hey i didnt say 10.. someone else said there where only 10 registered users at Canopus.com that used the HVX..
Intel vs AMD turnkey canopus systems
- Thread starter Jeff In Ocala
- Start date
Jarred Land said:
I have been spending time figuring out the details of a killer 8 core HD editing system. I am about to give it up and drop it down to 2 dual cores so I can run Win XP and Premiere. I just got off the phone with Adobe. Premiere 2.0 does not handle or take advantage of 4 processors. I would have to get special rights to get it to work on Win 2003 Server and then the NLE doesn't take advantage of the CPUs. I am bummed.
Does any other NLE work with Win 2003 Server and take advantage of 4 processors?????
Is it similar to Premiere? Is it worth learning a new program for real fast editing/rendering etc.
yochua
Last edited:
mule ferguson
Well-known member
See my orginal post on page 1 . Thats my story and I sticking to it. If you own more than 1 that does not count.
Mule
Mule
Yes, the operating system itself will limit the number of cores - "workstation" class OSes support up to two CPUs (physical packages), and with XP that means 4 cores (2x2). You need a Server-class Windows to support more than 2 packages, unless you somehow get a special OEM build from Microsoft.
As far as the applications go, it's not so much about supporting N CPUs (cores), it's more about how much you are doing.
Most operations are not infinitely slice-able, meaning that the amount of concurrency of most operations does have limits. For example, if you're starting an orchard (with an empty field), you can't harvest the fruit at the same time you plant the trees because the tree haven't produced fruit yet.
Unless you're running many layers of processing or running multiple tasks simultaneously, the gains diminish after 2 cores.
Brandon
As far as the applications go, it's not so much about supporting N CPUs (cores), it's more about how much you are doing.
Most operations are not infinitely slice-able, meaning that the amount of concurrency of most operations does have limits. For example, if you're starting an orchard (with an empty field), you can't harvest the fruit at the same time you plant the trees because the tree haven't produced fruit yet.
Unless you're running many layers of processing or running multiple tasks simultaneously, the gains diminish after 2 cores.
Brandon
How about for rendering, this 8 core system amounts to a rendering farm. Can ProCoder or any other video rendering software utilize all 8 cores? This should be no problem because I assume that video is rendered one frame at a time or is that only the case for computer graphics. I am assuming 8 cores make a really awesome rendering farm for CG, assuming Win 2003 server and the render software can do everything any queuing software can do. (Many assumptions, wish someone else already tried this.)
The question remains weather it will speed the rendering of anything into anything. Can the rendering software break up the work into small pieces?
The question remains weather it will speed the rendering of anything into anything. Can the rendering software break up the work into small pieces?
Now we get into an interesting discussion of multithreading and concurrency.
Multithreading is often attributed to concurrency, but it's a little more complicated than that. Multithreading allows separate threads (operations) to run concurrently, but that doesn't mean that things will actually run any faster.
For example, if you're making an apple pie from fresh apples, you can't bake the pie at the same time you're peeling and slicing the apples - it just doesn't work that way.
Similarly, if your process requires the results of other operations before it can begin processing, having it running in another thread doesn't help much since it's just waiting around for the results it needs in order to being.
The game programmers have been doing a lot of work to increase the amount of concurrent processing that can occur.
So, back to your 8 cores, eventually it becomes more a matter of doing more things versus doing things faster. Once you run out of concurrent operations, the speed gain from adding cores is minimal at best.
Brandon
Multithreading is often attributed to concurrency, but it's a little more complicated than that. Multithreading allows separate threads (operations) to run concurrently, but that doesn't mean that things will actually run any faster.
For example, if you're making an apple pie from fresh apples, you can't bake the pie at the same time you're peeling and slicing the apples - it just doesn't work that way.
Similarly, if your process requires the results of other operations before it can begin processing, having it running in another thread doesn't help much since it's just waiting around for the results it needs in order to being.
The game programmers have been doing a lot of work to increase the amount of concurrent processing that can occur.
So, back to your 8 cores, eventually it becomes more a matter of doing more things versus doing things faster. Once you run out of concurrent operations, the speed gain from adding cores is minimal at best.
Brandon
dregenthal
Veteran
mule ferguson said:
Got mine today. Using it on an older Dell Workstation . . . dual 2gig Xeon with 2gigs of Ram. Appears to run well on my 3gig Toshiba laptop as well (both systems are XP Pro).
I really like the capability of exporting back to P2 structure, MXF files. Can't wait for that free upgrade to version 4.