waltervolpatto wrote:3) file at 120, timeline at 120, playback at 60 (the max my monitor can do) you can edit every frame and it will skip to every other frame maintaining the playback
1) the project settings are irrelevant because
2) I setup the timeline itself with those settings.
but
I'm playing a ProRes file, a H264 might not pass the deflating/decoding speed of your CPU...
In #3 above, you said that your file was 120 and your timeline was 120, but playback at 60—what specific what specific timeline setting did you configure to playback at 60 fps while leaving the timeline itself at 120? I initially tried to match your settings at the timeline level, but failed to locate a playback frame rate setting there — hence why I resorted to the project level playback frame rate setting. The only other timeline-level frame rate setting I could locate (aside from the timeline frame rate itself) is Monitor -> Video Format. Changing Video Format to a lower frame rate had no impact on playback (i.e. when I set it to HD 1080p 59.94, playback still occurred at 119.88).
What are you using that produces ProRes files at 119.88 FPS? I attempted to replicate your configuration, but my Ninja V maxes out at ProRes 59.94, and similarly, transcoding from H265 to ProRes wasn't an option either since DaVinci Resolve doesn't support ProRes export, and Premiere Pro's implementation of ProRes maxes out at 59.94 as well.
However, I did take your suggestion of transcoding the H265 to H264, but I'm afraid the result was the exact same... when played back at 119.88, DaVinci Resolve automatically stops playback within 2-3 seconds each time.
Although I wasn't able to test ProRes 119.88, I was able to transcode the file to an arguably equally NLE friendly format — DNxHR 444. At an overall bit rate of 6,991 Mbps, it's safe to say that compression was minimal. Unfortunately, just as before, behavior was exactly the same: playback was incredibly choppy and halted every 2-3 seconds.
Since your base clock is 2.9 GHz, your max boost clock is 4.3 GHz, and your core count is 12, while mine are 3.75 GHz / 4.5 GHz / 32 respectively, I think we can agree that I am not hardware constrained. I should be able to replicate your results — with the notable exception that I do not have a DeckLink card.