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 :)

Rockett Speed

I just transcoded 2 hours of footage and it took 8 hours = 4:1???? again

I have the updated driver, firmware, RCX 252.

It was 4kHD to 1080x1920 ProRes HQ, both at 29.97

I have only 3gigs or RAM on my loaner machine, is this the reason?

Any thoughts?
 
Rocketcine was always much faster for me.... Watching my cores between the two programs was night and day. Redcinex at best uses my cpu cores to about half their potential...at best, and rarely at the same time... Rocketcine, tends to push all eight cores right to the peak of their performance. This is according to my activity monitor. After doing a job the other day that took way too long, i think i am going to revert back to the last firmware so i can keep using rocketcine.
 
Ian Laurie said:
Redcinex at best uses my cpu cores to about half their potential...at best, and rarely at the same time... Rocketcine, tends to push all eight cores right to the peak of their performance. This is according to my activity monitor.
Click to expand...

Good Point! I am seeing the same here.
 
Dustin Cross said:
Deanan,

How are you guys getting faster or equal speed with RCX when everyone else is seeing Rocketcine being much faster?


Dusty
Click to expand...

I should have been more specific... DPX/TIff is faster or the same depending on the setup/formats/etc.
QT/DNX are highly dependent on many more factors (codec settings, cpu, ram speed, disk speed, source format, crop, etc) so performance varies much more at the moment.

The main reason is RCX currently uses an external exporter which increases stability alot because Quicktime tends to randomly grab loads of memory and cause problems. This will also let us go to 64bit for RCX. For now this can cause the QT and DnX exports to slow down and be more sensitive to the system environment.

However, we have some significant improvements for RCX working in our internal versions that will speed up the exports.
 
Thanks Deanan,
question though... will going to 64bit do anything if we are using an external exporter? doesn't the external Exporter also need to make the conversion in order for that too work?

EDIT: Glad to hear about improvements though!
 
Ian Laurie said:
Thanks Deanan,
question though... will going to 64bit do anything if we are using an external exporter? doesn't the external Exporter also need to make the conversion in order for that too work?

EDIT: Glad to hear about improvements though!
Click to expand...

The external converter has to stay 32bit bit QT-X is not yet usable.
 
Deanan said:
I should have been more specific... DPX/TIff is faster or the same depending on the setup/formats/etc.
QT/DNX are highly dependent on many more factors (codec settings, cpu, ram speed, disk speed, source format, crop, etc) so performance varies much more at the moment.

The main reason is RCX currently uses an external exporter which increases stability alot because Quicktime tends to randomly grab loads of memory and cause problems. This will also let us go to 64bit for RCX. For now this can cause the QT and DnX exports to slow down and be more sensitive to the system environment.

However, we have some significant improvements for RCX working in our internal versions that will speed up the exports.
Click to expand...

Deanan,

Great news on RCX and where it's going. It's getting very feature rich and by far been the best of the bunch for a walk away render with even hours and hours of footage. Wondering, could you elaborate on those variable/factors?

I have been getting about 10 fps on my 4,1 MBP 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo 15" w/ 4BG of 667 MHz ram hooked up to an istoragepro Express3 with 8 2.5" drives on a RAID 5. That's reading and writing to the same RAID. Surprisingly I'm getting about the same off my quad core tower. With Rocketcine-x I was getting closer to 19 fps. This was all with Prores 422HQ 1080 btw.

Thanks for any input.
 
Lonny Danler said:
Deanan,

Great news on RCX and where it's going. It's getting very feature rich and by far been the best of the bunch for a walk away render with even hours and hours of footage. Wondering, could you elaborate on those variable/factors?

I have been getting about 10 fps on my 4,1 MBP 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo 15" w/ 4BG of 667 MHz ram hooked up to an istoragepro Express3 with 8 2.5" drives on a RAID 5. That's reading and writing to the same RAID. Surprisingly I'm getting about the same off my quad core tower. With Rocketcine-x I was getting closer to 19 fps. This was all with Prores 422HQ 1080 btw.

Thanks for any input.
Click to expand...

We see double that or more here on our systems. Even rocketcine normally runs much faster than 19fps but processing speed is dependent on system speed/throughput/stability (some towers we've run into with bad ram or other pci-e cards that cause slowdowns)
 
CJ Roy said:
Deanan-

Looks like everyone still has the same issue that we've said for months now, RedCineX is much slower than RocketCinex. Most dailies & transcodes will be going to QT's or MXF's.

So when can we expect a fix?
Click to expand...

See my previous post about speed.
 
Deanan said:
We see double that or more here on our systems. Even rocketcine normally runs much faster than 19fps but processing speed is dependent on system speed/throughput/stability (some towers we've run into with bad ram or other pci-e cards that cause slowdowns)
Click to expand...

Double that or more would be awesome! but every DIT I've talked to seems to run into similar figures based on those specs (give or take a few fps). What are you guys doing different? Could you do an item breakdown of what's under the hood to compare?

Could you also elaborate about the bad ram and/or pci-e cards? What configurations, models should we watch out for?
 
Lonny Danler said:
Double that or more would be awesome! but every DIT I've talked to seems to run into similar figures based on those specs (give or take a few fps). What are you guys doing different? Could you do an item breakdown of what's under the hood to compare?

Could you also elaborate about the bad ram and/or pci-e cards? What configurations, models should we watch out for?
Click to expand...

Email the log files and system profile to redcinex@red and we can see what might be different.

Lots of interrupts on the pci-e can cause slowdowns. We don't have enough info on what other cards cause this but we do know that older towers (gen1 and 2) definitely have pci-e issues.
 
Deanan said:
Email the log files and system profile to redcinex@red and we can see what might be different.

Lots of interrupts on the pci-e can cause slowdowns. We don't have enough info on what other cards cause this but we do know that older towers (gen1 and 2) definitely have pci-e issues.
Click to expand...

Will do. Carts on a job right now but will save to a usb stick and email as soon as I can. Thanks
 
Deanan-

What is your system configuration on the machines that you're getting realtime transcode speeds? I have 3 machines in front of me getting 6-12 frames per second for MXF, ProRes, etc.

2 of these machines were realtime with RocketCine. But now the speed is crippled with RedCine-X. All versions.

Thanks.
 
Deanan,

What kind of speed are you getting transcoding to quicktimes from RCX with rocket? You said you are getting good speed to DPX, but most of us render to Quicktime. We really need render to QT to be what is was in rocketcine.


Dusty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top