Question about HD editing fluidity

palomino3000

New member
Hi.
I have tons of HD video .ts h264 to edit.
I want upgrade my pc because the hd editing with videoredo is too slow and jerky.
affects this, more the video card or CPU?
I have intel quad core and ati radeon hd 4870.
better to change the CPU or video card for more fluidity?
better intel I5/i7 or ati radeon 5870 hd?
I have to choose one of two for upgrading my pc....
thanx
 

Clumpco

Member
Before you order that CPU and graphics card, take a look at your disk sub-system (run HD-Tach on it) and make sure that you are getting "normal" throughput (HD-Tach has a database of typical drives/controllers that you can compare to).

Running VRD on a Q6600 I don't find it too slow, OK there are occasional pauses while seeking but nothing to write home about. Maybe just a bit more RAM could do the trick too?
 
I want upgrade my pc because the hd editing with videoredo is too slow and jerky.
Do not undertand the slow and jerky part.

I have a Intel dual-core running at 3.2Ghz and the play back is acceptable. The navigation, with thumbnails on, is slow updating the thumbnails only because VRD must decompress the frames for display. This requires a lot of CPU. It is a known issue.

Upgrading will not hurt anything but only to upgrade because of this issue is not worth it, IMO. Find another reason to upgrade.:rolleyes:

Mike
 

palomino3000

New member
I have two superfast hard disk in raid0 and 6Gb of ram!

The thumbnail is tooooooo slow......someone have any other suggest?
 

MrVideo

Active member
I have two superfast hard disk in raid0 and 6Gb of ram!

The thumbnail is tooooooo slow......someone have any other suggest?
At this point in time, as a user, all I can say is: live with it

Here's why. As I understand the though process with the thumbnails, it only gets updated when the user isn't doing a lot of jumping around. That said, it will wait only so long before it will do a thumnail update.

If VRD updated the thumnails every time you moved a few frames, you'd really be bitching.

A speedup might be to dump what it has in its buffer as to what it thinks it needs to display. I do a lot of moving forward and backward by I-frames. After I stop, it'll update at least the last three, or so, locations where the I-frames were. If it would notice that I actually stopped and dumped what it had in the queue and only display the current location, it would speed things up.

That said, the logic behind what is going on is not simple. Unless the programmers have a flash of inspiration regarding thumbnail updating, it is what it is.

To me, that isn't a killer.
 

robena

New member
I find scrubbing H.264 material with the fine slider "sticky" too, even with a quad-core at 3GHz and a fast raid 5 drive.

You have to move it very slowly, otherwise it gets stuck a little while before jumping ahead suddenly.

My suggestion, which I plan to try some day, would be to switch to an SSD drive.
 

MrVideo

Active member
I find scrubbing H.264 material with the fine slider "sticky" too, even with a quad-core at 3GHz and a fast raid 5 drive.
That is why I get close with the scrubbing and then do control left/right arrows to quickly jump by I-frames.
 

moyekj

Member
Scrubbing HD mpeg2 with Womble absolutely blows VRD away on same system. It is my largest complaint about HD mpeg2 editing with VRD - and I have thumbnails turned off and it's still way slower than Womble.
 

robena

New member
Yes, Womble is easily 10 times faster than VRD.

But it's a mess for everything else. One glitch in the stream, and bye bye audio sync.

Still, it shows that VRD is using a scrubbing method that is far from optimum.

VRD remains overall an outstanding product, I would even say the only video editor worth using. But it would be nice if they would look at what Womble does for scrubbing, and decide to match it.
 

Mortbrad

New member
Those of you having slowdowns with thumbnails - what antivirus are you running?

I've seen this symptom where the virus checker is causing the slowdowns. If you have Norton, Mcaffee or Computer Associates I'd try pausing it.

I've recently gone from a Q6600 to an i7-965 and there's not really any difference on the timeline, but faster obviously in ad-scans and so on. I also run WD green drives so there's a speed compromise there.

I think you need to look at what else is runing and resident in the system.
 

Mortbrad

New member
any feedback with SSD drive?
I don't think its a suitable use of the technology, yes you'll get faster read speeds but I think you'd drastically shorten the life of the device.

Besides, I have much slower hard drives than you and I don't have a problem.

Can you answer the question regarding Antivirus software?
 

robena

New member
I don't think its a suitable use of the technology, yes you'll get faster read speeds but I think you'd drastically shorten the life of the device.
After a while, the SDD drive will indeed lose easily 50% of its speed, but it still will be much faster than any hard drive, and seek time will remain unbeatable.

If I try one, I'll post my findings.
 

Mortbrad

New member
After a while, the SDD drive will indeed lose easily 50% of its speed, but it still will be much faster than any hard drive, and seek time will remain unbeatable. If I try one, I'll post my findings.
If you get a drive with trim it won't slow down over time but if you intensively use an SSD for editing I'll give it a 3 month lifetime tops.

Personally I think a raid-0 of 2 Velociraptors should sustain near the same speed as a good SSD, and give larger capacity. Seek times are not really relevant to something like video editing where sustained transfer rate is probably much more important.

Personally I think SSDs are of much more benefit in an OS drive where the seek time is much more relevant and true, high speed random access of smaller files gives you more of a speed benefit.
 

robena

New member
If you get a drive with trim it won't slow down over time but if you intensively use an SSD for editing I'll give it a 3 month lifetime tops.
Thanks for the info, it could save me a bunch of $$!

Personally I think a raid-0 of 2 Velociraptors should sustain near the same speed as a good SSD, and give larger capacity. Seek times are not really relevant to something like video editing where sustained transfer rate is probably much more important.

Personally I think SSDs are of much more benefit in an OS drive where the seek time is much more relevant and true, high speed random access of smaller files gives you more of a speed benefit.
I'm already using an 8 drives raid 5 which is quite fast, but that does not help at all with fluidity.

That's why I think that seek time is more important, but I could be wrong...
 
Top Bottom