Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Dual Xeon Z820 beast and Redcine-X BARELY using 19% of CPU???

D

David Bourla

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
252
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
New York City
I'm doing something really wrong. What settings do I need to use to export footage faster? I tried everything and my $10,000 computer is still a RENDER slug.
30-40 minutes to render A 30 SECOND CLIP? Seriously?
Help?

Z820 HP
Dual Xeon 2687W
64 gigs RAM
Intel 480 SSD
Titan GPU
 
David

1. Do you have a REDROCKET installed?
2. Please list as many specs as you can about your system (especially what storage devices your footage is coming from and going to.
3. Is it specifically REDCINE-X that is slow? Do you have issues with any other apps not working properly?
 
No Red Rocket. Everything else is fast. Just redcine is a slug.
Z820 HP
Dual Xeon 2687W
64 gigs RAM fastest available
Twin Intel 480 SSD (footage going out from one and going to another- SATA 3, blazing fast)
Titan GPU Cannot wait for V19!!

I tried Alpha 18 - a bit faster but not by much.
 
Are you using multiple threads via redline?
 
Could your storage be creating a bottle neck?
 
My storage is the fastest available without putting the SSD's in RAID config. And even if storage was slow, wouldn't at least the CPU burn at higher than 19%? With Redline it jumped to 36%. But heck, when I use handbrake to decode a dvd - my CPU utilization jumps to 99%! How can Handbrake use all of my 32 core firepower and redcine doesn't even get half?

Argh.
 
David,

You are going to have give more information, like what frame size and compression is your footage at and what exactly are you transcoding to?

On my two year old i7 rendering from an external FW400 G-RAID to an internal RAID of two WD Raptors, a two minute 4K Red One clip takes about 12 minutes to transcode to DNxHD 36.

So a 30 second clip taking 30 to 40 minutes to transcode sounds like a long time to me.
 
Not only that, but what correction have you done to the clip? Did you apply any changes in the Alchemy Group? Try removing the RMD for a clip and then reload it in RCXP and transcode without making any adjustments at all. Does it transcode faster?
 
Go to the task manager when next about to run an encode, and go to the performance tab/resource monitor. Keep this window on top and watch every graph. Start you encode and watch what spikes. Disk.....RAM?? Has Hyper Threading been turned on in the BIOS? They sort of removed the option for it from the Z800 biso, but i think it's back in the Z820 from memory. Plus answer what Peter asked......
 
I can't believe people still don't get this, after years of the same question : .... RCX only uses one core to do the r3d decode. So if you have 6,12,32 cores it won't help one iota.

The GPU version mentioned will decode the r3d's super fast according to early information from Red.
Should be wonderful.
Let's hope that this is a free upgrade!
 
Stipulating that what you are saying is correct, then shouldn't that core be pegged at 100%? In David's case all the cores are at around 20%.

Empirically speaking, 30 to 40 mins to transcode a 30 second clip seems too long.

I'm not saying that RCX's .R3D decode is multithreaded. (I honestly don't know but, FWIR, once Assimilate was out of the picture RC performance took a hit.) What I am saying is that something else (also) seems to be contributing to the slowness of the transcoding.
 
Peter,
Windows time slices a single thread ( one 'core' worth ) between all the cores. This way the cpu die won't overheat in one area.
That is what you see.
 
Okay, but have you ever seen a 30 second clip take 30 to 40 minutes to transcode? This just seems way too long to be described by single threading alone.
 
Like I said it probably has to do with some correction that's applied to the clip. Alchemy is especially known for causing this kind of longer render/transcode times. Try transcoding the clip after removing the RMD file and reloading the clip in RCXP.

RCXP can utilize multiple cores/threads via Redline (it's an option in the settings) by transcoding/rendering more than one clip at a time. However it's one clip per thread and you can't have multiple cores/threads working on one single clip.
 
Thank everyone for all their help so far. Let me rephrase the question. My specs and settings are not important.
I am not concerned with the SPEED of my transcodes AT ALL. I am trying to figure out why the CPU utilization is so MINIMAL.
With EVERY other program I have that uses the processors intensely, you can see the CPU meter jump to the 50% to 99% level, meaning that the cores are being used to the max.
Even a simple program like handbrake that decodes video will set my PC burning away to 99% CPU usage.

So here is my question: why can I never get Redcine to fully utilize the CPU's?? I tried every singe imaginable setting and Redline and frame size and transcode type - same damn thing, barely 20% or 40%.

Anyone else ever analyze their CPU usage? What scores or percentages are you all getting??

THANKS!
 
Les Dittert said:
I can't believe people still don't get this, after years of the same question : .... RCX only uses one core to do the r3d decode. So if you have 6,12,32 cores it won't help one iota.
...
Let's hope that this is a free upgrade!
Click to expand...

Les, please don't spread mis-information. RCX uses more than 1 core, it has for many years.

Of course it's a free upgrade

David: you'll be happier soon ;)
 
Ah, ok. Multithreading is on. Nothing added in Alchemy. Pure clip with no adjustments. Task manager spikes only half the cores. The CPU gadget meter Windows 7 is still less than 40% at best.
With a previous build of Redcine, I got the CPU up to 85% on this identical setup, now I'm getting abysmal results.
 
Okay, everyone. Totally appreciate the help. I agree that V19 will arrive and will be awesome!! :-)
 
Rob,
I stand corrected, can you explain how to saturate cores with the difficult task of transcoding ?

I just did another test on a sandybridge E machine. Five 5K r3d's coming from SSD transcoding to 640 sized quicktimes.
Exporting from timeline, all clips.
I'm seeing 21% processor utilization.
I see the Redcine-X pro.exe process reading one r3d at a time in the resource monitor.
Disk IO is not the bottleneck, it's at 2.6 megabytes a second from the SSD.
The destination 640 QT is writing at a 0.2 megabyte a second rate. Not a bottleneck.

What am I doing wrong ? How many r3d decode threads ya running ? Is there a setting ?

Anyhow, I can't wait for the GPU j2k decoder to be aded to the RCX tool. That should fly!





Rob Lohman said:
Les, please don't spread mis-information. RCX uses more than 1 core, it has for many years.

Of course it's a free upgrade

David: you'll be happier soon ;)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top