Catalyst Perfomance

[foxrider]

Hi Simon,

do you mean you are able to run 3-4 layers of AIC 1080p content on either quad core or 8 core machine?

[samsc]

Hi Simon,

do you mean you are able to run 3-4 layers of AIC 1080p content on either quad core or 8 core machine?

with 2009 macs you should be able to get 6-8 layers of 1080p with AIC codec

i get 6-8 layers on my 2009 8 core 2.26Ghz mac with AIC 1080p 25fps

2009 macs with 10.6.x are significantly faster than 2008 with 10.5.x

around 20-40% faster

with 10.6.x more cores have improved performance - more cores are better.

[Mr_P]

with 2009 macs you should be able to get 6-8 layers of 1080p with AIC codec

i get 6-8 layers on my 2009 8 core 2.26Ghz mac with AIC 1080p 25fps

I've never got more than 4 layers of AIC at 1080p 25fps on ANY MacPro... not even the same spec as you quoted.
How do you manage to get 6-8 layers on 2009/2010 MacPros?

S

[samsc]

I've never got more than 4 layers of AIC at 1080p 25fps on ANY MacPro... not even the same spec as you quoted.
How do you manage to get 6-8 layers on 2009/2010 MacPros?

S

suggest you run test G on your systems and send charts.

and we can check the spec of the machines you have-

[samsc]

there isnt much mystery to performance - every machine is different

using test G on a folder full of the same file type - image and codec - with different movies

i didnt optimise or use latest hardware - i like to test on older systems - so this is not optimised to get best performance.
2009 mac pro 2.26GHz 8 core 10.6.4 GT120 - ssd
tests with gt120 ( which isnt great and is not recommended ) - on old mtron ssd - 1920x1080 output

first file is range of codecs from photojpeg to prores
second file shows 1080p AIC 6-7 layers - 30 different aic files
third file 20 layers 720x576 AIC

---

performance tests are not in show context and every machine needs to be tested by end users

this is only a general indicator not a specification

[foxrider]

there isnt much mystery to performance - every machine is different

using test G on a folder full of the same file type - image and codec - with different movies

i didnt optimise or use latest hardware - i like to test on older systems - so this is not optimised to get best performance.
2009 mac pro 2.26GHz 8 core 10.6.4 GT120 - ssd
tests with gt120 ( which isnt great and is not recommended ) - on old mtron ssd - 1920x1080 output

first file is range of codecs from photojpeg to prores
second file shows 1080p AIC 6-7 layers - 30 different aic files
third file 20 layers 720x576 AIC

---

performance tests are not in show context and every machine needs to be tested by end users

this is only a general indicator not a specification

Hi Richard, is it possible that you provide some test files in different resolutions so that I can test my machine with the similar files that you use and compare.

Can you comment on quad cores machines and 8 cores machine. Will the 8 cores machines be able to run more layers than the quad cores since you mention that 10.6.x uses all cores.

[samsc]

Hi Richard, is it possible that you provide some test files in different resolutions so that I can test my machine with the similar files that you use and compare.

Can you comment on quad cores machines and 8 cores machine. Will the 8 cores machines be able to run more layers than the quad cores since you mention that 10.6.x uses all cores.

the point is that all content is different - so you have to use your own files.
or what you have access to.
cores arent important unless you have a lot of layers.

the order of importance is

1. codec for file -
2. ssd
3. cpu and graphics card

[samsc]

Hi Simon,

do you mean you are able to run 3-4 layers of AIC 1080p content on either quad core or 8 core machine?

for most layers you need to use apple intermediate codec-

for best quality people use apple pro res ( which comes in 5 flavours )

depends on what people want-

there is significant performance difference between codecs - and data rates