Size of 1 system 8 * 8.5 * 2.25 inches, so they are very small just a little bigger then an Apple Mini. So 8 of them doen’t take that much space, you can stack them.
On 29 Sep 2014, at 18:37, Ryan M <rymerr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah really the actual space/room is the issue there, not sure where i'd > put that. > With PPSS, it looks like it distributes the encoding of different files > over the available resources, it wouldn't spread a single encoding job over > them correct? Yes that’s correct. If 1 resource becomes free, job done, it takes the next file to be done. > I do need a way to automate ffmpeg instances so more jobs > can run at the same time. You can run as many jobs as you do have CPU cores, with 8 systems being DualCore, 16 jobs at once. > My jobs aren't just a bunch of files sitting in > a directory, it is querying a db for files that need to be encoded in > various ways. You could run multiple instances of PPSS, with different encoding parameters. You could query your DB for files with ffmpeg parameters X, make symlinks to Directory X and another query for files with parameters Y and make symlinks to directory Y One PPSS instance runs the X and another instance runs the Y symlinks directory. > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Henk D. Schoneveld <belca...@zonnet.nl> > wrote: > >> Why wouldn’t it be realistic ? >> Have a look at https://code.google.com/p/ppss/ to distribute jobs over >> the amount of systems you have and works like a charm. >> On 29 Sep 2014, at 17:05, Ryan M <rymerr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I don't know that it is realistic to have 8 systems running though. If I >>> can pay more and have the approx same amount of throughput with one >> system, >>> that would be better. >> In what way would it be better, less room, yes but that’s very expensive >> room you pay for in my opinion. >>> I just don't want to pay like $4k more (for the >>> Xeon vs Haswell-EP) and only get a few more fps out of it. If stepping >> up >>> to Xeon allows ~40fps like Sean said then it is probably worth it. >> Thank >>> you very much for the input. >>> >>> On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Henk D. Schoneveld <belca...@zonnet.nl> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On 28 Sep 2014, at 13:13, Henk D. Schoneveld <belca...@zonnet.nl> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 26 Sep 2014, at 18:36, Ryan M <rymerr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I am putting together hardware to encode a large and ever growing >>>> catalog >>>>>> of video using ffmpeg/x264. Much of the source video is 1080p >> ProResHQ. >>>>>> Currently I have a box with a Haswell 4770k CPU which gets around >> 12-15 >>>>>> fps, I am of course looking to increase that as much as possible. >>>>> Have a look at >>>> >> http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-5960X+%40+3.00GHz&id=2332 >>>>> and compare with >>>>> >>>> >> http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4770K+%40+3.50GHz&id=1919 >>>>> or in 1 view >>>>> http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=1919&cmp[]=2364 >>>>> 7 times the price for less then 2 times the performance. >>>>> Spreading the task over more much cheaper CPU’s gives you more bang for >>>> the buck if realtime encoding isn’t needed. >>>>> You could use 8 Dual Celeron systems to get the same performance as 1 >>>> E5-2690 where CPU cost would be 8x52.45 vs. 1x2299.99 Of course >>>> motherboards etc are needed and housing but a low cost MB and Housing >> can >>>> be bought at < 100.00 a piece. 8*(100+52.45) ~ 1220.00 >>>>> Saved more then $1.000 And the Xeon still needs a motherboard and case >>>> of course. >>>> The CPU Mark and single thread performance are good indicators for >>>> relative ffmpeg encoding speeds. I do have i5 i7 and the named Celerons >>>> which I compared extensively with the same source files and encoding >>>> parameters. >>>> Disk I/O isn’t any problem, think of it, 5 times BluRay bitrates results >>>> in 90Kb/s < 12MB/s. Every modern disk has no problem with that and even >>>> old-fashioned nics, 100Mb/s can cope with that. >>>>>> >>>>>> Trying to determine if getting the latest dual CPU Xeon (such as >> E5-2690 >>>>>> v3) setup is going to be worth the significant additional cost over >> the >>>>>> best Haswell-E (Core i7-5960X). >>>>>> >>>>>> I've read lots of articles/posts and it is not clear to me. I know >>>> worth >>>>>> is subjective but looking to know if there'll be significant increase >> in >>>>>> fps using 2 Xeons. I need to justify the $6-7k price tag. >>>>>> >>>>>> Any insight/experience would be appreciated. >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks >>>>>> Ryan >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> ffmpeg-user mailing list >>>>>> ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org >>>>>> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> ffmpeg-user mailing list >>>>> ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org >>>>> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ffmpeg-user mailing list >>>> ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org >>>> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ffmpeg-user mailing list >>> ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org >>> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ffmpeg-user mailing list >> ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org >> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user >> > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-user mailing list > ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
