-
David,
First of all, thanks for all your testing. I received all your results, but have not yet had the opportunity to add them to the database.
Let me try to explain the Disk I/O results, but start off with the other results first.
MPE On results are 8 or 9 seconds. What you clearly see here is statistical measurement error. Windows only allows us to measure in discrete seconds. If more accuracy were possible, it is not unthinkable that the actual results here would have been something like 8.73 - 8.41 - 8.39 - 8.46 - 8.52, so I would not worry about these differences, but attribute them to measurement error. BTW, that is the reason that the timelines in PPBM6 will be longer and even more complex, in order to reduce these measurement errors. In my own case when doing this test 10 times, I got 7 times a 3 second score and 3 times a 4 second score and that is why my MPE score is listed as 3.
The same more or less applies to the MPEG2-DVD, H.264-BR and MPE Off tests. Plus or minus one second is statistically the same result.
The Disk I/O test is a completely different matter. Your disk setup is crucial here. Let me put down some sustained transfer rates for your various disks or arrays and please remember that these are rough, indicative figures, but may help you understand what is going on here.
Sustained transfer rates on your various disks are around:
Single disk 100 MB/s
3 x R5 on-board 140 MB/s (or less)
4 x R5 RocketR 225 MB/s
So, from that perspective it is no surprise that your best score is from the 4 x R5 RocketRaid and the test from the 3 x R5 On-board is the slowest, because of the CPU overhead that this on-board raid entails. The weird one is of course hampered by the fact that you have the media cache (scratch) and export on that slow internal raid, which puts an extra burden on the CPU for the parity calculations. You see the effect of the CPU overhead clearly in the MPE Off score when you run everything off the RocketRaid.
Last, the weird result may have been caused by background processes, like automatic updates, disk optimizing schedules, and the like.
I know this is a complex matter and probably my explanation does not answer all your questions, but at least you can't say I did not try.
| -
Thanks a ton, Harm... that actually helps a lot. My curiosity, though, is why test 5 had a 580 disk speed, while test 2 had a 138, where EVERYTHING was on that one disk? It would seem to me that at least not having the data on that disk would help the disk i/o, and therefore it should be faster than test 2... Or is test 2 faster because the CPU doesn't have to handle moving things between multiple disks/raids, while on test 5, it has to move data between two different raids? But if that were the case, why wouldn't test 1 also be slow since data is moving between two raids and a third standalone disk?
Also, please note the comments I replied on my data via e-mail before you post it... one of the submissions had an error in the raid submission, and the first one I threw out entirely...
Also, can you explain why the 4 disk raid has such a higher data rate than the 3 disk raid? Is it purely due to the added disks?? And if so, would adding a 4th disk to my on board R5 speed it up in a similar fashion? Because I could take the 1TB standalone for exports and add it to that on-board R5... Or, should I do as I saw recommended in another post this morning, and take those four onboard disks and recreate them as an R10, maintaining redundancy but also gaining speed? Would losing that dedicated export disk not be worth the added disk in the R5 and/or the ability to create an R10?
| -
David, with CS5.5 running with hardware acceleration (MPE-On) on a GTX 285 is like (pardon me Harm) wondering why your speed boat with the anchor overboard is going so slow. My testing has show that while the GTX 285 and GTX 275 were of value with CS5, they are practically useless with CS5.5 especially if you are overclocking your CPU. You are running an i7-920 at stock speed but you might try running PPBM5.5 with MPE software only Notice my SB i7-2600K results below and compare the MPEG2-DVD results with and without GPU assistance.
Despite all the expert opinions on multiple disk drives it turns out that all my x58 scores are with essentially 3 drives/arrays. This system has room for 18 removable drives
- OS/Applications/paging--1 drive
- Big RAID 0 for everything project-wise--8 drives (I now admit this is overkill but I had to prove it to myself)
- Backup/archiving multiple drives
| -
-
-
David,
For 3 layer of RED, you are likely being most hammered by your CPU. You can validate this by calling up CPU, GPU monitor during your work and note when you maxing you CPU cores out.
You talk about budget issues; invest the pennies involved to get a CoolerMaster 212 cooler and overclock your 920 to at least 3.7GHz. Done right, this will be WAY faster for what you are trying to do and will not fry your CPU. At 3.7 with a good cooler, your CPU will still likely be way cooler than your GTX 285!
Also for scrubbing and playback, try from the menu sequence / render entire work area. While this takes time to render, I find this an essential step to work with 4-layer RED 4k on my pretty fast 6-core GTX 480, 24GB system.
Jim
| -
-
-
-
-
I just rendered a multi-layer RED Epic timeline with some heavy CC, and my temps after about 12 minutes of rendering peaked in the upper 70's... looks like I'll definitely be getting a better cooler!
The SPD tab has the following info:
Module size: 2048MB
Max Bandwidth PC3-10700H (667 MHz)
then the timings table has a ton more info that I can post if you need it... The label on the memory just gives the part number (which returned no hits on Google) and a barcode... not much info.
A quick google search for PC3-1070 reveals that it is indeed what is known as 1333 memory, though apparently manufacturers are a little misleading in their labeling info, as 1333 refers to the MT/s data rate, not the MHz speed. However, since I have a triple-channel memory system, would the 667 MHz be tripled to give me an effective 2000MHz speed? And since you're only as good as your weakest link, is there really any point to OC'ing my system with memory at only 2GHz (already slower than my proc)? I really don't know much about the ins and outs in the hardware world
| -
-
-
-
-
-
-
- 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
- 5 points awarded for
-
10,000+ points
-
1,001-10,000 points
-
501-1,000 points
-
5-500 points
-
