There is no chart that I know of to give you boiler-plate solutions. What you can do is run the http://ppbm4.com benchmark and send the results to Bill (and possibly myself by private mail) to get a feeling of how fast your system is in comparison to others.
To give you an example, yesterday I encoded a 38 minute timeline (HDV 1080i) to MPEG2-I frame @ 100 Mbps with 1920 x 1080i CBR and it took slightly less than 12 minutes with maximum render quality on.
Whenever I hear Matrox, I get this uneasy feeling that something is amiss. Maybe if you pull that card out you will get better results. That has been the experience of a lot of people over here.
For exporting to DVD use Dynamic Link to Encore if you are not familiar with encode settings and bit budgetting.
Thanks for your help. I have copied and pasted my results below. It seemed to get through that queue very quickly, so perhaps the slowness is do to something more specific in the project I am working on. Perhaps a large mismatch in what I am capturing vs. what I am exporting? The camera is recording in HD.... I don't know much about hardware at all, and only know very basic stuff about exporting, so I know it is probably difficult to understand what I'm looking for. The last version of Premiere I had basically allowed you to choose format, size, quality, and codec whereas this version has so many different export settings I can pick from, it is hard to just guess and check which ones work best.
Hewlett Packard, Computer Manufacturer
HP Z800 Workstation, Computer Model
132.2, secs Total Benchmark Time
32, secs AVI Encoding Time
46.2, secs MPEG Elapsed Time
54, secs Rendering Time
Intel, CPU Manufacturer
Xeon E5530, CPU Model
2.40, GHz CPU speed
1, Number of CPU chips
4, Total Number of Cores
12GB, GB RAM
Premiere Pro CS4, APP Version PPBM4 DV
Win 7 (64), OSVersion
SAS, OS Disk Interface
500xR1E, GB OS Disk Capacity
15,000, OS Disk Speed
Same as OS, Project Disk Interface
Same as OS, GB Project Disk Capacity
Same as OS, Project Disk Speed
Same as OS, Preview Disk Interface
Same as OS, GB Preview Disk Capacity
Same as OS, Preview Disk Speed
Same as OS, Output Disk Interface
Same as OS, GB Output Disk Capacity
Same as OS, Output Disk Speed
NVidia Quadro FX 1800, Graphics Board
Using a Matrox RT.X2 Capture Card, Comment
1 person found this helpful
One thing is for sure: Your system performs suboptimal. Your results are way worse than I had expected, based on your specs. You have a very capable system but in some way it does not deliver what one would expect. Your disk intensive AVI test is among the lowest performers, your MPEG encoding is around (or slightly lower than) expected, your rendering time is again much lower than expected. Overall these results can be improved on easily, unless Matrox is at the heart of the problem. With your system I would guess it will not take too much trouble to achieve a score below 100s, maybe even around 85s.
First, check all processes running, turn off indexing and compression on your disks, kill unnecessary processes, add some SATA or SAS disks for better disk performance and you will see a significant performance gain.
Bill or I will update the results page to include your data, so you can easily see your own results.
BTW, what did you mean by 500xR1E for your SAS disk? How is it configured? 15K disks do not come in 500 GB capacities. And what version of PR are you running? 4.0, 4.1, 4.2.1?
Hi, let me jump in, if I may. I work with Genevieve and helped set up this computer. I am technically inclined but not so much video hardware inclined. Let me correct the hard drive configuration error. I told Genevieve the wrong thing when she asked about the configuration. The true configuration is 300x2 R1E. RAID 1E in this instance is essentially a striped mirror. Also, Premiere is running at the latest available version from Adobe (which is 4.2.1 I believe). Do you have any suggestions that might help us gain the maximum performance out of the hardware we have? It seems like the disk IO is the bottleneck in this situation? Honestly, there isn't a terribly easy way to mitigate that. Are there any best practices available for hard disk configuration for NLE systems? It seems we are in the situation of having the right hardware (give or take) without having everything working in harmony. Thank in advance for your help!
The major bottleneck appears indeed disk I/O.Even though you have two physical disks in the system, Win7 sees them as a single disk, since they are raided as a raid1. For optimale disk performance I suggest you add at least two physical disks 7200+ RPM (so either SAS or SATA, the latter less expensive, the former with better performance), move the pagefile and the media cache and projects to one disk and the media to the other disk. That will improve your results significantly I think.
Next have a look at the two latter guides here, on storage and on tuning: How to get the best from a PC? Some guides...
The tuning guide was written for Vista, but the Blackviper site now also has a guide for Win7 services.
Hope this helps.
I have posted the link to the updated webpage in a private mail to Genevieve and Bill will probably post it on his website shortly too for all to see.
As you can see, the AVI results are disappointing for such a machine. The disk setup can be improved with little effort and that will give you a much better score on the AVI test. The MPEG score is not brilliant, I would have expected slightly better results (a couple of seconds maybe) but not something where you will benefit from the most. The rendering score will improve from a better disk setup as well. Overall I think your RPI (relative performance index) ought to be around 300 - 350, not the current score of around 610. Maybe superfluous, but this RPI shows your relative performance in real life situations in comparison to the top performing machine (which just happens to be my machine) and simply put, currently your machine is more than 6 times slower and I think you can improve that to around 3 - 3.5 times slower than the top one.
Out of curiosity, what would make my machine a "top performer"?
Beating my scores, or better the scores indicated with "Top" with a blue fill and white font.
Personally I think that the new top machine will be an overclocked i7-980X @ 4.x+ GHz (hexacore) with a very good disk setup, like 4 SSD's in Raid10 as boot and a 16+ raid30 array with Cheetah 15K7 disks. It may be some time before we see such a configuration however.
So what would recommend for my setup? A hardware RAID card with a RAID 5 setup?
I don't know how critical speed is for you, but a good raid controller card is around $ 500 - 1K+, depending on the number of channels. Before going that route you may first see what adding 3 disks to your system will do in performance.
I'm following the discussion here but you guys lost me awhile back. I'll let Matt ask anything that is helpful to him. I can follow video editing in the software, and this seems like a hardware problem, which is out of my league. If there are any settings I can change - in capturing, in exporting, or in software settings, I'm all ears. Thank you very much for your help, Harm - the benchmarking is really interesting info.
Thanks for all of your advice. I think the biggest detractor in our system is the fact we are using VERY fast hard drives in a non-standard RAID as a single OS/project disk config. I did this mostly as a toss-up between performance and redundancy. However it seems like none of the systems have built in disk redundancy.
I plan on removing the matrox card and rerunning the tests to ensure that the matrox card isn't the culprit (which I don't think is the case). Then, I think I may purchase two more 15K SAS drives and use one drive for the OS and then use the other 3 in a RAID 0 set for the project disk. Do you think that will give us better numbers? Everything else on our system seems on par with the top half of the performers on the benchmarking site you sent to Gen.
In this type of configuration, is there an optimal setup for the OS and premiere to ensure maximum performance?
This setup will give a large performance boost. However the downside is the lack of redundancy in a raid0. This problem is pretty easy to overcome when you are use tape based media, like DV or HDV, because if you lose all data on the raid0, you can recapture from the original tapes and restore the project files from a backup (possibly on the C drive), but if you are using XDCAM, P2 or other HDD/flash based media you may get into serious trouble, because you may already have used the SxS or P2 or flash card for new recordings and no longer have the old material available. So this will mean a whole new look at your backup strategies.
From a price/performance point of view SATA disks are much more attractive than SAS/SCSI disks. Likely the mobo in the Z800 will have a number of SATA connectors free, so that may be an alternative to keep costs down, albeit as some performance loss, but with huge storage capacity gains.
For good performance check that you have:
1. Turned search indexing and compression off on all disks.
2. Set all services not needed to manually start or disabled. Look here for suggestions: http://www.blackviper.com/Windows_7/servicecfg.htm
3. Set your pagefile to a fixed size on the raid0 drive. I suggest 8 GB.
4. Check that you have no superfluous processes running with Process Explorer.
5. Use CCleaner or 1ClickPCFix to clean up your registry.
6. Use PerfectDisk or another disk defragger regularly.
All the rest of the tips were already mentioned in the links I gave you.
Hope this helps.
Here were the numbers with the Matrox card removed:
99.4, secs Total Benchmark Time
10.8, secs AVI Encoding Time
40.6, secs MPEG Elapsed Time
48, secs Rendering Time
That is exactly what I expected, a significant improvement and that is without additional disks, which will improve your results even more. Your RPI is now 360, much better than the 610+ it was previously. I think with the additional disks Matt is planning, you can shave off an additional 10-15 seconds. Bill will post these results in due time, but I have posted them under the link I previously sent you in a private mail, so you can see the improvement yourself.
Do you have any ideas why the Matrox card is slowing things down? Its a $1200 device so I would assume at the least it should keep performance the same. Are you familiar with that card and its use?
Thanks for the update. I anticipate and hope for the same type of performance gain when adding a raid 0 project disk with 3 15k SAS drives.
Sorry but I'm not familiar with the RT.X2. I have used the RTX.100 in the past, but despite the price tag threw it in the garbage can quite soon. It was a complete waste of money and from the sounds one picks up here, the RT.X2 is in the same league.
This is not completely true. The full story is that I pulled the card from my system and tried to sell it, but did not find anyone who was interested, so I first used it as a doorstopper and for the first time it worked fabulous! No hiccups, no crashes, no BSOD's, everything was in perfect harmony and my office door stayed open. Until we had a serious storm and the force on the Matrox card was just too big and it collapsed under the pressure, so it ended up in the garbage can. The door did not really suffer from the violent wind gusts luckily.
I would anticipate an RPI of around 300 when you have added those disks, so an additional 20% performance gain. Maybe even more.
The Matrox RT.X2 works quite well if you have the current drivers and insert it in a proper slot in your computer. Just read the manual and release notes. It lessens the requirement for rendering and makes some conversions faster. It is difficult to assess the entire problem without also knowing:
1. Type of file being converted;
2. Sequence settings;
3. Use of converted file - so that proper conversion settings may be used.
Having used RTX.100 for many years and now using the RT.X2 in Vista 64, my experience with the Matrox products has been nothing but positive. It has saved me much time in editing video.
If you run a Matrox card on any system not validated by Matrox, you run serious risks of incompatibility. The validated list of components and systems is extremely short and outdated. That means you can never build a state of the art system. The only component that I have that is validated is my video card, all the rest is not on their list. If you are happy with the card, good for you. I'm perfectly happy without it and assure you that my system outperforms your Matrox equipped system. Don't believe me? Run the test yourself: http://ppbm4.com That way you will also know that we are talking about DV material in a NTSC DV sequence and all the rest of the tests.
I am in the process of reconfiguring the hard drives to run in a RAID 0. Would we realize a greater performance boost by making the C: drive a RAID 0 set or the D: drive? I have 4 drives. One of the partitions will run on a single drive and the other will run on a RAID 0.
Matt, you will likely have the best performance (with the greatest risk) when you use
C: single disk for OS & programs
D: three disks in raid0 for everything project related, media, project, renders, media cache etc.
but you are taking a significant risk, because if one disk fails, you lose ALL your data. If you are prudent with backups, this should not be a major drawback, but it requires discipline and backup storage. For safety I would set PR to autosave projects to your C: drive.
Thanks Harm, that is what I anticipated. Are there software settings that i need to make inside Premiere to tell it to use the other partition? Also, do you have any suggestions for backing up the PC? We will have a DROBO connected via USB which I plan to use as storage for backups. I understand USB isn't terribly fast when dealing with a lot of data, but it should work for our needs.
The Drobo is great for archival purposes. It should serve you well. You keep telling me about partitioning. Why would you want to partition? There is no advantage in partitioning, only drawbacks unless you want a multi-boot system.
So you would recommend having only a single partition for the OS and Project work? (i.e. Just a single C: drive?)
Here are the new numbers with a 4-disk RAID 0:
81.3, secs Total Benchmark Time
5.7, secs AVI Encoding Time
40.6, secs MPEG Elapsed Time
35, secs Rendering Time
Thank you for all of your help!
Now that is progress!!! Congrats, Matt and Genevieve.
Coming from 132 seconds down to 81 is a huge improvement. You will benefit greatly from that performance increase. Can you please indicate what changes in your disk configuration took place, so I can update your results. I assume it was a single array 1,000 x 4 R0 SATA 7,200 used for Output, Project and Preview.
The array is comprised of 4 300GB 15k SAS drives in a RAID 0 configuration. We will be doing nightly backups to a 4TB drobo for redundancy.
Thanks for your help!