrete GPU to use. In fact there is not much difference in performance of EDIUS on either the 4790K system and the Threadripper main difference being 1080Ti for PCC use. I think the original Canopus software was great for MPEG and maybe even DV. It started to have some issues with HDV and then I started to use HQ. Things improved with more powerful CPU and then QS so that AVCHD was fine to but the move XAVC etc has started to identify the issues. h264 etc has really highlighted the problems and they have been slow to change architecture to match progress in PC components.

                            I edit in 1920x1080 even though most of the source is GH5 UHD as I want to crop/pan/zoom in post. So this is resource utilization with a GH5 Vlog UHD 60P h264 150Mbps file on the timeline corrected to rec709.

                            EDIUS X CPU 95% GPU 24% will not run consistently or fill buffer.
                            EDIUS X 1/2 preview CPU 98% GPU 20% still not filling buffer or running well PCC OFF and it will run but not fill buffer but maintain buffer CPU 100% GPU 10%
                            Vegas 18 CPU 34% GPU 10% running full speed at Best/ Full setting
                            Resolve 17 CPU 11 % GPU 34% running full speed

                            This is the competition that EDIUS has to at least match. Of interest looking at cores used EDIUS uses all cores equally. Resolve does not but uses about 4 of the 12( 24) cores a little more than the others and some not at all. Same for Vegas. Still the highest used core is still only at about 40%.


                            EDIT: If I turn off GPU decode in Resolve so that the Threadripper has to do all the decode just like EDIUS Resolve still plays fine with CPU now at 26% but GPU down to 22%. Same characteristic for cores used.
                            Last edited by Ron Evans; 01-16-2021, 07:18 PM.
                            Ron Evans

                            Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 NVME OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro, Shuttle Pro2

                            ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS X, 9.5 WG, Vegas 18, Resolve Studio 17


                            Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Yes Dave I think those were some clips your sent me.

                              I didn't get on well with Resolve, for example unless it was non familiarity ignorance I couldn't find a way to propagate colour correction to other clips in the colour tab, it needed to be done in the Edit tab, and it needs the paid version to do HDR. I found it too clunky (like Premiere Pro) to keep on jumping in and out of each tab to do different jobs, in Edius it is all in one place.

                              I found Ron your comment that PCC GPU acceleration was working for you, it certainly doesn't in my Xeon environment.

                              I also feel that Edius is making unnecessarily hard work of playback.

                              This has taken quite a time to prepare and led me to my own conclusion at the bottom as to what's best for me to do.

                              I had a comment in the past from GV Jerry that he was working with a high clock speed and for instance he was able to play the YouTube UHD downloaded clips which won't play at all on my system.

                              Now if we take that up that any CPU manufacturer will have a power/heat throttling problem which shows up by adding more cores gives a lower base clock speed, that I think means that the die can't export the heat fast enough.

                              So actually for Edius we should look to maximising the base clock speed not the turbo clock speed for the sweet spot. That does take you lower down the performance chart on https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html.


                              The highest base clock ranges from 3.6 to 3.7GHz.

                              The surprise is the i7-11700k 8 cores 3.6Ghz base turbo 5.0Ghz. Passmark score of 27,108 Socket LGA1200
                              i9-10900k 10 cores 3.7GHz base 5.3GHz turbo. Passmark score of 24,101 Socket LGA1200
                              i9-10850K 10 cores 3.6GHz base turbo 5.1GHz. Passmark score of 23,366 Socket LGA1200
                              i9-10910 10 cores 3.6GHz base turbo 5.0GHz. Passmark score of 22,187 socket LGA1200

                              I would certainly water cool it.

                              I would wonder if the i9-10900K might be the best bet for Edius from the above list.

                              AMD do not give such a high base clock but yes we have PCIe v4 with more lanes so the motherboard should be able to move more data than the Intel motherboards. The AMD closest 3.8GHz equivalent would be the the Ryzen 9 3950X Cores 16, base frequency 3.5Ghz base, turbo 4.7GHz socket AM4. Passmark score 39,300. Of course no Quicksync.

                              It might be a good idea to wait to see how Edius 10 develops as the re-write to database format was supposed to give a lot more coding flexibility for a modular structure approach, maybe the playback engine will be attended to.

                              Interesting that a friend of mine has an iMac with an 8 core CPU but Final Cut X cannot handle UHD clips taken at a wedding very well, it chokes it as FC X only is programmed to use 4 of the 8 cores he has available.

                              My only issue apart from the funding of a new PC build is the number of card slots I need

                              1. Tango 3 USB/Firewire 800 card x 1 speed is ok
                              2. GPU Gigabyte GTX1080TI x16
                              3. GV PCIe extender card for Storm 3G Elite (used for deck control injest from SD players) x4
                              4. Atto fibrechannel board x8
                              5. Decklink 4k Extreme 12G card x8

                              I need 5 SATA Raid slots as well.

                              The LGA1200 socket Z490 chipset gives very poor multi socket PCIe connectivity with one genuine PCIe times 16 socket, 1 times 8 which fights with the M2 drive which disables it, and 3x PCIe times 1 sockets, which is no use to me at all.

                              The LGA 2066 socket ASUS WS PRO/SE X299 Chipset provides the PCIe connectivity I need, and with thunderbolt, but these only take the X series CPU with no Quicksync. So I am stuck with what I have already.

                              The only way out of this issue is to buy a Sonnet Echo Express SE IIIe which is a Thunderbolt to PCI expansion chassis (£300) Which supports 3 PCIe times 8 slots, and an Asus PCIe to Thunderbolt EX-3TR (£129) but that needs a PICIe Express times 4 slot. For that you need a motherboard with a thunderbolt AIC connector and that works with the ASUS Prime Z490-A motherboard.

                              The only other way therefore of improving my system performance is to go AMD Threadripper 3990X 64 core beast, bare bones is about £5k to build.

                              There is yet another conversation about the whole PC build and the fastest components to put with your selected CPU, as the i9-10900K (24,101 Passmark) installed in an ASUS ROG STrix Z490E motherboard comes out at a system Passmark of 11,707 compared to my dual Xeons at 35,000 but it might match the current build state of Edius better despite the lower passmark.

                              So my conclusion is that unless I have missed something significant, there is nothing hardware wise that really suits the way Edius works right now that gives high processing power and hardware PCIe slot flexibility whilst hanging onto Quicksync. This doesn't really match the current hardware market high end CPU's for professional systems, and optimising Edius playback is a must for cascadable Xeons/AMD.

                              Regards

                              Mike


















                              Sys4: Z10PE-D16WS MB 2xE5-2696 Xeon 64 active logical cores. EWG9. 64G RAM. Aorus GTX1080Ti. 55" Q7 1500 NIT HDR 4K TV/Storm 3G Elite/Decklink 4K 12G/8CH audio monitoring, Yamaha RXA-870 A/V. Sys1-3 EWG8 + RX-E1+HDBX1000 MIP in HP xw8600 2 x X5492 CPU 8 cores, 8Gig RAM, Quadro FX3800. All sys Fibre to central media pool - 5TB Axus Yotta RAID + QLogic Fibre Switch. Central VCR rack plus YUV & audio to viewing room with Yamaha AX1 7.1 100 watt per channel amp with 1000W sub 63" HD 3D Samsung TV

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                PS watch out!

                                Edius 9x save proxy files as filenmame.extension.proxie, Edius 10 saves them as filename.proxie.extension so if you go from Edius 9X to Edius X using proxie files you end up with a right old mess in your footage folder as one doesn't understand the other's proxy files.

                                Mike
                                Sys4: Z10PE-D16WS MB 2xE5-2696 Xeon 64 active logical cores. EWG9. 64G RAM. Aorus GTX1080Ti. 55" Q7 1500 NIT HDR 4K TV/Storm 3G Elite/Decklink 4K 12G/8CH audio monitoring, Yamaha RXA-870 A/V. Sys1-3 EWG8 + RX-E1+HDBX1000 MIP in HP xw8600 2 x X5492 CPU 8 cores, 8Gig RAM, Quadro FX3800. All sys Fibre to central media pool - 5TB Axus Yotta RAID + QLogic Fibre Switch. Central VCR rack plus YUV & audio to viewing room with Yamaha AX1 7.1 100 watt per channel amp with 1000W sub 63" HD 3D Samsung TV

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X