One of the surprises with my nMP, was the lack of professional grade support in the products. I admit I know nothing about Video, but I understand computer hardware.
My test set up was FCPX with the data bases in a 500MBS raid drive. I used the internal SSD drive as the destination drive because my other raid drive was not fast enough. If I had a faster external raid drive I would have used that and I do not think it would have made a difference from my testing. Importing and exporting on the same raid drive sucked and my internal drive is not large enough test that.
At this point, the machine is not designed for h.264. In researching the AMD video card I have to wonder if the h.264 hardware is on the card and just not being utilized.
You can see the video being processed by the GPU is an order of magnitude faster. My numbers are just eyeball guesses from the disk monitor program apple provides, but you can see where the performance is and where it is not.
If the video market is moving from editing to process, then hardware will have so support the video processing, not the cpu. It looks like that is the process in the nMP.
It is curious apple went with the professional codecs instead of h.264. When I look at the system design differences between a searchable video database and videos storage system, I do not see too much professional testing done on the database side. Most of the performance testing is done at the video editing level.
I would guess at some point the video technology in the in the iPhone/ipad world will have to merge with the nMP The market war will be in the video processing/gpu area, where video editing will be processor based.
In looks like the nMP is a great tool for building a video data base in 422 and a lousy tool for working with h.264
I have never build a video data base or worked with much video, so this is all new to me. I am driving a 4k UD590 and two other monitors, two tb raids and a usb raid. I can scan 60 fps on driving the 4k and the 1920x1080 full screen video without a pause.
I used to do professional performance testing, and you can write the test to sell what ever you want. Mostly I did professional system testing, then you had test how well it worked in the real world.
I have years of work on the video database and if it takes all night to export a h.264 video I can live with it. If the next nMP is a swap out upgrade, as long as it preserves the integrity of my video data base I can live with that. There is a difference between a game machine and a system machine.
If apple owns the video processing technology from a system level, the hardware will not matter.
I am still sorting through how to build my system and understanding the tools I have.
Mac Pro (late 2013)
3.7 GHz Quad core Intel Xeon E5
64GB 1866 MHz DDR3 ECC
AMD FirePro D300 2048 MB
Raw Video 4096x2160 12fps optimized 4096x2160 60fps
Optimized 4K Raw 4K
Read MBS Write MBS Read Write
4444xq 250 900 8 100
4444zq filter 70 140
4444 240 900 8 100
4444 filter 70 140
422hq 250 900
422hq filter 70 140
422 400 600
422 filter 300 230
422 lt 100 100
422lt filter 70 70
422 proxey 100 50
422 proxy filter 100 50
h264 30 10 3 3
h264 filter 30 10
Import 4k 500 500
Transcode 30 90
Import with transcode 30 90
timeline scans 60 FPS on external drives.(optimized)
My test set up was FCPX with the data bases in a 500MBS raid drive. I used the internal SSD drive as the destination drive because my other raid drive was not fast enough. If I had a faster external raid drive I would have used that and I do not think it would have made a difference from my testing. Importing and exporting on the same raid drive sucked and my internal drive is not large enough test that.
At this point, the machine is not designed for h.264. In researching the AMD video card I have to wonder if the h.264 hardware is on the card and just not being utilized.
You can see the video being processed by the GPU is an order of magnitude faster. My numbers are just eyeball guesses from the disk monitor program apple provides, but you can see where the performance is and where it is not.
If the video market is moving from editing to process, then hardware will have so support the video processing, not the cpu. It looks like that is the process in the nMP.
It is curious apple went with the professional codecs instead of h.264. When I look at the system design differences between a searchable video database and videos storage system, I do not see too much professional testing done on the database side. Most of the performance testing is done at the video editing level.
I would guess at some point the video technology in the in the iPhone/ipad world will have to merge with the nMP The market war will be in the video processing/gpu area, where video editing will be processor based.
In looks like the nMP is a great tool for building a video data base in 422 and a lousy tool for working with h.264
I have never build a video data base or worked with much video, so this is all new to me. I am driving a 4k UD590 and two other monitors, two tb raids and a usb raid. I can scan 60 fps on driving the 4k and the 1920x1080 full screen video without a pause.
I used to do professional performance testing, and you can write the test to sell what ever you want. Mostly I did professional system testing, then you had test how well it worked in the real world.
I have years of work on the video database and if it takes all night to export a h.264 video I can live with it. If the next nMP is a swap out upgrade, as long as it preserves the integrity of my video data base I can live with that. There is a difference between a game machine and a system machine.
If apple owns the video processing technology from a system level, the hardware will not matter.
I am still sorting through how to build my system and understanding the tools I have.
Mac Pro (late 2013)
3.7 GHz Quad core Intel Xeon E5
64GB 1866 MHz DDR3 ECC
AMD FirePro D300 2048 MB
Raw Video 4096x2160 12fps optimized 4096x2160 60fps
Optimized 4K Raw 4K
Read MBS Write MBS Read Write
4444xq 250 900 8 100
4444zq filter 70 140
4444 240 900 8 100
4444 filter 70 140
422hq 250 900
422hq filter 70 140
422 400 600
422 filter 300 230
422 lt 100 100
422lt filter 70 70
422 proxey 100 50
422 proxy filter 100 50
h264 30 10 3 3
h264 filter 30 10
Import 4k 500 500
Transcode 30 90
Import with transcode 30 90
timeline scans 60 FPS on external drives.(optimized)