non-Red CF cards for scarlet 2/3"

[Zach Tucker]

With scarlet 2/3" running at redcode 100, what is the resulting MB/s? I'm curious if my stack of Lexar 16gb 300x CF cards (rated to 45 MB/s) will cut the mustard.

.z

 

[Mohammed El Sharqawy]

its have been discussed a lot in this forum that the reason behind RED Certified CF cards is the sustained write rate and not the peak rate.. and that's why they are more expensive than the normal cards available around the market.. i think one might think of the SanDisk 90MB/s cards.. and see how they would perform on scarlet when released.. anybody tested them with RED ONE?

this might help a little:

Here is some reference...

REDcode 42 is the equivalent of 7.5:1 compression ratio with 4K and a RED ONE (64 MB/sec).
REDcode 36 is 9:1
REDcode 28 is 10:1

Some numbers for the various formats:

5k FF (5120x2700)@24fps:
REDcode 7.5:1 = 65MB/s
REDcode 5:1 = 100MB/s

5k HD (4800x2700)@24fps:
REDcode 7.5:1 = 60MB/s
REDcode 5:1 = 92MB/s

5k 2:1 (5120x2560)@24fps:
REDcode 7.5:1 = 60MB/s
REDcode 5:1 = 92MB/s

5k 2.37:1 (5120x2160)@24fps:
REDcode 7.5:1 = 52MB/s
REDcode 5:1 = 78MB/s

Full chart will be published with the release of EPIC. If there are any errors in these it is because it is late (1:20 am)

Jim

you can also read the whole thread:
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=593857#post593857

 

[Michael Olsen]

Obviously, there is the possibility that there could be some sort of breakthrough between now and the release of Scarlet. But, based on current trends, your current CF cards will not be sufficient.

Every opinion I have read by someone using the 90MB/s Sandisk has been one of dissatisfaction. Even if it only occasionally drops frames...it's still dropping frames.

I don't know enough about what goes into CF cards in the first place, but it seems that the RED Cert. CF cards have some extra mojo that really makes them shine where others simply don't cut it. I'd love to know why.

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

With scarlet 2/3" running at redcode 100, what is the resulting MB/s? I'm curious if my stack of Lexar 16gb 300x CF cards (rated to 45 MB/s) will cut the mustard.

.z

NO-

discussed ad nauseum on here. Try SEARCH.

The CF manufacturers basically LIE and MIS LABEL their cards.

SUSTAINING Speed requires the highest quality silicon in the cards

RED tests CF Cards everyday and would be delighted to find ones that work
but they dont.

IT is NOT a conspiracy. It is a FACT. There are NO non RED CF Cards that
work yet.

 

[Lee Saxon]

RED tests CF Cards everyday and would be delighted to find ones that work

Did you come up with this line on your own because it reads like it came straight from a press release or product brochure.

Believed the same thing as you up until that line; now I suspect we've both swallowed the same propaganda.

 

[David Rasberry]

Some of the newest gen 600x CF cards that are specifically designed for sustained writes for HD video recording might be good enough for 24-30fps, but likely not for high speed frame rates or the lowest compression rates for Redcode. In fact it may take SSD's to record the very highest quality highest speed footage. Even Red's own CF cards may not be good enough for that. Beyond just speed is the ability to withstand repeated sustained write/read/format/reuse cycles without a hiccup.

 

[Kevin Olsen]

I find it so remarkable that we are still debating performance of single CF cards when everyone already takes advantage of the benefits of Raid-0 (striping) with 7200rpm hard disks in their editing and playback systems.

Surely two or even four high performance cards could take 75-100MBs in a Raid-0 setup. I know the relationship is not linear (4x 45MBs cards do not equal 180MBs), but SSDs work great in Raid-0, why not CF? Is the controller a problem?

I just think it's kinda funny that this is still a problem. Everyone uses multiple 7200rpm disks in Raid-0/5 to take advantage of the benefits of this performance and no one is arguing that you should only use a single 15,000rpm drive to do the same work.

Does anyone else share this viewpoint? I feel like the lone jackass claiming this should be a lot easier than it is now, but shouldn't it? Hard drives reached a plateau a while ago but thanks to Raid, performance has risen to the demand, why is CF lagging behind? Didn't RED even hint at a dual slot CF module a while ago to tackle this exact problem?

 

[chrislancaster]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1ME2Q4ev-I&feature=player_embedded


what do u guys think about these hoodman RAW cards ... they are suppose to be 100 mbps

675x

fw800 15 secs a gig ... sounds good

32 gb $500



also anyone else freaked out about the h264 royalties clause ?? is this something that should be worried about?!?:yikes:

 

[Tim Sutherland]

I find it so remarkable that we are still debating performance of single CF cards when everyone already takes advantage of the benefits of Raid-0 (striping) with 7200rpm hard disks in their editing and playback systems.

Surely two or even four high performance cards could take 75-100MBs in a Raid-0 setup. I know the relationship is not linear (4x 45MBs cards do not equal 180MBs), but SSDs work great in Raid-0, why not CF? Is the controller a problem?

I just think it's kinda funny that this is still a problem. Everyone uses multiple 7200rpm disks in Raid-0/5 to take advantage of the benefits of this performance and no one is arguing that you should only use a single 15,000rpm drive to do the same work.

Does anyone else share this viewpoint? I feel like the lone jackass claiming this should be a lot easier than it is now, but shouldn't it? Hard drives reached a plateau a while ago but thanks to Raid, performance has risen to the demand, why is CF lagging behind? Didn't RED even hint at a dual slot CF module a while ago to tackle this exact problem?

First of all Raid 0 is not the best way to store or transfer important data. If any member of the array faults, you lose the whole thing.

Also, in your editing bay, you don't ever have to take drives out of the raid. So if you were going to raid CF cards in a way that I'd be comfortable with, you have to put them in an enclosure or something and then put that in the camera, which doesn't seem like it's getting us anywhere.

 

[Kevin Olsen]

First of all Raid 0 is not the best way to store or transfer important data. If any member of the array faults, you lose the whole thing.

So the RED Drive and RED Ram are not a reliable storage medium? Seems like a lot of people like them... (Note, both are hardware Raid-0)

Also, in your editing bay, you don't ever have to take drives out of the raid. So if you were going to raid CF cards in a way that I'd be comfortable with, you have to put them in an enclosure or something and then put that in the camera, which doesn't seem like it's getting us anywhere.

I agree, any misconfiguration would be detrimental to the volume, but a simple cartridge designed to hold them in a two (or more) configuration would provide simple reloading and allow easy replacement of a failed card. (I am envisioning something like the CF to 1.8" Drive module that holds three CF cards, of course more robust and efficient)

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I find it so remarkable that we are still debating performance of single CF cards when everyone already takes advantage of the benefits of Raid-0 (striping) with 7200rpm hard disks in their editing and playback systems.

One problem here is that CF performance is very erratic in most cases. In my experiences of testing for other applications, most CF cards perform very poorly in RAID configurations. It's not so simple as just striping a few together as we would with hard drives.

This has been discussed to death here, but people still want to believe there is a conspiracy taking place.

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

Did you come up with this line on your own because it reads like it came straight from a press release or product brochure.

Believed the same thing as you up until that line; now I suspect we've both swallowed the same propaganda.

Great Attitude Lee. Please do not group me in your "conspiracy theories"
I dont share that view at all.

Do some research, Deanan tests cards regularly and so do many non-partisan people. The cards dont exist... and remember, we are GUESTS of RED on here.. not vice versa.

Unfounded Negative Comments like that are gonna get you launched into the outer limits

 

[Kevin Olsen]

This has been discussed to death here, but people still want to believe there is a conspiracy taking place.

I don't think there is a conspiracy, it's just really bizarre that Raid works well for other applications but not for CF. I know it's been discussed, I will go back and read a bit more about it...

I am optimistic that the new 64GB CF cards will be much more reasonable in price/GB and due to the fact that Epic and Scarlet are coming out soon, the volume of cards needed to supply this new demand will be astronomical. Economy of Scale will be on our side in this equation, making the RED Cards even more competitive.

KO

 

[Lee Saxon]

Great Attitude Lee. Please do not group me in your "conspiracy theories"
I dont share that view at all.

Do some research, Deanan tests cards regularly and so do many non-partisan people. The cards dont exist... and remember, we are GUESTS of RED on here.. not vice versa.

Unfounded Negative Comments like that are gonna get you launched into the outer limits

A.) I was joking, chill out

B.) That was a really quite mild and harmless comment (even IF I'd been serious), whoever would ban me over it also needs to chill out

C.) I don't think there's any conspiracy, I believe Red when they say no other cards will do it. But come on, they'd be "delighted" to find a $150 Sandisk card that could get the job done, ending sales of their $300 cards? They so would not. Come on, that DID sound like press release language.

And check my next post for evidence that I'm with Red on this issue...

 

[Lee Saxon]

...it's just really bizarre that Raid works well for other applications but not for CF. I know it's been discussed, I will go back and read a bit more about it...

You put your hard drives in a RAID 0 because they're too slow for a given application. The problems with CF cards are that they're too slow AND they're wildly inconsistent (35 MB/s one instant, 5 MB/s the next, that sort of thing) because of cheap controllers (and probably cheap flash). RAID 0 can't solve, and in fact I imagine would exacerbate or be broken by, the latter problem.

My understanding of RAID and flash technologies is limited, that might not be the only issue, but I think that's the big one.