Rendering DCPs

Hi All,

I am just sitting here cursing myself for rendering an incorrect DCP: took the stereo instead of the 5.1.

It takes my humble system 3.5 hours to render a 2K and about 7.5 for a 4K.
I need both from the 4K (UHD) timeline.

I thought AHA! I can let it render the 2 overnight and be ready in the morning but....
I have to change image scaling in the project settings from 1998 to 3996.
Am I over complicating? That is the only way, no?
So - a future feature might be that the Deliver page will call up the relevant settings changes as it is, at least under these circumstances, a Deliver page need.
my 2 bobs worth...

three thoughts...
- i make a folder with jpeg2000 files & 5.1 audio and then wrap them into a DCP with DCP-0-Matic, advantage is when a small change is requested (ie: a logo added to the head or a .com added to the tail) i only need to render the frames changed and re-wrap - the re-wrap takes about 7-12 min on my machine, it's a file copy and write a new XML, so dependant on disk speed mainly

- i have dual 2697v2's and and typicaly run a 4k Jpeg2000 seq in about realtime, 2k seq runs around 40-60fps with all threads flat out, so the pain of 11 hours of rendering and then another 11 hours of re-rendering is not something i have to deal with

- v16's flexiable timeline raster should help with your workflow, i typicaly have credits at both 4k and 2k on seperate video tracks, and bypass what ever i'm not exporting, but avoiding scaleing credits means seperate timelines anyway, in v15 it means copying the project and resetting the raster to 2k... then lineing them both up to go at the same time, no huge advantage to v16, but it does save a step or two and makes keeping track of changes easier

Thanks for the thoughts Dermot.

This is the first 4K delivery project I have done and it has highlighted some system shortcomings, most significantly the CPU. During render, the RTX 2080 ti is 10-18% while the CPU (5930K) is flat out. I was looking towards dual Xeon Silver when I read something on the forum suggesting the i9 9980XE might be better bang for buck. Whichever way I go, I will get another RTX 2080 ti and that should put me back in the zone.

I am looking forward to V16 but hate risking a major version change in the middle of a major project.

I often put out to .dpx but never thought of J2000 - DCP-O-Matic I have used for RE-wrapping before.

I am going to put upgrades in action in the next week or two. Any further recommendations gratefully accepted.
Cheers

Thanks for the thoughts Dermot.

This is the first 4K delivery project I have done and it has highlighted some system shortcomings, most significantly the CPU. During render, the RTX 2080 ti is 10-18% while the CPU (5930K) is flat out. I was looking towards dual Xeon Silver when I read something on the forum suggesting the i9 9980XE might be better bang for buck. Whichever way I go, I will get another RTX 2080 ti and that should put me back in the zone.

I am going to put upgrades in action in the next week or two. Any further recommendations gratefully accepted.
Cheers

i9 9980XE is still around $2,000 US

The new Ryzen 9 series with 16 cores, 4.2 GHz (stock settings) all-core should also be fast enough and it will only set you back around $600 US which leaves $1,400 US to spend on an extra 2080ti.
The blockdiagram of the X570 looks like this.


The Ryzen 9 has a cinebench R15 multi core score of ~ 4250 at stock settings
The i9 9980XE has a score of around ~ 3650 stock settings (before zombieload migitation).


We will know more about Ryzen 9 around the 27 may.. 3 june

Depending on your codecs here are the test from puget 1 vs. 2 GPU's
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/DaVinci-Resolve-15-AMD-Radeon-VII-16GB-Performance-1382/

An other option might be to use a new fast system for editing/grading/etc.. and your current system for final render so you can keep working during final rendering(in DR16 you can render only the parts you changed).

I am feeling burdened by the breadth of choice.
RTX seems to be a better future proof guess? I just bought one anyway so will stick with it.
Does it have 100% compatibility with AMD?
I have never had a non Intel - not that I am chauvinist about it.
Chipset RAID availability?
E-ATX formfactor?

I am feeling burdened by the breadth of choice.
RTX seems to be a better future proof guess? I just bought one anyway so will stick with it.
Does it have 100% compatibility with AMD?
I have never had a non Intel - not that I am chauvinist about it.
Chipset RAID availability?
E-ATX formfactor?

There is no such thing a future proof these days.
Get an RTX when you use CUDA only software when you don't it's a waist of money for programs like Resolve.
AMD is 100% compatible (thanks to IBM in the past).
Intel had a lot of security leaks and that hasn't been good for perfomance.

We work with a Threadripper 1950x 128 GB,with 8 spinning drives in raid 10 for storage and 2 samsung 970 pro 1 TB in raid 0 as a scratch drive and 1 970 512 GB as a system drive. 2 VEGA FE with 16 GB as GPU's and a DeckLink 4K Extreme 12G for color grading. It works like a charm. Our's has onboard 10G ethernet.

We will upgrade our 4 older 3960x to the new Ryzen 9 when they turn out to be good (we will know soon) and equipe them with Radeon VII's.

We shoot UMP(or lower) and rent a 8k helium when we really need the pixels.

Why would you need E-ATX when everything you need fits on ATX?

Next weeks $5k machine is faster and better in anyway than a $30k 2 year old machine in Resolve.

There have been rumours that the RTX ray trace and AI features will be exploited by Resolve in the near future...?

There have been rumours that the RTX ray trace and AI features will be exploited by Resolve in the near future...?

There have also been rumours that intel would release 10 nm in 2016 (still not happening).

Haven't seen any of that in DR16, maybe next year in DR17.. and next year NVidia, AMD and intel will have better GPU's for less money because they have to compete with eachother.

That's what I meant with future proving, it's impossible these days.
Example:
1,5 years ago we bought the cheapest 16 GByte GPU(VEGA FE) on the market for $1,000 that could do 10 fps with 8k.R3D with 4 power window + 3 OFX + noise reduction in Resolve(around the same speed in Resolve as the Quadro P6000 which costed $6,000 at that time). Today we can buy a $700 GPU(RadeonVII) that is 50% faster with the same workload, doing 15 fps.
VEGA FE ~ $100/fps vs. RadeonVII ~ $47/fps.

Buy what you need, when you need it.

Ryzen 9 is a compelling argument but I am not sure I can wait for it to be available "down under"...

Thanks for your interest Dermot and Misha

Ryzen 9 is a compelling argument but I am not sure I can wait for it to be available "down under"...

Thanks for your interest Dermot and Misha

Just a $5k AUS system that is pretty fast.

PCPartPicker Part List: https://au.pcpartpicker.com/list/XtR6GG

CPU: AMD - Threadripper 1950X 3.4 GHz 16-Core Processor ($827.20 @ Newegg Australia)
CPU Cooler: Noctua - NH-U12S TR4-SP3 54.97 CFM CPU Cooler ($105.00 @ Umart)
Motherboard: ASRock - Fatal1ty X399 Professional Gaming ATX TR4 Motherboard ($645.00 @ I-Tech)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 64 GB (4 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($764.50 @ Newegg Australia)
Storage: Samsung - 970 Pro 512 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($217.00 @ Austin Computers)
Storage: Samsung - 970 Pro 1 TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($439.00 @ Austin Computers)
Storage: Samsung - 970 Pro 1 TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($439.00 @ Austin Computers)
Video Card: MSI - Radeon VII 16 GB Video Card ($1089.00 @ PLE Computers)
Case: Antec - P101 Silent ATX Mid Tower Case ($130.00 @ Skycomp Technology)
Power Supply: Silverstone - Strider Titanium 1500 W 80+ Titanium Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply ($329.00 @ Scorptec)
Total: $4984.70
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-05-24 00:05 AEST+1000

Case has room for 8 spinning drives, motherboard has onboard 10 G ethernet and supports upto 8 sata drives in raid 0/1/10 for storage and 2 SSD's in raid 0/1 as scratch drive + 1 SSD as system drive.

Ryzen 9 is a compelling argument but I am not sure I can wait for it to be available "down under"...

Hi.

Please don't compare AMD with the way Intel used to do things. I expect AMD President and CEO Dr. Lisa Su at May 27 in her 2019 COMPUTEX keynote to launch the new 3rd generation Ryzen CPU's
and also tell us, when it will be available in the shops wordlwide. For that is the way, she normally do.

I will also suggest you look at this link, to the conclusion from one of the most knowledgeable reviewers wrote about the Top Intel Core i9-9980XE CPU.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13539/th ... -review/21

Regards Carsten.

Hi Misha,

...
We work with a Threadripper 1950x 128 GB,with 8 spinning drives in raid 10 for storage and 2 samsung 970 pro 1 TB in raid 0 as a scratch drive and 1 970 512 GB as a system drive.
...

Concerning RAID 0, according to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID :
“RAID 0
RAID 0 consists of striping, but no mirroring or parity. Compared to a spanned volume, the capacity of a RAID 0 volume is the same; it is the sum of the capacities of the disks in the set. But because striping distributes the contents of each file among all disks in the set, the failure of any disk causes all files, the entire RAID 0 volume, to be lost. A broken spanned volume at least preserves the files on the unfailing disks. The benefit of RAID 0 is that the throughput of read and write operations to any file is multiplied by the number of disks because, unlike spanned volumes, reads and writes are done concurrently,[12] and the cost is complete vulnerability to drive failures.”
Considering having RAID 0 on the new PC I’m setting up, I wonder if the risk of loosing data due to disk failure is worth it.
To be more specific, I have 2 Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe M.2 500GB, 1 for the OS and 1 for Resolve scratch disk. Then there are 2 x 4TB spinning drives for all the rest. All the rest is less then 3TB and it isn’t likely to increase much in the foreseen future. The second 4TB drive is intended to be used as a backup to the first one. At first I thought of arranging them in RAID 0, but now I wonder.
Any thoughts about it, or recommendation?

Use RAID 0 only when you need the speed and when it's not that important that you loose data.
When you loose data on a scratch drive it's not important, just an inconvenience.

i use:
- mirrored SSD's for os, 256 is enough room to hold any and all software needed
- mirrored 2Tb spinning drives for metadata, project archives, DRP's etc, this is swept by the backup server every night
- local working drive on SAS @ Raid5 / 32Tb, this would be my "cache drive"
- NAS in raid5 with 64Tb spinning drives, 10Gige connections - for cam orignal, show openings and other re-use elements + master render target

- NAS in raid5 with 64Tb spinning drives, 10Gige connections - for cam orignal, show openings and other re-use elements + master render target

I have always tried to render to a drive away from the rushes.

The RAID is within the NAS?
I found, even with SSDs, that the chipset RAID at RAID 5 wasn’t giving me enough performance so I have used RAID 0

I keep a Drobo for backup. It’s slow but it can be populated with cheap spinners and is like a RAID 5. In 5 years I have never lost anything from the SSD RAID 0 (my main media drive) or Drobo in 10 years.

Here you can calculate how secure the different RAID's are https://www.servethehome.com/raid-calculator/raid-reliability-calculator-simple-mttdl-model/

RAID 5 isn't very secure as you can calculate.
We went for RAID 10 for storage in our Threadripper workstation, because it doesn't have onboard RAID 6.
For a scratch drive we went for just pure speed hence (2x 970PRO 1 TB) RAID 0.

We just installed a redundant RAID Z3 storage server, so no more future upgrades for the storage drives in the workstations.

Hi Misha,

...
We work with a Threadripper 1950x 128 GB,with 8 spinning drives in raid 10 for storage and 2 samsung 970 pro 1 TB in raid 0 as a scratch drive and 1 970 512 GB as a system drive.
...

Concerning RAID 0, according to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID :
“RAID 0
RAID 0 consists of striping, but no mirroring or parity. Compared to a spanned volume, the capacity of a RAID 0 volume is the same; it is the sum of the capacities of the disks in the set. But because striping distributes the contents of each file among all disks in the set, the failure of any disk causes all files, the entire RAID 0 volume, to be lost. A broken spanned volume at least preserves the files on the unfailing disks. The benefit of RAID 0 is that the throughput of read and write operations to any file is multiplied by the number of disks because, unlike spanned volumes, reads and writes are done concurrently,[12] and the cost is complete vulnerability to drive failures.”
Considering having RAID 0 on the new PC I’m setting up, I wonder if the risk of loosing data due to disk failure is worth it.
To be more specific, I have 2 Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe M.2 500GB, 1 for the OS and 1 for Resolve scratch disk. Then there are 2 x 4TB spinning drives for all the rest. All the rest is less then 3TB and it isn’t likely to increase much in the foreseen future. The second 4TB drive is intended to be used as a backup to the first one. At first I thought of arranging them in RAID 0, but now I wonder.
Any thoughts about it, or recommendation?

I'm using a 4 drive RAID 0 for my camera originals for playback, with the knowledge that failure is possible. I have all the files backed up on an external drive. In the case of failure, I will need to replace the failed drive and copy the files back to the new RAID 0. For me this works as I'm not working with clients in the room and don't need a fail safe RAID. Maybe this could work for you also?

RAID 0 on SSDs has not failed for 5 years.
I keep a backup.