Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

Get answers to your questions about color grading, editing and finishing with DaVinci Resolve.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 3547
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 9:19 am

Well, the Shogun has a pretty good screen actually.
But to work in HD from a computer, you'll need extremely good eyesight…
Resolve Studio and Fusion Studio
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM and 32 GB RAM
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 9:28 am

Uli Plank wrote:Well, the Shogun has a pretty good screen actually.
But to work in HD from a computer, you'll need extremely good eyesight…

Sure - also, I have just edited my post adding that only makes sense if the Atomos device is also used as a field monitor/recorder - otherwise it's too expensive...

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 11:12 am

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:Thanks guys.

Of course, I did find an M.2 NVMe drive with parameters (capacity, transfer rates) as close to those of my Toshiba as possible; what I'm concerned is that with different on-board controllers it still may not work with my Toshiba in RAID 0.

Regards,
Piotr


The drive I have is this one http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews ... eview-1tb/, which currently available drive would match it best? The cheapest one with similar transfers of 2,500/1500 is this one (sorry - in Polish): https://www.morele.net/dysk-ssd-plextor ... n-1813249/ Do you think I should just order it and not worry?

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

Carsten Sellberg

  • Posts: 377
  • Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:13 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 11:54 am

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:
Uli Plank wrote:Well, the Shogun has a pretty good screen actually.
But to work in HD from a computer, you'll need extremely good eyesight…

Sure - also, I have just edited my post adding that only makes sense if the Atomos device is also used as a field monitor/recorder - otherwise it's too expensive...
Piotr


Hi.

I have a couple of Samsung 850 Pro 512 GB SSD's I already use to record on from my URSA Mini 4.6K.
So what I am looking for is a monitor solution only. I am using glasses and also think 7" is to small. My current laptop is a 17".
But Thank you for suggesting it. I would I never got the idea myself.

Regards Carsten.
URSA Mini 4.6K
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 12:34 pm

Carsten Sellberg wrote:But Thank you for suggesting it. I would I never got the idea myself.

I agree 7" is too small for a regular computer screen - but can you imagine I'm using my Inferno as a secondary "reference" monitor for PQ grading? My main one (a 49" UHD TV - HDR10-capable and rated at 1,000 nits) is fed via the HDMI mezzanine card of my Decklink 12G Extreme - when I really need to fine-tune the highlights, I prefer watching them on the Infeno, fed simultaneously from 12G SDI port on the same Decklink. And the Inferno is rated 1,500 nits plus it's so much smaller that the highlights are definitely more pronounced, giving me opportunity to see how my grades will look on different devices.

But I'm digressing; sorry could help more, Carsten :)

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

Dan Sherman

  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:07 pm
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 3:47 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:I'm using the M.2 drives as my cached media storage, and nothing else. Since I grade for HDR, the minimum format for me is DNxHR HDR (that's how Resolve calls it in the drop-won list). But with 2-3 such drives in RAID 0, I could also cache to uncompressed. And of course, the volatility of such array isn't that important as the cached media are sort of scratch, anyway.


Your Current drive is capable of 2.6 GB/s read, and 1.6 GB/s write.

The maximum DNxHR 444 bitrate is only 0.444 GB/s , and I believe what BM calls HDR is just a tweaked flavor of this. If I did the math right even uncompressed 10 bit is only 1.44 GB/s. so no matter what you are doing, you should be fine with your current drive, as long as your system doesn't have any other bottlenecks.
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 4:23 pm

Dan Sherman wrote:
Piotr Wozniacki wrote:I'm using the M.2 drives as my cached media storage, and nothing else. Since I grade for HDR, the minimum format for me is DNxHR HDR (that's how Resolve calls it in the drop-won list). But with 2-3 such drives in RAID 0, I could also cache to uncompressed. And of course, the volatility of such array isn't that important as the cached media are sort of scratch, anyway.


Your Current drive is capable of 2.6 GB/s read, and 1.6 GB/s write.

The maximum DNxHR 444 bitrate is only 0.444 GB/s , and I believe what BM calls HDR is just a tweaked flavor of this. If I did the math right even uncompressed 10 bit is only 1.44 GB/s. so no matter what you are doing, you should be fine with your current drive, as long as your system doesn't have any other bottlenecks.


I did try caching to uncompressed and the single 2,500/1,500 drive was too slow. And I think your math isn't correct, what would be uncompressed bandwidth for 4K DCI @50 fps? According to this calculator https://www.extron.com/product/videotools.aspx, it is 26.73 Gbps!!!

Also, MSI support recommends two identical models of drives - and the model I have is impossible to be found...

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline
User avatar

Jack Fairley

  • Posts: 906
  • Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:58 pm
  • Location: Los Angeles

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 5:35 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:what would be uncompressed bandwidth for 4K DCI @50 fps? According to this calculator https://www.extron.com/product/videotools.aspx, it is 26.73 Gbps!!!

It depends on the signal. 8-bit YUV should be about 7Gb/s, 16-bit RGBA more than 26.
Threadripper 1950X 3.7GHz
64GB DDR4-2666
2x GTX 1080 Ti
DeckLink 4K Extreme 12G
Resolve Studio 15.1.2
Windows 10 Pro 1803
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 5:40 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:[
I did try caching to uncompressed and the single 2,500/1,500 drive was too slow. And I think your math isn't correct, what would be uncompressed bandwidth for 4K DCI @50 fps? According to this calculator https://www.extron.com/product/videotools.aspx, it is 26.73 Gbps!!!

Piotr


This website is not good for video files calculations. Use AJA DataCalc which is good.

Resolve uncompressed cache is 16bit for HDR, so you need (for 50p 4K DCI and RGB channels):

4096*2160*50*16*3 =21234Gbit/8= 2655MB/sec, so on the edge of your drive. Because 16bit is 2^4 there is no padding needed so math is correct (when you count for 10bit it's not 30bit, but 32 as 2 bits are left empty due to need of 2^n alignment).

It will be converted into single frames as far as I understand, so bit harder to read. Single frame should be around 53MB for RGB and 70MB for RGBA.

I woud probably choose ProResXQ HDR as its quality is near lossless and there is no real need to waste space/bandwidth for 16bit uncompressed. Of course this requires bit more CPU, but you are about to get plenty, so no problem.
Last edited by Andrew Kolakowski on Mon Aug 20, 2018 5:52 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Offline
User avatar

Jean Claude

  • Posts: 1813
  • Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2015 4:41 pm

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 5:48 pm

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:
Piotr Wozniacki wrote:[
I did try caching to uncompressed and the single 2,500/1,500 drive was too slow. And I think your math isn't correct, what would be uncompressed bandwidth for 4K DCI @50 fps? According to this calculator https://www.extron.com/product/videotools.aspx, it is 26.73 Gbps!!!

Piotr


This website is not good for video files calculations. Use AJACalc which is good.

Resolve uncompressed cache is 16bit for HDR, so you need (for 50p UHD):

4096*2160*50*16*3 =21234Gbit/8= 2655MB/sec, so on the edge of your drive.

It will be converted into single frames as far as I understand, so bit harder to read.

+1

Not easy: you can turn in every direction: there is always a bottleneck. :oops:
Find the best balance: easier to calculate in theory than to fall to the ground ...
It's a compromise ... and unfortunately without testing it on your own, it's hard to prove it.
Windows 10 PRO X64 1709 and 1803 | DaVinci Resolve Studio 15.2.0.033 | Fusion Studio 9.0.2 | Decklink Studio 4K 6G | Desktop Video 10.10.14 | Nvidia 416.34
Offline

Dan Sherman

  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:07 pm
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostMon Aug 20, 2018 11:55 pm

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Resolve uncompressed cache is 16bit for HDR, so you need (for 50p 4K DCI and RGB channels):


That's what I did wrong, I thought he was using 10bit

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:
4096*2160*50*16*3 =21234Gbit/8= 2655MB/sec, so on the edge of your drive. Because 16bit is 2^4 there is no padding needed so math is correct (when you count for 10bit it's not 30bit, but 32 as 2 bits are left empty due to need of 2^n alignment).


yea, uncompressed 16bit is completely bonkers! A 2TB SSD would only store ~12.5 minutes of footage.
Offline

Dermot Shane

  • Posts: 1408
  • Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 6:48 pm
  • Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostTue Aug 21, 2018 3:13 am

yea, uncompressed 16bit is completely bonkers! A 2TB SSD would only store ~12.5 minutes of footage.


not so bonkers, was the only option for cacheing in ACES until recently, that's why i have alot of spinning drives raided, i need both the space and the speed

i think a 2Tb SSD is bonkers, far too small for any use in my world
Offline
User avatar

MikeMeagher

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 8:21 pm
  • Location: Bellingham, WA. USA

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostTue Aug 21, 2018 3:57 am

I have discovered my render times improved by the following hardware configuration:
Resolve studio and my OS is on m.2 drive;
My source files are in a 3 HDD drive Raid 0 array;
And my destination drive is another SSD RAID
0 array drive.
If I render to the same array as my source files the render framerate is slower.
My experience is that Resolve speed is more than simply GUI speed..data transfer speeds is a function of throughout through the entire pipeline and all components plays a huge role too.
Mike Meagher Underwater Cinematographer
www.youtube.com/WolfeelDiver
Win 10 64 pro I 7 6 core X99 board 64 GB ram
M.2 app drive. 2x SSDs in Raid 0 for cache.
3x spinning HHDs raid 0 for source files.
Dual 2x EVGA1080 ti video cards
Resolve 14.3 studio
Offline

Dan Sherman

  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:07 pm
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostTue Aug 21, 2018 4:21 am

MikeMeagher wrote:I have discovered my render times improved by the following hardware configuration:
Resolve studio and my OS is on m.2 drive;
My source files are in a 3 HDD drive Raid 0 array;
And my destination drive is another SSD RAID
0 array drive.
If I render to the same array as my source files the render framerate is slower.
My experience is that Resolve speed is more than simply GUI speed..data transfer speeds is a function of throughout through the entire pipeline and all components plays a huge role too.


What you have done, is prevented your drives from having to handle "mixed" (simultaneous reads and writes) I/O. Mixed is the worst performing mode for every type of drive.
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostTue Aug 21, 2018 4:34 am

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:
Piotr Wozniacki wrote:[
I did try caching to uncompressed and the single 2,500/1,500 drive was too slow. And I think your math isn't correct, what would be uncompressed bandwidth for 4K DCI @50 fps? According to this calculator https://www.extron.com/product/videotools.aspx, it is 26.73 Gbps!!!

Piotr


This website is not good for video files calculations. Use AJA DataCalc which is good.

Resolve uncompressed cache is 16bit for HDR, so you need (for 50p 4K DCI and RGB channels):

4096*2160*50*16*3 =21234Gbit/8= 2655MB/sec, so on the edge of your drive. Because 16bit is 2^4 there is no padding needed so math is correct (when you count for 10bit it's not 30bit, but 32 as 2 bits are left empty due to need of 2^n alignment).

It will be converted into single frames as far as I understand, so bit harder to read. Single frame should be around 53MB for RGB and 70MB for RGBA.

I woud probably choose ProResXQ HDR as its quality is near lossless and there is no real need to waste space/bandwidth for 16bit uncompressed. Of course this requires bit more CPU, but you are about to get plenty, so no problem.

Andrew is right - when I first tried caching uncompressed, it was "almost" playing back full speed from my single M.2 drive. But "almost" isn't good enough, so I think to RAID 0 3 such drives (or 2 if the board doesn't allow 3) - and I rarely cache much more than 15 minutes of a timeline. Do I need caching to Uncompressed? Will see; probably not - but as I mentioned elsewhere, I like open options :) Of course, it's irrelevant if I decide to stay Intel, after all (which is still possible)...


Also I cannot use Prores on Windows :(

Piotr
Last edited by Piotr Wozniacki on Tue Aug 21, 2018 5:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostTue Aug 21, 2018 5:06 am

A request for sound advise for you guys: MSI Support I correspond with about their X399 Taichi mobo - when asked about mixing different types of M.2 drives for RAID 0 - wrote to me:

"Regarding M2. We suggest to use 2x identical models. Even different models/vendors might work, the timings between them are different. So we cannot say how they will act in RAID mode...

As we know. The older RD400 SSD’s from them are not working in RAID at all – or giving troubles in RAID.
Better check with Toshiba directly regarding function in RAID with their XG3 M.2
"

Well - the exactly same model as my current Toshiba is almost impossible to be found anywhere, but I did find a source on eBay: https://www.ebay.com/itm/TOSHIBA-1TB-M- ... 2#viTabs_0

Returns are allowed, the seller has 100% positive feedback... What do you think? Would you take the risk and buy one, so that it matches exactly my current drive? Decisions, decisions...

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

Carsten Sellberg

  • Posts: 377
  • Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:13 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostTue Aug 21, 2018 6:26 am

Hi.

First, X399 Taichi is an ASRock motherboard. Just want to tell you if, you write to MSI again.

Together with a MSI Meg X399 Creation you will receive a M.2 Xpander-Aero M.2 PCIe card.

Its hold up to 4 additional M.2 NVMe PCIe 3.0 x4 SSDs. It look a little as a small graphics card with a Graphics card cooler. There is a picture in this link:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13189/th ... ard-review

If you want to use it a 1x8x PCIe slot, wonder I how many M.2 NVMe PCIe 3.0 x4 SSD you then can use? But that, can the manual tell.

When I see the price in your link do I also wonder if it is the time to suggest a few faster SSD'd in a RAID and the use the Toshiba standalone?
Think it much will depend on your requirement for SSD disk space.


Since last week did I find two links a like to share. First this user comment from Spooktra:

'Reading through all the reviews of this processor, not just this one but the ones done by other sites as well, I can't help but feel like everyone is testing this processor the wrong way. It's not meant to run one task as fast as possible, not even embarrassingly parallel tasks primarily because those are almost best handled by a GPU, this processor is meant to run multiple tasks simultaneously.'

https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/h ... oads/page3

And then this Youtube: 'Threadripper 2 2990WX in-depth review & benchmarks'



18:52 - 21:14: More work you give it, faster it get

Regards Carsten.
URSA Mini 4.6K
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostTue Aug 21, 2018 7:00 am

Carsten Sellberg wrote:Hi.

First, X399 Taichi is an ASRock motherboard. Just want to tell you if, you write to MSI again.


Sure Carsten, I wrote to ASRock - MSI has just been a mistype on my part.
Carsten Sellberg wrote:Together with a MSI Meg X399 Creation you will receive a M.2 Xpander-Aero M.2 PCIe card.

Sorry, my Friend - but unfortunately the MSI MEG Creation is out of the question for me because of its PCIe slots arrangement. I just couldn't install my two GPU cards in X16 slots, and still have double-width room with X8 PCIe slot for my double-decker Decklink. It is the only one out of all the X399 boards we've been discussing here with such unfortunate slots arrangements!
Carsten Sellberg wrote:When I see the price in your link do I also wonder if it is the time to suggest a few faster SSD'd in a RAID and the use the Toshiba standalone?
Think it much will depend on your requirement for SSD disk space.

Sorry - don't understand what you mean by the above; could you elaborate? EDIT: oh, OK - get you now. Yes, sound advise - my problem though is that at the moment, with all these necessary expenditures, I just cannot afford two new M.2 drives. Luckily, this doesn't stop me - the RAID for my caching can be set up at some later time, down the road :)
Carsten Sellberg wrote:Since last week did I find two links a like to share. First this user comment from Spooktra:

'Reading through all the reviews of this processor, not just this one but the ones done by other sites as well, I can't help but feel like everyone is testing this processor the wrong way. It's not meant to run one task as fast as possible, not even embarrassingly parallel tasks primarily because those are almost best handled by a GPU, this processor is meant to run multiple tasks simultaneously.'

Regards Carsten.

Definitely agree in 100% - several renders simultaneously, or even a Moldflow analysis running in the background while I work with Resolve, is how I'm hoping to take FULL advantage of the 2990WX!

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 24, 2018 3:52 pm

Guys - I'm going through an extremely difficult time trying to decide between the good intel i0-7060X and the 2990WX monster. My agony is even greater as - at my somewhat advanced age - it may as well prove that the system i chose now will be the last high-end PC in my life :(

But of course, nobody is going to make the decision for me. So - the 2990WX'es architecture "quirks" aside - please tell me one thing that many of you, as running Resolve on the mid- to high-end workstations, may actually know:

- assuming my goal is not necessarily a system with jaw-dropping paper specs, but a well-balanced one (and by that I mean a workstation with no extremely narrow bottlenecks) - and considering I already have two Titan Xp as my GPU powerplant, which number of CPU cores do you think will balance better those GPU with Resolve: 16 or 32? I mean, please forget for a while about the Resolve overall scalability, or the above-mentioned 2990WX architecture compromises (with memory access, for one) - and try to think about your own experience with workstations based upon 2x 18-cores Xeons and just two GTX 1080 ti GPUs (and I know quite a number of Resolve users run it on such no-compromise machines): do you think those 2, even very powerful, GPU cards tend to create a bottleneck for those 36 CPU cores? If so, have you noticed it only occasionally - or is it an inevitable and permanent "feature" of such a relation between the CPU vs. GPU real power in those systems?

I know it's difficult to publicly admit "oops - I made a mistake" when one spent so much money on their 2x 18 (or even more) Xeon cores, when there only is place for two GPU cards on his/her motherboard; it's only natural to be reluctant admitting it! But if some of you tried to help me and actually admit this is the case with their systems (i.e. more than 30 CPU cores being an overkill for just two, even very powerful, GPU cards - such person(s) would actually help me enormously, as I'd then simply forget about the 2990WX TR and stay with the old good Intel. Of course, the opposite also applies: if someone stands out saying "hey - only 30+ core CPU can balance two sufficiently powerful GPUs, I never noticed my GPU cards being a bottleneck, i.e. actually slowing down, my 2x 18 core Xeons in Resolve" - then again, I'd owe a lot to them.

Thanks in advance for this kind of real-life experience-based comments by actual Resolve users, rather than links to the rapidly growing number of various and always unconclusive 2990WX "technical" reviews, YT videos etc. Good balance in Resolve is what really is of interest to me now that I need to make up my mind :)

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline
User avatar

Daz Wood

  • Posts: 176
  • Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 2:59 pm

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 24, 2018 4:24 pm

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/09 ... iew/?amp=1

Almost a year old review it sums up with:

. Ultimately, the i9-7960X is a powerful CPU made for those those willing to custom water cool, or brave enough to de-lid. It's a CPU for enthusiasts and content creators with more money than sense chasing Reddit bragging rights, even when better value options exist. It's a CPU that, despite its strengths, I struggle to recommend to anyone but the most hardened of Intel fans.

The good
The fastest slice of silicon going
Good gaming performance
Improved memory support
Modern complement of I/O
The bad
Not that much faster than Threadripper 1950X
Fewer PCIe lanes than the competition
Power hungry
Continual use of TIM instead of solder
High clock speeds and quiet systems out of the question without custom liquid cooling or delidding
The ugly
There's little justification for the price tag. Buy a Threadripper 1950X instead.
Thank you

Daz
Offline
User avatar

Jack Fairley

  • Posts: 906
  • Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:58 pm
  • Location: Los Angeles

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 24, 2018 5:58 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:*snip*

I have a Threadripper 1950X and 2x 1080ti. I consider this a well balanced system - any 4K RAW format I have tried will play back in real time, and I can even use some NR or other GPU effects while doing it. 8K RED is another story, but I can set debayer quality to 4K and get along that way.
Threadripper 1950X 3.7GHz
64GB DDR4-2666
2x GTX 1080 Ti
DeckLink 4K Extreme 12G
Resolve Studio 15.1.2
Windows 10 Pro 1803
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 24, 2018 8:11 pm

Piotr you are as always overthinking :)
Get something which you really need, not what you want :D

Most likely i9 14 cores is good enough to go with your Titans. No need to waste money.
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 3547
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Aug 25, 2018 1:33 am

That is a well balanced system. Going beyond that depends on your typical jobs. For example: with lots of R3D coming in, get lots of fast cores. For massive NR and such, look for a MB that supports 3 GPUs. For huge image sequences, get the fastest storage. For Fusion jobs, up the RAM.
Resolve Studio and Fusion Studio
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM and 32 GB RAM
Offline

Carsten Sellberg

  • Posts: 377
  • Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:13 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Aug 25, 2018 5:07 am

Hi.

You ask for 'real-life experience-based comments,' but I hope it will be OK that I write this?

First I will like to point out that I don't think the 2990WX have any "quirks". Yes it uses the NUMA memory architecture, that normally is used in clusters of CPU's. Many reviewers blamed this for the bad scaling. But I feel that they are wrong. Phoronix.com tested the 2990WX with Linux and found much higher performance, so I feel that the scaling problem is inside Windows. But only time can tell.

You write: ' at my somewhat advanced age - it may as well prove that the system i chose now will be the last high-end PC in my life'. Then I wonder, when is it the right time for you to buy this next high-end PC?
Will it be after 31. August, at the end of the year or may be next year.

Please see under the 14 comments in the Puget Systems review of the 'Cinema 4D: AMD Threadripper 2990WX Performance' where William M George wrote: Matt, who handles Resolve, is on vacation this week - but you can probably expect articles from him covering Resolve, Premiere Pro, and After Effects before the end of the month.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/artic ... ance-1217/

So I hope, that a Resolve review with the 2990WX is close, and that it can answer some of your remaining questens.


In Daz link is the 1950X suggested and Andrew recommend the Intel Core i9-7940X Skylake X 14 Cores. Which to buy? I expect none.

If you choose the AMD way will I suggest the 2950X or larger. The 2950X will be available world wide from 31 August and have a normal memory layout. Only the 2990WX and the coming 24 cores 2970WX uses the NUMA memory architecture.

If you choose the Intel route, did Intel at the Hot Chips 2018 event show some slides 'Next Step in Intel Xeon Scalable Processor'

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13239/in ... ade-lake/2

The new 28 cores 56 threads Intel desktop CPU is promised before the end of the year. But when will the 14 core variant arrive?
So I can't see any reason to go out and buy a Intel Core i9-7940X Skylake X 14 Cores now, and with the ongoing competition, do I expect the prices of the next generation of Intel 14 cores CPU's to be lower.

As I previous wrote, do I feel that the 2990WX's scaling problem is inside Windows and will expect that the new Intel many cores CPU's also to have it. But only time will tell.

An another thing. I don't know how many PCIe lanes your dual sized Dec-Link require. Please post, if it is a PCIe x4 or x8 card?
And how many M.2 NVMe PCIe 3.0 x4 SSD do you want to use. May be your PC selection will be limited by the number of PCIe lanes on your next motherboard.

We had, what I will call a nice brainstorming the other day. I think you choice of a new PC and at what time, very mush must depend on BMD coming plans and ideas for Resolve. Do they want to change Resolve into several concurrently running programs to take better advantage of the power of new CPU's with many cores and threads?
And what is the timeframe. Will it be next year, in 3-4 years or may be never?

Regards Carsten.
URSA Mini 4.6K
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 3547
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Aug 25, 2018 5:23 am

My hope is that at least background rendering will come soon.
Resolve Studio and Fusion Studio
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM and 32 GB RAM
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSun Aug 26, 2018 12:49 pm

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Piotr you are as always overthinking :)
Get something which you really need, not what you want :D

Most likely i9 14 cores is good enough to go with your Titans. No need to waste money.


Yeah, I'm aware of my COD symptoms, Andrew :) Anyway - if I were to buy a 14- core CPU now, it wouldn't for sure be the i9 - but the Ryzen Threadripper 1920X; it is really cheap and - if I am to live long enough, and earn not much less than now for at least a couple of years - I'd have a great option open: upgrading just the CPU with the next generation one, and with the number of cores that in the meantime would prove optimal for Resolve :) But to do that, I must buy a right board now...

Alas, my problem is that I'm still trying to wrap my head around those X399 motherboards, their VRM performance and high (like 250W) TDP cooling capabilities. While I am an engineer, my specialty is not electronics - so please be patient and explain it to me in laymen terms:

Just yesterday, the Gigabyte X399 Aorus Xtreme became available for Euro 640 (plus shipping - oops :() at Amazon.de. I'm reading it has 10-phase VRM; to put it in the right perspective, how does it differ from majority of Gen-1 boards? Are they only 8 phase VRM? What I don't understand is this: if 10-phase VRM is needed to handle 2990WX properly - how on earth adding an extra fan (like Asus does with their ROG Zenith Extreme) is supposed to achieve the same goal? Not to mention other manufacturers, whose boards (like e.g. ASRock's X399 Taichi) aren't even going to get any hardware changes - and yet ASRock claims it's 100% compatible with the second generation Ryzen... In other words: are we talking more about current draw capabilities (10-phase VRM would suggest that), or cooling a 250W CPU (hence the extra cooling kit from Asus), or both? Please help me understand it, so I buy the right board for Gen-2 Threadipper without going bankrupt - because you know what? When I read the MSI X399 Carbon AC board specs (https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X399-GA ... ON-AC.html) - it also is claimed to have 10+3 phase power - so where the real difference is, making it half the price of the Aorus?!!

Thanks,
Piotr

PS. Oh, and BTW: is it just me, or does the design (or the looks, at least) of the (so highly recommended by Carsten in this thread) Gigabyte X399 Aorus Xtreme seem identical to that of the so much cheaper MSI X399 Carbon AC?
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSun Aug 26, 2018 1:41 pm

Jack Fairley wrote:
Piotr Wozniacki wrote:*snip*

I have a Threadripper 1950X and 2x 1080ti. I consider this a well balanced system - any 4K RAW format I have tried will play back in real time, and I can even use some NR or other GPU effects while doing it. 8K RED is another story, but I can set debayer quality to 4K and get along that way.


Here you go - so I'm not hallucinating that my 8-core CPU is way too slow in relation to my 2x Titan Xp performance! In some circumstances, I see the CPU loaded 100% with the GPU at just 20-30% - but never the other way around... The i9-7960X aside for a while, I think I should wait for some 1950X price drop (hopefully after the 2950X has arrived). But the Ryzen in general is already so much cheaper than Intel, that I seriously doubt such a serious price drop of the 1st generation Threadrippers ever comes; the AMD/Intel market will petrify with pricing basically not changing much, and will resemble the market division between PC and Mac believers... Time will tell. Anyway: the 1950X is not worth its current price for me; if I were to buy a 1st generation Threadripper it would be the 1920X, which really is cheap already (my idea of such an upgrade path I described in another post)...

Piotr
Last edited by Piotr Wozniacki on Sun Aug 26, 2018 3:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

Carsten Sellberg

  • Posts: 377
  • Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:13 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSun Aug 26, 2018 2:13 pm

Hi.

I am sorry, but I will have to split my answer in to two.

When I started to compare the VRM circuit on the Gigabyte X399 Aorus Xtreme with that on the MSI X399 GAMING PRO Carbon did I make some google search. But the results was for the MSI X399 SLI PLUS who also have a 10 phase VRM circiut. So I got some wrong information.

I will look at it again later. But I am not sure how much time I will have in the next two days. But I will not forget you.

But for now. If you buy a 12 core Ryzen Threadripper 1920X don't I think it will be a good idea to upgrade to a 32 core 2990WX later. Then I hope you will wait to August 2019 before you upgrade to a CPU with higher number of cores.

The 2019 generation will be manufactured on the 7nm process node instead of the current 12nm.
That normally will give faster, cheaper and smaller size using less power or a mix of that.

The 16 core Threadripper actually consist of two 8 core Ryzen glued together. The 32 core consist of four 8 core Ryzen glued together. This 8 core Ryzen module is expect to be a 10 core or 12 core module on the 7nm process node.

It will then be possible to make a 20 to 24 core Threadripper in 2019 with only a TDP of 180 Watt. But I feel that AMD will choose to increase the TDP of this Threadripper 2019 CPU's. So I think we will need higher TDP.

About the second part of my answer. I will not forget you.

Regards Carsten.
URSA Mini 4.6K
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSun Aug 26, 2018 3:10 pm

Thanks Carsten - you are so helpful :)

When I considered the possibility of buying the 1st Generation 12-core Threadripper now, I didn't mean to upgrade it very soon. I'd rather wait at least 2 years, so the 3rd Generation (7 nm technology) will already be in place. My reasons for even considering such a path is simple: money :). At the moment, I need to upgrade almost entire workstation: from the CPU through RAM through the motherboard; since it will most probably be an E-ATX one, I also need to buy a new case, PSU and some really good CPU cooler. All these components - when bought at the same time - would require a serious financial effort, so it wouldn't be a silly idea at all to save circa 75% of the 2990WX price an buy the 1920X instead for the time being - it will certainly be noticeably faster than my current 8-core i7, while I'll be able to spend more money on some really good motherboard, faster RAM, etc.

But while we already know for the fact that the 2nd generation Ryzen Threadripper still uses the TR4 socket just like the 1st generation did - can we assume safely the 3rd Threadripper generation will still use it, as well? If it doesn't - my above-outlined idea will make no sense at all.

So to resume: what I'd really appreciate from you, Carsten, would be:

1. Help me understand all these TDP temperature ratings and VRM power phases differences, so I can decide on which board to buy in an informed fashion and not merely basing on the notion that "expensive is better" :)

2. Help me find out whether the TR4 socket is here to stay for even the 3rd generation Threadrippers with 7nm technology

As usually, I'm looking forward to your valuable comments and opinions; TIA

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

Carsten Sellberg

  • Posts: 377
  • Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:13 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostWed Aug 29, 2018 8:58 am

Hi.

This post will be the next of a series of few post to try to help you getting further.
I will return later with more information on your questen 1.

But you wrote: 'buy the 1920X instead for the time being - it will certainly be noticeably faster than my current 8-core i7,' I am not sure that it will 'certainly be noticeably faster than your current 8-core i7'. One thing is CPU benchmark. An another thing is Resolve. But here is a benchmark comparison:

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/In ... 2580vs3934


About the 7nm:

AMD's first 7nm product will be a Graphics Card recommended for AI, shipping this year:

'AMD Demos 7nm Vega GPU: Betting Big on Machine Learning for Radeon Instinct; Shipping This Year'

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12910/am ... pping-2018

And the first AMD CPU will be the server EPYC CPU. The server CPU's is a very lucrative market, but the validation process can take up to one year. The EPYC CPU are in family with the 32 cores 2990WX. Please read:

'AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019'

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12912/am ... ng-in-2019

And then to the end of this AMD slide called 'Threadripper - The Monster Truck of computing':
'2019 - : New platform features to take TR4 to the next level'

from: https://videocardz.com/75231/amd-ryzen- ... edt-market

And as I remember did AMD's Jim Anderson, Senior Vice President and General Manager say to keep the TR4 socket until 2020 in a PcWold Threadripper 2 YouTube video. There is only a few of them. Please see this link to find the right one:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pcworld

Yesterday I read some news about both Jim Anderson and GlobalFoundries, one of the 4 large Wafer Factories:

'AMD Exec Resigns, Company Moves 7nm Chip Production To TSMC'

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-m ... 37703.html

The rumors of the 10 or 12 cores Ryzen modules giving 40-48 cores Threadrippers, appeared after Intels prototype demonstration of a 28 cors 56 threads CPU with an industrial chiller at Computex 2018.

And I still expect a new generation of nice Threadrippers in 2019.


But after answering some questens, will I continue with try to explain why some X399 motherboards cost 300$ and others 550$.

It is called marketing. the marketing departments think, if they have a series of motherboards, the total sales will be higher.
Some of the thing they can change is the network controller. And the type and number of ports. For example cost a 10G bit network controller more than 100$. Some as Gigabyte include one on the motherboard. Others as Asus include one as a PCI card in the motherboard package.

An other expensive add on card is a separate card for more M.2 NVMe PCIe 3.0 x4 SSD's.
MSI include a PCI Card in its top motherboard package. Asus choose for its top motherboard, to add a card that fit in a RAM like socket.

Other things, can be different number of SATA ports. Some X399 motherboards have 8 others only 6.

USB type and numbers can also be different.

The place where you find the largest difference between the different brands of motherboards is the BIOS. The different manufacturers have different ideas of how important special features as overclocking is. Other think user friendly BIOS is more important. You will be able to learn more about BIOS differences by finding reviews describing the operation of the BIOS'es.

I hope to get time to write the next part in the weekend.

Regards Carsten.
URSA Mini 4.6K
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostThu Aug 30, 2018 5:34 am

Thanks Carsten for your time and effort in answering me. One thing however, is still missing from what you wrote about the many and various reasons for similar mainboards to bear dramatically different price tags - and I'd like to kindly ask you to elaborate on it even more :)

Let's take the two boards I was comparing:

1. the Gigabyte X399 Aorus Xtreme - 10-phase VRM, Euro 640
2. the MSI X399 Carbon AC board - 10+3 phase power, below Euro 400

Now - as I also noticed before - those 2 board have identical layout, and even look basically the same. So my question remains:

- is the Aorus "better" for powering the 2990WX thanks to its 10-phase VRM? if so - how?

The 10+3 phase power of the MSI X399 Carbon AC worse looks (or sounds) not worse to my lame eyes and ears than that for the Gigabyte Aurus, but if it isn't the same (VRM power section), which would indeed explain the Euro 250 price difference - please, oh please explain :) Euro 250 is lots of money to our Polish standards!

Thanks again,

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

MishaEngel

  • Posts: 190
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:18 am
  • Real Name: Misha Engel

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostThu Aug 30, 2018 12:51 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:Thanks Carsten for your time and effort in answering me. One thing however, is still missing from what you wrote about the many and various reasons for similar mainboards to bear dramatically different price tags - and I'd like to kindly ask you to elaborate on it even more :)

Let's take the two boards I was comparing:

1. the Gigabyte X399 Aorus Xtreme - 10-phase VRM, Euro 640
2. the MSI X399 Carbon AC board - 10+3 phase power, below Euro 400

Now - as I also noticed before - those 2 board have identical layout, and even look basically the same. So my question remains:

- is the Aorus "better" for powering the 2990WX thanks to its 10-phase VRM? if so - how?

The 10+3 phase power of the MSI X399 Carbon AC worse looks (or sounds) not worse to my lame eyes and ears than that for the Gigabyte Aurus, but if it isn't the same (VRM power section), which would indeed explain the Euro 250 price difference - please, oh please explain :) Euro 250 is lots of money to our Polish standards!

Thanks again,

Piotr


The Aurus has built in 10 Gbit/s ethernet.

I have the Fatal1ty X399 Professional Gaming also with built in 10 Gbit/s ethernet
It has 3+8 VRM's doing 60 ampere max each. With 8 VRM's for the CPU and a bit of margin I can get 8x50A=400Amp. for the CPU at a Vcore of lets say 1,3 volt this gives a power of 520 Watt which is more than enough to overclock the TR2990WX to 4 GHz. on all cores.
When I would have to buy a new MB for X399 today I would pick the same board again because of the following features: 8 sata (raid 0, 1, 10) and built-in 10 GBit/s, no other board has this combined.
Put an extra fan in your case to blow directly on the heatsink of the VRM's (this is valid for every X399 motherboard) or use a waterblock that covers both CPU and VRM's (that's what I do these days.)

For gpu's I use two VEGA FE's because it has 16 GB VRAM(so I don't get the out of memory error all the time like many NVidia consumer cards give you) and 10 bits color OpenGL overlay(for adobe software, etc.. not for Resolve). I have them water cooled under volted, over clocked running at 1600 MHz and the memory at 1100 MHz (13,1 TFlops (fp32) and 563 GB/s bandwidth).
(The people at BMD also use a 16 GB card, NVidia quadro GP100 for $ 6.600, bit above my budget).

Get atleast 4x16 GB of the fastest memory you can afford (DDR4-3200 CL14) and a good PSU. For the scratch drive I would go for 2xSamsung970pro 1TB in raid0.

Get the CPU you need, when doing a lot of 8k.R3D get the 2990WX otherwise the 16c/32tr is fast enough. TR3 will have PCIe 4.0, just that you know.
Offline

Dan Sherman

  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:07 pm
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostThu Aug 30, 2018 3:00 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:
Now - as I also noticed before - those 2 board have identical layout, and even look basically the same. So my question remains:

- is the Aorus "better" for powering the 2990WX thanks to its 10-phase VRM? if so - how?

The 10+3 phase power of the MSI X399 Carbon AC worse looks (or sounds) not worse to my lame eyes and ears than that for the Gigabyte Aurus, but if it isn't the same (VRM power section), which would indeed explain the Euro 250 price difference - please, oh please explain :) Euro 250 is lots of money to our Polish standards!


@Piotr

Unless you really want to go down a pcb design rabbit hole, I suggest you just pick one you like and call it a day, because all the 2nd gen boards should be plenty for what you are going to do with it.

To see what board is truly the best, or why they have cost differences often requires reviews/analysis such as this.


Comparing the resistors, capacitors, shunts and other circuitry on a pcb is a very hardcore subject, and requires a great deal of very un-common and not widely available knowledge.
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 4:47 am

Dan Sherman wrote:
Piotr Wozniacki wrote:@Piotr

Unless you really want to go down a pcb design rabbit hole, I suggest you just pick one you like and call it a day, because all the 2nd gen boards should be plenty for what you are going to do with it..


Hello, Dan,

Yes - this is a sound advise, as I don't even have time (or background knowledge) to go through all those descriptions. One thing stroke me though in your above statement: I was under impression from Carsten's excellent input here, that the only 2nd generation boards (i.e. coming as such from factory) among those discussed here are:

- the MSI Meg X399 Creation (unfortunately out of the question for me because of its PCIe slots arrangement
- the Gigabyte X399 Aorus Xtreme

I probably misunderstood Carsten, which is just another proof I must not overthink my purchase :)

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

Dan Sherman

  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:07 pm
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 9:18 am

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:One thing stroke me though in your above statement: I was under impression from Carsten's excellent input here, that the only 2nd generation boards (i.e. coming as such from factory) among those discussed here are:

- the MSI Meg X399 Creation (unfortunately out of the question for me because of its PCIe slots arrangement
- the Gigabyte X399 Aorus Xtreme

I probably misunderstood Carsten, which is just another proof I must not overthink my purchase :)

Piotr


I think those are the only two gen 2 boards available today, but that could change tomorrow, next week or next month.

Imo, it's never a good idea to be an early adopter when it comes to computers, unless you have money to burn. For example I'm going to upgrade to a 2080 ti, but I probably won't do it for 4 or 5 months, by then all the custom boards will be on the market, giving me more options.
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 2:36 pm

Dan Sherman wrote:I think those are the only two gen 2 boards available today, but that could change tomorrow, next week or next month.

Very wise approach, Dan - my "only" problems. making the decisions rather urgent, are:

- at my age, postponing purchase of what one wants and needs is rather silly
- it's high time my rather expensive components which didn't fit on my current X99 board (or inside the rather small case), and have been relegated outside using PCIe extenders - stop gathering all the dust literally lying on the floor, and without any protection (and one of them is my Decklink Extreme 12G card for which I paid almost USD 2,000 at the time of purchase)...

Cheers
Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

MishaEngel

  • Posts: 190
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:18 am
  • Real Name: Misha Engel

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 3:01 pm

All Gen 1 boards support Threadripper 2 with a bios update.
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 3:25 pm

MishaEngel wrote:All Gen 1 boards support Threadripper 2 with a bios update.

Yes, but one with 10+3 phase VRM power - provided adequate cooling - will do it better even with O.C.

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

Dan Sherman

  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:07 pm
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 3:49 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:Very wise approach, Dan - my "only" problems. making the decisions rather urgent, are:

- at my age, postponing purchase of what one wants and needs is rather silly
- it's high time my rather expensive components which didn't fit on my current X99 board (or inside the rather small case), and have been relegated outside using PCIe extenders - stop gathering all the dust literally lying on the floor, and without any protection (and one of them is my Decklink Extreme 12G card for which I paid almost USD 2,000 at the time of purchase)...

Cheers
Piotr



I'm not saying wait years, if a manufacture is going to release gen 2 boards it will most likely be before the holiday rush.

I think you need a bigger case in general, I hate the tiny case fad that's been going on for the last few years.

for example I'm planning on one of these for my next build!
http://www.lian-li.com/pc-v3000/
Offline

MishaEngel

  • Posts: 190
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:18 am
  • Real Name: Misha Engel

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 4:06 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:
MishaEngel wrote:All Gen 1 boards support Threadripper 2 with a bios update.

Yes, but one with 10+3 phase VRM power - provided adequate cooling - will do it better even with O.C.

Piotr


At 4 GHz all-core the 2990WX uses 385 Watts at 1,25 volt hence 308 Ampère. Let's say you have a bad sample and need 1,3 volt and 320 hence 416 Watt to reach 4 GHz all-core. Every TR board can deliver that with proper cooling of the VRM heatsink (a € 10,- 12cm silent fan blowing on the heatsink).

P.s the overclocking sweetspot of the 2990WX is around 3.7 GHz All-core (236 watt, 1,05 volt, 225 Ampère).

Raising the DRAM voltage to 1.55-1.6 volt will bring more with TR2990WX (More MHz and/or lower CL, faster infinity fabric) and the fan blowing on the VRM-heatsing cools the DRAM's a the same time.

It's your money, you can spend it on marketing blabla or value.
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 6:31 pm

MishaEngel wrote:It's your money, you can spend it on marketing blabla or value.

Exactly Misha, and that's why I will most probably spend my money on the cheapest one in the bunch - the MSI X399 Gaming Pro Carbon AC with 10+3 phase VRM, and - in a relatively large case the PHANTEKS Enthoo Pro is - focus on providing it with some additional (air) cooling with the Noctua NH-U14S TR4-SP3 sitting on my 2990WX. The board doesn't have too many bells & whistles, but does offer all I really need - and as previously stated, is some 2/3 price of the 2nd generation "by birth" Gigabyte Aorus.

The only thing I'm a bit uneasy about is the overall build quality of MSI products in general, as I've always been an Asus mainboards' guy. What is the consensus here on this - i.e. the reliability and longevity of MSI vs. Asus vs. Gigabyte? The MSI X399 Gaming Pro Carbon AC - if I go with it - would be the very first MSI product in the many various level and price PCs I put together in my life...

Piotr
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

MishaEngel

  • Posts: 190
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:18 am
  • Real Name: Misha Engel

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 7:02 pm

What is your source material Piotr?
Offline

Dan Sherman

  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:07 pm
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostFri Aug 31, 2018 7:43 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote: What is the consensus here on this - i.e. the reliability and longevity of MSI vs. Asus vs. Gigabyte?


I personally won't buy anything but ASUS, but that's because I prefer their bios, and imo, their QVL is usually broader than the other manufactures.
Offline

Carsten Sellberg

  • Posts: 377
  • Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:13 am

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Sep 01, 2018 7:21 am

Hi.

Have you ever considered to use a PCI Extender to move the Dual Slot Dec-link card out of the motherboard and place it an another place in the cabinet.

To show you a picture will I link to one from ebay. The picture is number 3 of 6 and the product is called '16x to 16x HQ Powered'

https://www.ebay.com/itm/PCI-Express-1x ... 0782075924

And here is a link with a post from Ole Kristiansen where he show an attachment, with a picture of how he mounted his:

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=75892


When you compare the MSI X399 Carbon AC board - 10+3 phase power vs the Gigabyte X399 Aorus Xtreme - 10-phase VRM. Is the last is also a 10+3, but all Brands uses 3 phases for the X399 Chipset. Just the writer didn't mention it.

I previous wrote: 'You will need to set a level of performance you want to run it on. And then try to make sure you don't have any bottleneck in your setup. The performance of the 2990WX will only be as high at the weakest part of a big line of different factors. As Power Supply - Motherboard - VRM Circuit supplying the 2990WX - The 2990WX CPU it self - The Cooler. If just item in this line is weaker than the rest, will You not get the possible performance out of your 2990WX.'

The VRM circuit is also a kind of power supply. And don't run it at max power as you never will do with a power supply. And don't run it near max power in situations with a high steady load. But what can you do if you have a to small VRM circuit. You can add more cooling to it. Lets look at the tree Asus X399 motherboards, just as an example.

They increased the cooling af the VRM cooling on all tree X399 by adding additional heatsinks. And at the same time I expect that they increased some numbers in the BIOS of power levels. And then call it a Thredripper 2nd generation motherboard. But on one of the X399 motherboard they also added a small fan blowing directly on the VRM circiut. Why didn't they do it on the other two?
I don't know. But I am sure Asus know what they are doing. And the reason that I like the Asus solution is, that it is an upgrade to existing motherboards.

Misha mention the possibility to 'Raise the DRAM voltage to 1.55-1.6 volt'. But I wonder where he got the idea from, and what kind of cooling they use?
May be he have a link to share. If it is not a English link, is it may be possible to translate it with google translate, and then share the translated link with us.

Thanks to Dan for posting the link: 'EVGA RTX 2080 FTW3 VRM, PCB, & Power Analysis by Buildzoid'



It is a good explanation, and he know a lot more than me.

Regards Carsten.
URSA Mini 4.6K
Offline

MishaEngel

  • Posts: 190
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:18 am
  • Real Name: Misha Engel

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Sep 01, 2018 1:08 pm

Carsten Sellberg wrote:Misha mention the possibility to 'Raise the DRAM voltage to 1.55-1.6 volt'. But I wonder where he got the idea from, and what kind of cooling they use?
May be he have a link to share. If it is not a English link, is it may be possible to translate it with google translate, and then share the translated link with us.


The idea is the same as when you want to overclock a CPU, you need more voltage when you want to run it stable. A friend of mine overclocked his RAM with a i9-7900X Gskill trident Z DDR4-3200 cl14 to cl12.

We learned the trick from Der8auer, one of the most honest overclockers on youtube.
We raised the voltage of our Gskill to get 3200 MHz CL14 on all 8 memory banks with our TR1950x with standard voltage we couldn't get higher than 2933 MHz on all 8 memory banks (standard 1.35v ours 1.50v). With 4 banks it was no problem to reach 3200 CL14 on standard voltage. Since the memory controller of the Threadripper 2 is a lot better, higher memory speed (hence infinity fabric) is possible.

For the cooling we just let a 12 cm fan blow air over the DRAM-banks(in the begining we used it to cool the VRM heatsink, but now we have a waterblock that cools both the CPU and the VRM's).

With the dual-slot declink card you can use PCIe riser cables to place it somewhere else
https://videocardz.com/review/pci-express-riser-extender-test
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Sep 01, 2018 1:18 pm

MishaEngel wrote:For the cooling we just let a 12 cm fan blow air over the DRAM-banks(in the begining we used it to cool the VRM heatsink, but now we have a waterblock that cools both the CPU and the VRM's).

Hi,

My I know which water cooling block exactly are you using with your 2990WX? Does the choice need to consider also the specific motherboard an possibly case? TIA

Piotr

PS. I should have remained once more that I never ever used water cooling, so please be as specific as possible answering my lame question :)
Last edited by Piotr Wozniacki on Sat Sep 01, 2018 1:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

RikshaDriver

  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:08 am
  • Real Name: Asim Siddiqui

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Sep 01, 2018 1:20 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:
MishaEngel wrote:The only thing I'm a bit uneasy about is the overall build quality of MSI products in general, as I've always been an Asus mainboards' guy. What is the consensus here on this - i.e. the reliability and longevity of MSI vs. Asus vs. Gigabyte? The MSI X399 Gaming Pro Carbon AC - if I go with it - would be the very first MSI product in the many various level and price PCs I put together in my life...

Piotr


ASUS generally use higher quality Capacitors which helps them stand out from the crowd in terms of longevity. That said, others have also upped their game as well, so these days it comes down component inclusions and personal preferences.
Offline

MishaEngel

  • Posts: 190
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:18 am
  • Real Name: Misha Engel

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Sep 01, 2018 1:59 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:
MishaEngel wrote:For the cooling we just let a 12 cm fan blow air over the DRAM-banks(in the begining we used it to cool the VRM heatsink, but now we have a waterblock that cools both the CPU and the VRM's).

Hi,

My I know which water cooling block exactly are you using with your 2990WX? Does the choice need to consider also the specific motherboard an possibly case? TIA

Piotr

PS. I should have remained once more that I never ever used water cooling, so please be as specific as possible answering my lame question :)


https://www.ekwb.com/custom-loop-configurator/

I started here and got what I need.
Offline
User avatar

Piotr Wozniacki

  • Posts: 910
  • Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 12:17 pm
  • Location: Poland

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Sep 01, 2018 2:07 pm

Thanks - on the second page of the Configurator = "which part I want to cool" - what to choose in order to have both CPU and VRM cooled?
HW: 2990WX CPU | MSI X399 CARBON AC | 64GB RAM@XMP3200 | 2x Titan Xp GPU | 4x WD Black 3TB RAID0 media drive | 2x 1TB NVMe RAID0 cache drive | SSD SATA system drive | Decklink 12G Extreme | Samsung UHD reference monitor SW: Resolve 15 | Vegas Pro 16
Offline

MishaEngel

  • Posts: 190
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:18 am
  • Real Name: Misha Engel

Re: Improving Resolve Performance on Windows

PostSat Sep 01, 2018 2:45 pm

Piotr Wozniacki wrote:Thanks - on the second page of the Configurator = "which part I want to cool" - what to choose in order to have both CPU and VRM cooled?


CPU and Motherboard. It gives you one block that cools both CPU and VRM's
PreviousNext

Return to DaVinci Resolve

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Christian Lessner, John Tarvin and 30 guests