New AMD Ryzen

Javier said:

Take a look a this test. Running 9 Dahua 4MP cameras at 30fps with live view at 30FPS. Max observed CPU usage for 3 seconds on task manager with nothing else running on the Win10 6700K computer. Further testing needs to be done at lower live view FPS since there is a dramatic reduction in CPU with lower FPS. Maybe later when I have time i can repeat the test at 15 FPS live view.

Click to expand...

Those numbers look to be in a system with some other overhead/driver issues. My lower-interrupt PC did over "400MP/s" on an i7-3770 running at 8% average CPU utilization. My i7-4770 system consumes more CPU time due to some system overhead someplace, which I've quit caring about since I couldn't pinpoint the issue.

That was down from something like 70% CPU without Quicksync iirc. Pretty much maxed out at 70% on an i7, since hyperthreading is useless. So if we assuming going from 100% on 4 physical cores, down to 16% (8% overall thread utilization), that's an 84% reduction in CPU needs. Much better than your figures.

Quicksync is strongly recommended, but the Ryzen CPUs show promise. An i7 still jumps in power usage pretty quickly (one core in turbo/12% total CPU on an i7 will make the entire system start pulling upwards of 70W. A more power-optimized PC could likely handle the same load at under 30W, but it needs to be built for that. Same way my i7 Thinkpad can consume as little as 6 Watts and peak around 30, whereas other laptops idle at 15-20. CPU is only one part of the puzzle - the entire platform means a lot.

My i7-4770 is still taking around twice the CPU time as the i7-3770 system used, but even that system is still a drop of around 70% from non-hardware-accelerated.

fenderman said:

you cant have everything

Click to expand...

We actually CAN have this. The tools are Open Sourced and out there for any developer to use.

We already see benchmarks of Ryzen CPU beating equivalent i5 CPUs in H.264 & H.265 test.
(The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X vs Core i5 Review: Twelve Threads vs Four at $250)

So if we want AMD based Hardware Acceleration (VCE), BI just needs to add support for it. Is that too much to ask for?

GitHub - GPUOpen-LibrariesAndSDKs/AMF: The Advanced Media Framework (AMF) SDK provides developers with optimal access to AMD devices for multimedia processing

Sireone said:

We actually CAN have this. The tools are Open Sourced and out there for any developer to use.

We already see benchmarks of Ryzen CPU beating equivalent i5 CPUs in H.264 & H.265 test.
(The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X vs Core i5 Review: Twelve Threads vs Four at $250)

So if we want AMD based Hardware Acceleration (VCE), BI just needs to add support for it. Is that too much to ask for?

GitHub - GPUOpen-LibrariesAndSDKs/AMF: The Advanced Media Framework (AMF) SDK provides developers with optimal access to AMD devices for multimedia processing

Click to expand...

Yes it is too much to ask for.....Blue Iris is developed by a single person... Something like this takes time and is pointless when Intel works great... There are other things he can improve on...Don't like it, try a different vms... Oh wait they don't support it either...And cost way more...
Have you bothered emailing support and asking for it or do you just enjoy bitching about it here... AMD is way behind Intel and there is zero cost savings..In fact it's often cheaper to go with Intel..buy the supported hardware and you won't have problems...

Benchmarks of software-based h.264 and h.265 encoding are basically meaningless for Blue Iris because if you set it up right (direct to disk) then you won't be encoding video for anything more than remote viewing clients.

It would be great if BI implemented all the major hardware acceleration APIs (Intel, Nvidia, AMD), but Blue Iris is built and supported by a single developer so there just isn't time.

get to coding then and let us know when you have a BlueIris competitor for $60 that supports AMD..

What makes you think you have any rights to demand any functionality out of BlueIris? When one of my customers wants a new architecture added; we charge them a bloody fortune (6 figures typically) for all the required development work, testing and maintenance.. soo If you want to go sponsor a few development Cycles I'm sure Ken would be happy to drop everything else he has to do, acquire the appropriate hardware needed and work on this..

'Just add support for it' lol, what makes you think its just a few lines of code and not a massive undertaking requiring a ton of work? Your also presuming that BlueIris's licensing is compatible with open source licenses, which is a pretty big presumption.

I don't think the AMF framework linked above would be a problem (MIT license + LGPL for ffmpeg which I'm fairly certain BI already uses).

nayr said:

get to coding then and let us know when you have a BlueIris competitor for $60 that supports AMD..

What makes you think you have any rights to demand any functionality out of BlueIris? When one of my customers wants a new architecture added; we charge them a bloody fortune (6 figures typically) for all the required development work, testing and maintenance.. soo If you want to go sponsor a few development Cycles I'm sure Ken would be happy to drop everything else he has to do, acquire the appropriate hardware needed and work on this..

'Just add support for it' lol, what makes you think its just a few lines of code and not a massive undertaking requiring a ton of work? Your also presuming that BlueIris's licensing is compatible with open source licenses, which is a pretty big presumption.

Click to expand...

I wasn't demanding anything. All I'm simply saying is that there options. Whether or not BI wants to invest time into it is there choice. I'm actually speaking for the ones out there who did spend the $60 (including me) and would like to provide a little input to the 'single' developer. We should be a community of people helping each other providing valuable input. Not saying things don't but this product because it's garbage etc..

bp2008 said:

I don't think the AMF framework linked above would be a problem (MIT license + LGPL for ffmpeg which I'm fairly certain BI already uses).

Click to expand...

Thank you bp2008 for being supportive!

Nvidia would be terrible to add support for, lets use 2x-3x the power consumption of an intel box on just a gaming gfx card that increases the system cost dramatically.. AMD's not much better and power consumption is very important for a server thats continuously loaded down 24/7/365.. Ken choose to support the best hardware for the job at hand, speaking of options/choices, there's other NVR software out there other than BlueIris, but I dont think any of them give 2 fucks about AMD or NVIDIA either.

PS. Ken/BlueIris does not participate on these forums, so your not communicating at all to the developer by whining on IPCT.

It's amazing to me that folks want to figure a way to make subpar hardware work....Zero thought goes into their rational...

fenderman said:

It's amazing to me that folks want to figure a way to make subpar hardware work....Zero thought goes into their rational...

Click to expand...

Hmm...I believe the OP requested interest in the new Ryzen CPUs which is far from being 'subpar'.

Sireone said:

Hmm...I believe the OP requested interest in the new Ryzen CPUs which is far from being 'subpar'.

Click to expand...

Subpar for blue Iris and more expensive than an i7 kaby lake when using elitedesk or optiplex system....Folks wanting to use amd are gamer's who don't realize they are paying more for powehogs... Silly...

fenderman said:

Subpar for blue Iris and more expensive than an i7 kaby lake when using elitedesk or optiplex system....Folks wanting to use amd are gamer's who don't realize they are paying more for powehogs... Silly...

Click to expand...

Funny thing about that, until a couple months ago anyone who bought an AMD chip for gaming was shooting themselves in the foot with a CPU that is maybe 2/3 the speed at best. And paying more on electricity in the long run too (assuming they pay for their electric bill). Now, it is much more even.

Just got word from Ken and he states that the next step would be to work on nVidia HA. This is actually good news for us as we can always add these discrete GPUs in our AMD Ryzen servers.
Looks like other VMS vendors are finding success with nVidia as well.

20170403-NVIDIA

Would be neat if nvidia/amd/intel made simple video codec chips without the overhead of a whole GPU. It wouldn't be a high volume product, though.

Thanks for all the great posts and information. I really appreciate the input. I too have been carefully watching the Ryzen...both the 1700k as well as the 1800k.

Presently, we are using the Intel 4770k with beautiful results on 10 or so cameras, most of which are the Hik 2032's. But soon, we hope to upgrade and enlarge our security system to 20+ cameras, and we need full resolution on all of them.

I agree that for the last few years, Intel has been kicking AMD's butt royally. When comparing the AMD 8350 8 core with the 4770k it was a no brainer. I think the electricity savings alone would pay off the 4770k within a few short years. So it was an easy choice then.

I have also been carefully watching the Intel 7700k's too. What stands out to me is the 63% faster speed with multiple cores of the Ryzen 1700k over the Intel 7700k. This is quite a bit faster than the 7700k.

Fenderman, I have received so much good help and advice from you over the years. And I am thankful for you taking the time to help me and myriads of others.

But when I keep reading your posts here, it appears as if you are leaning heavily [personal preference and bent] toward the Intel side of processors. At times I feel that you either cannot or will not even give the AMD Ryzen a balanced and non-bias consideration. And the part that is most painful for some people here is that you use put-downs and negativity if they even consider using an AMD Ryzen...and I quote: "It's amazing to me that folks want to figure a way to make subpar hardware work....Zero thought goes into their rational..."

Yo, wassup with that?

You are a "Staff Member" here at IPCA. I was hoping for a higher level of professionalism and non-bias, positive, kind, and respectful interaction and sharing of ideas and information here at this site.

Please consider my plea.

Thank you!

Soar

I think the 8 core Ryzen CPUs stand a chance of being competitive with an i7 in terms of megapixels per second, but would likely consume more power as it wouldn't have hardware acceleration to increase efficiency.

Won't know unless someone carefully benchmarks a recent Intel and Ryzen system on the same workload.

bp2008 said:

I think the 8 core Ryzen CPUs stand a chance of being competitive with an i7 in terms of megapixels per second, but would likely consume more power as it wouldn't have hardware acceleration to increase efficiency.

Won't know unless someone carefully benchmarks a recent Intel and Ryzen system on the same workload.

Click to expand...

BP,

So good to hear from you again. Thanks again for all the help you have given over the years. I probably would not even have a decent security system if it were not for you and Fenderman.

Well, does anyone have any idea how much the power consumption of these two processors would vary?

As mentioned in an earlier post, when placing the AMD 8350 alongside the Intel 4770k, it really was not even a comparison when it came to power consumption.

And that is why I gladly went with the Intel 4770k. If I remember correctly, the power consumption difference was somewhere between 200%-300% and that was huge for us.

soarwitheagles said:

Fenderman, I have received so much good help and advice from you over the years. And I am thankful for you taking the time to help me and myriads of others.

But when I keep reading your posts here, it appears as if you are leaning heavily [personal preference and bent] toward the Intel side of processors. At times I feel that you either cannot or will not even give the AMD Ryzen a balanced and non-bias consideration. And the part that is most painful for some people here is that you use put-downs and negativity if they even consider using an AMD Ryzen...and I quote: "It's amazing to me that folks want to figure a way to make subpar hardware work....Zero thought goes into their rational..."

Yo, wassup with that?

You are a "Staff Member" here at IPCA. I was hoping for a higher level of professionalism and non-bias, positive, kind, and respectful interaction and sharing of ideas and information here at this site.

Please consider my plea.

Thank you!

Soar

Click to expand...

My recommendations are not biased. They are based on FACT. I will have not and never will recommend crap to the users here. Intel is recommended here because its is superior to AMD in EVERY way. Power consumption, performance with Hardware acceleration. Ryzen is new, and DOES NOT SUPPORT hardware acceleration with BI (it could be months or years before its supported if ever - yeah i know someone posted indicating that ken said he would work on it, but that means nothing). I dont understand why folks keep wanting to overpay for SUBPAR equipment. I am writing this post from an elitedesk i7-6700 that I paid 400 dollars for including a 256gb ssd. Anyone who in the past used amd for a BI system is basically foolish. They are power hogs and COST MORE, when considering that you can buy intel based systems for these low prices. If BI ends up supporting AMD and the power usage is comparable then you will see a recommendation. I will not simply recommend something because you need to justify your silly AMD purchase. You can run easily run 20 cams on a modern intel i7 skylake/kaby lake system.

Based on the post above, Ken didn't even say he would work on it (nvidia hardware acceleration).

There is not much reason to upgrade an i7-4770K for Blue Iris. It is still very nearly the best CPU you can get for it.