Corvus wrote:The fact that you automatically cast me as a stereotype without even knowing my age reveals way more about you than it does about me.
Saying your something, and saying your posts "read like" something isn't the same thing!
Corvus wrote:I've given you my mediainfo screenshot as requested. I'm puzzled as to why you haven't commented on that yet?
Because I started typing my last response before you posted any of that information. Since then I was helping My wife get our son ready for daycare, having a cup of coffee, and getting ready for work myself.
The info for the one clip you posted is 100 mb/s 24p 8bit 4:2:0 UHD footage, you shouldn't even need to transcode that. IMO, Your should be able run that through a UHD timeline, or failing that just run a FHD timeline and export UHD come render time.
Corvus wrote:Plus they are both NVME drives - capable of well beyond 400 MB/s
Your knowledge is a little lacking here. They are capable of well beyond that in lab conditions when running synthetic benchmarks when they can leverage a high queue depths and can read large chunks of data sequentially.
for example take a look at these synthetic benchmarks (best case senarios)
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12670/th ... d-review/7Mixed 4k Random read/write
970 Evo 1TB 403 Mb/s
970 Evo 500GB 403 Mb/s
Mixed 4k Random read/write (Power Efficency)
970 Evo 1TB 132.5 Mb/s
970 Evo 500GB 113.8 Mb/s
Depending on exactly what drive your OS lives on,where you source media lives, where the cache directory is, and what other process are doing you can slow any drive to a snails pace, even a PCIE mvme one. Trust me I now, I deal with system issues at work daily.
what drives are you using exactly?
where is the os?
where is the source media?
where is the resolve cache directory?
Corvus wrote:I mentioned disk bandwidth was only 20% utilized during optimization anyway, meaning that even *if* I was only using one drive, disk bandwidth wouldn't be anywhere close to full utilization.
as I mentioned before resource monitor is useless for debugging. It only give feel good info, as its sample rate is slow and doesn't consider any of the details.
Corvus wrote:I mean everything I am telling you is factual information about my problem, and you seem to be getting angry and pulling random insults out of thin air just because the facts of the problem disagree with the completely arbitrary reasons you are pulling out here.
No people are getting angry with you, because you keep arguing your hardware is good enough based on your own anecdotal opinions. Most of us that have responded have been through this with others many many times, and its usually not a Resolve issue, is a hardware or a hardware/os/bios configuration issue.
what MB and ram are you running specifically? if you want more help you will have to give more details like newegg links so we can view specs.
The first thing that comes to mind is that your MB might be screwing you over by sharing lanes between your drives and gpu, but i would need to know what mb you are using to validate that.
AMD 7950X | AMD 7900XTX (23.20.24) | DDR5-6000 CL30-40-40-96 2x32 GB | Multiple PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME | ASUS x670e HERO | Win 11 Pro 23H2 | Resolve Studio 18.6.5 B7