4.6.4 - October 21, 2017

davekra said:
You know what doesn't make sense, all the threads on CPU utilization and what to do for it and none of it made any difference in my utilization till that 'limit decoding' button.
If the stuff Fenderman goes on about in all those CPU threads had any meaningful impact on utilization people wouldn't keep asking about it.
Most of the threads just kinda end with the OP still looking for resolution. I guess inactive cameras is a more exciting topic.
Click to expand...
You are doing something wrong...it direct to disk makes a HUGE difference. Hardware acceleration makes a HUGE difference..I cannot help user error...I am not the only one (one over 20 BI pc's I might add) that sees these improvements...the features are there for a reason. Your settings are incorrect or you are using a woefully under powered pc and expect magic. Your logic is also flawed, people keep "asking for it" because they want to run MORE cams at HIGHER res with MORE fps on the SAME processor...i cant fix stupid.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: h1ckman and giomania
anijet said:
Yes, It's a problem (although minor) for me as well. I think I'll send Ken a note.
Click to expand...

I sent to Ken: "Since changes in the latest version to handling of inactive cameras it would sure be nice to have a "Hide Inactive Cameras" option or, the option to select which profiles they are hidden instead of the hidden toggle for all profiles.
When some cameras are active only during certain profiles they still show when the other profiles are selected. Maybe I'm missing something but I can't seem to find a way to hide them."

Ken responded with: "Yes, due to popular demand, this is coming in 4.6.4.5."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tinman
And we cant help you read the responses we provide and understand them.
I spelled it all out in the thread I linked. I'm fully licensed, use direct to disk on all cameras, hardware acceleration is enabled, provided fps and kb/s numbers, confirmed Win defender settings, CPU model, etc..
If I have some setting wrong I would freely admit it and document it for others.
I'm sure it can get frustrating answering the same questions over and over, but I've done my searches, bookmarked threads and implemented all the suggested fixes. I hesitated even posting in that other thread because of the way you, Fenderman, belittle and accuse those asking these types of questions.
Use the search. Check.
Follow the suggested fixes. Check.
Post results, ask questions, get called stupid. Check
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q™
davekra said:
And we cant help you read the responses we provide and understand them.
I spelled it all out in the thread I linked. I'm fully licensed, use direct to disk on all cameras, hardware acceleration is enabled, provided fps and kb/s numbers, confirmed Win defender settings, CPU model, etc..
If I have some setting wrong I would freely admit it and document it for others.
I'm sure it can get frustrating answering the same questions over and over, but I've done my searches, bookmarked threads and implemented all the suggested fixes. I hesitated even posting in that other thread because of the way you, Fenderman, belittle and accuse those asking these types of questions.
Use the search. Check.
Follow the suggested fixes. Check.
Post results, ask questions, get called stupid. Check
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you are doing wrong...I have seen this a million times..user swears by settings, I log in and they are wrong. Did you start with a fresh clean install of windows? do you have intel hd ONLY or is there a discrete card? there is a damn wiki explaining how to setup everything properly.
You are being called stupid because of your direct attack on me, basically calling me a liar...well if direct to disk and hardware acceleration dont have a HUGE impact on your setup then you are an idiot because you cant follow basic directions...keep acting like an asshole and you will be gone. Another moron who gets passive aggressive but cant handle it when it is thrown right back in his face.
 
davekra said:
Amazing, I checked the "Limit decoding unless required" button on all 5 of my cameras and CUP utilization (with the gui closed and me chrome remote desktoped in) dropped to less than 7% for BI! Prior to this option it would have been in the 50's.
With the BI open CPU was in the 30's where before it was over 90%. With BI gui closed and chrome viewing it via UI2 CPU was in the upper 80's.
It's now more efficient, CPU wise, to view using BI gui!

So, this option, does it or how does it affect the recorded video? My cameras are set to continuous recording direct to disk and BI is looking for motion.
Also, given this option reduces CPU utilization significantly, what would that point to regarding my earlier questions about CPU usage in this thread? BI running VERY high CPU 95%+ (see Pic)

I think this would certainly allow me to add additional cameras. Prior to this option, each additional camera added a significant load to the CPU. At 100% CPU, I would think it would struggle to add more cameras even if the megapixles/second were not maxed out.

Thanks for highlighting this option .
davidk
Click to expand...

Blue Iris resumes decoding all frames for all cameras when you view the All cameras group remotely (android / iOS / web). Therefore, this feature won't give your server any more capacity unless you disable the web server.

The option is intended to not affect recorded video (it should be fine), though it does affect motion detection and obviously it makes your live viewing a lot less smooth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ilrider78 and fenderman
Maybe Ken can add an option to keep limited decoding enabled even during remote group view. That would make all the difference, I think, and allow people to actually run more cameras and/or higher frame rates without maxing out their systems.

But before I could wholeheartedly recommend such a thing, something needs to be done to smooth out the transition between limited decoding and normal decoding. I've been seeing a 4-12 second video delay with the feature enabled, and the change log in the help file got updated to blame the delay on a decoder buffer. Like, it won't decode and render Frame 1 until frames 2, 3, and 4 are all queued up. Probably this frame buffer is normally used to keep the playback relatively smooth, and needs adjusted to keep latency low when the frame rate is extremely low.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ilrider78
New update fixed the inactive camera problem. Its nice to be sitting at home and have my cameras up and be able to click profile 4 and it popup business A along side my home cams, then profile 5 is business B, profile 6 is business C, and profile 7 being all 3 business and home... And i use profile temp time to turn off the remote cams after a period of time. Having multiple sets made the hidden camera thing not really work, so thanks Ken!

If you read this Ken what would be the possibility of adding a few more profiles, or make it a option for people who want it? ..got a few more businesses opening in the next year..
 
Last edited:
I experimented with the "limit decoding" feature and found that while it was successful at bringing the system utilization down from ~50% on average to as low as 25% on average, it definitely caused playback issues with live view using the default.htm view through Internet Explorer and UI2.htm through every other browser.

For now I've switched it off for all my cams, but I'll let Ken work on it and try it again sometime in the future!
 
Hey folks...just thought I would share my experience with this latest version. I am SUPER happy to report that it's all SO FAR SO (DAMN) GOOD! As I've mentioned in other threads, I am running BI on a Core i7-6950x (10 cores 20 threads) and 32 cameras ranging in spec from 2mp to 4K (PTZ plus fixed bullet cams). The 4K cameras have been recent additions and my CPU usage quickly spiked from around 64% to 90%. I had decided it was going to be time to consider upgrading to the "Next-Next" gen in processors if I was going to keep adding to my array of cameras.

However, since installing the new version last night and enabling "Limit Decoding Unless Required" on about 20 of the cameras, my CPU usage plummeted to an average of 27%. Now...I may be missing something here and only time will tell if there are other side-effects, but I am super happy with this latest version and excited for the potential it brings. Thanks to Ken for continuing to develop and improve Blue Iris!
 
  • Like
Reactions: h1ckman and fenderman
bp2008 said:
Try opening a web interface and viewing the all cameras group, then see what happens to CPU usage.
Click to expand...

And if you are a person like me who monitors his cameras on the desktop mostly, it just don't work good. For example I have multiple cams that follow around my property. If a car drives around the corner, it will flow from one cam view to the other seamlessly. But with the new feature enabled there is too much lag.
 
Hey bp2008....

Confirmed that when I open the web interface, the CPU jumps to about 85% (when showing all 32 cameras). This is till about 10% less than before this update as the PC was running at 95% almost all the time. Btw...when viewing a single camera from the web interface, my CPU dropped back down to about 35%.

Overall, I'm still quite happy with this, but appreciate your making everyone aware of this.

As a footnote, I am still planning to upgrade my main desktop machine for the holidays (XMAS TIME), and going to go all-out on the config. As I run another standalone install of BI on this machine, it will be a good way to test how much more headroom I will get with the new processors that have 18 cores with 36 threads. Crazy overkill? Yes, but I don't care :lmao:
 
  • Like
Reactions: fenderman
bp2008 said:
...something needs to be done to smooth out the transition between limited decoding and normal decoding. I've been seeing a 4-12 second video delay with the feature enabled, and the change log in the help file got updated to blame the delay on a decoder buffer. Like, it won't decode and render Frame 1 until frames 2, 3, and 4 are all queued up. Probably this frame buffer is normally used to keep the playback relatively smooth, and needs adjusted to keep latency low when the frame rate is extremely low.
Click to expand...

Is this the reason some motion detection alert markers are not recorded?
 
beepsilver said:
Is this the reason some motion detection alert markers are not recorded?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean. If there is no alert there is no (motion-triggered) recording, and this could certainly result in motion being missed due to the frame rate being so low.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beepsilver
Tuckerdude said:
Hey bp2008....

Confirmed that when I open the web interface, the CPU jumps to about 85% (when showing all 32 cameras). This is till about 10% less than before this update as the PC was running at 95% almost all the time. Btw...when viewing a single camera from the web interface, my CPU dropped back down to about 35%.

Overall, I'm still quite happy with this, but appreciate your making everyone aware of this.

As a footnote, I am still planning to upgrade my main desktop machine for the holidays (XMAS TIME), and going to go all-out on the config. As I run another standalone install of BI on this machine, it will be a good way to test how much more headroom I will get with the new processors that have 18 cores with 36 threads. Crazy overkill? Yes, but I don't care :lmao:
Click to expand...

Hahaha I wonder if the 18 core i9 can actually outperform the i7-8700K. So many variables are at play. Different chipsets, memory configurations, Quick sync on one but not the other ... who knows where the bottleneck could be.
 
Agreed man....it's always difficult to know. But, I am going to pull the trigger anyway since I like to update my main desktop every year or so. I must say, I was quite surprised when I first assembled this last computer (the Core i7-6950x) as it really seemed that the additional cores/threads was the magic bullet in getting a system capable of scaling up to 30+ cameras. I posted on this forum some time ago asking that very question but came away still fuzzy on the subject. At any rate, I will be sure to post my findings once I setup the new rig. Should be interesting!
 
fenderman said:
have no idea what you are doing wrong...I have seen this a million times..user swears by settings...
Click to expand...

Like a couple of days ago when I called by ISP and berated the poor CSR about their shoddy undependable service, only to discover 30 minutes later that my desktop computer was no longer plugged into my LAN. Opps. doh.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns and fenderman
Ken does not read here.

jcams said:
New update fixed the inactive camera problem. Its nice to be sitting at home and have my cameras up and be able to click profile 4 and it popup business A along side my home cams, then profile 5 is business B, profile 6 is business C, and profile 7 being all 3 business and home... And i use profile temp time to turn off the remote cams after a period of time. Having multiple sets made the hidden camera thing not really work, so thanks Ken!

If you read this Ken what would be the possibility of adding a few more profiles, or make it a option for people who want it? ..got a few more businesses opening in the next year..
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom