fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
See post 13, he already has the cpu use down to 12% using direct to disc recording...
How much is camnet licensing? I cant even find an online demo for it...
Blue Iris kills my i7 pc
- Thread starter Igroup
- Start date
How much is camnet licensing? I cant even find an online demo for it...
It's a nice setup. I don't mind spending money on hardware that delivers, and as I said before, using maximum resolution, frames and features that BI offers will require a I7 I assume. The number of cameras will go up to 12 at one point.
Problem with the CPU got solved, I can get more details in CPU performance based on add on cameras later.
Thank you.
Problem with the CPU got solved, I can get more details in CPU performance based on add on cameras later.
Thank you.
How many times have you seen "got it down to ..." but then that's "idle", whatever that means. This system is 1%...period, on an Atom, at 498 MHz. The one you see in the screen shot is free, as CNX32FREE and as CNX64FREE. No registry used. No registration. No phoning home. Some time in May.
fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
There is a slight bump in cpu during triggered recording...thats what idle mean when there is no active recording...i have over 20 Blue iris systems in place and there is nothing as feature rich at this price point or even close to it. There is a new feature or function added monthly...
also remember that in your screen shot your are displaying a single camera at 480x360 hardly a comparison to a bunch of 3mp cameras displayed in full resolution...
Not sure what cnx32 is...
I guess this is some app you developed or something..there is no indication of the feature set....without a feature set and a true high res camera comparison, its useless.
Not sure if you ever used blue iris, but it has many functions not available on other vms platforms even expensive ones and is MUCH cheaper...
Also a you point out this is the server not the client...blue iris will use way less cpu if its minimized and not displaying cameras...a full windows client is being developed as per the release notes..what is the cpu consumption of the server and client displaying 3mp hd video from 4 cameras?
I do agree with Fenderman. All softwares that I've tested before are pricey, some more complex than other but there are still bugs on them too. Usually they charge per camera, and some of them charge for sms and email alerts. The UC2 software, so far was the most stable and simple and worked fine with my setup, but lacks of features.
The BI, on the other hand, for $ 60.00 gives you so much more. I keep using demo version to test my cameras (since China stuff lacks of support or informations) but since I was able to get my cameras working with it, I will buy the full version and tinker more afterwards.
I did not solve the problem with cameras loosing signal yet, didn't had the time, I will try this weekend. I am confident that will get solved. I still have some other minor issues, but that's due cameras limitations, I will eventually solve those too.
In other words, what I am trying to say that for what it offers, BI is a great software, and it's worth every penny. My understanding is that support is great too. The Forum is wonderful, found all my answers so far. It's a good choice for a PC based NVR.
Thank you all! I will post findings during the weekend.
The BI, on the other hand, for $ 60.00 gives you so much more. I keep using demo version to test my cameras (since China stuff lacks of support or informations) but since I was able to get my cameras working with it, I will buy the full version and tinker more afterwards.
I did not solve the problem with cameras loosing signal yet, didn't had the time, I will try this weekend. I am confident that will get solved. I still have some other minor issues, but that's due cameras limitations, I will eventually solve those too.
In other words, what I am trying to say that for what it offers, BI is a great software, and it's worth every penny. My understanding is that support is great too. The Forum is wonderful, found all my answers so far. It's a good choice for a PC based NVR.
Thank you all! I will post findings during the weekend.
Nothing to remember, I made it. I know what it does. I said "1 percent... period" and that means exactly that. On an Atom. At 498 MHz.
Next week a QSG should be up. It's maybe not so quick start, but a guide it is.
If you remember, or just think, spending $70 per license and then having to spend another $700 on a machine to use it does not a bargain make. Add in the $100 to $200 a year for $kWh to power than over a 5 watt machine, and you keep on paying.
There is no expectation of reducing FPS, or resolution. If you want to record 1920 x 1080 @ 30 FPS, do it. If you want to put one camera per CAMNET server, or 20, do it. If you want to install multiple CAMNET servers on a machine, each running 1, or 20, or whatever, do it. If you want to install CAMNET server on multiple machines, each running ..., do it.
If you want software phoning home to turn itself off, or that makes you reduce FPS, and resolution (why'd you buy that camera again?), or that you dread if all cameras suddenly start recording at the same time, that has you pay per install, that makes you spend endless hours tinkering trying to get the new, max-speed-can-buy machine to not melt-down, ... well, I won't say do that. That is not a good thing to do.
I have no intention of converting anyone. If you like what you have. Use it. Just don't assume it's the way it has to be.
Next week a QSG should be up. It's maybe not so quick start, but a guide it is.
If you remember, or just think, spending $70 per license and then having to spend another $700 on a machine to use it does not a bargain make. Add in the $100 to $200 a year for $kWh to power than over a 5 watt machine, and you keep on paying.
There is no expectation of reducing FPS, or resolution. If you want to record 1920 x 1080 @ 30 FPS, do it. If you want to put one camera per CAMNET server, or 20, do it. If you want to install multiple CAMNET servers on a machine, each running 1, or 20, or whatever, do it. If you want to install CAMNET server on multiple machines, each running ..., do it.
If you want software phoning home to turn itself off, or that makes you reduce FPS, and resolution (why'd you buy that camera again?), or that you dread if all cameras suddenly start recording at the same time, that has you pay per install, that makes you spend endless hours tinkering trying to get the new, max-speed-can-buy machine to not melt-down, ... well, I won't say do that. That is not a good thing to do.
I have no intention of converting anyone. If you like what you have. Use it. Just don't assume it's the way it has to be.
fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
Lol this is all abstract..the project is not completed and you provide no feature set. What can this software do? What cameras does it work with?
The license fee for blue iris is 60 and its not PER camera, but rather per system. You dont need to spend 700 on a pc..I buy hasell i5 systems for 300 or less with three year warranties from hp...The power consumption is probably around 80 dollars per year at my high 20c per kwh rates. The reason why you need to tinker with blue iris is because it offers TONS of options..thats why we love it.
Not sure about your phone home issue- all licensed software checks to validate your license. Pay per install is better than paying per camera. An I5 haswell is overkill for most installs, you simply need to use the direct to disk option on blue irs.
There is absolutely NO way your machine can display and record 6 1080p cameras using one percent atom cpu...come on...your 1 percent example is a single camera at super low resolution...
Look its really simple, lets see what you cooked up and then blue iris, milestone, exacq can all close up shop..
P.S. The PC client seen in the screenshot uses Media Foundation for video decoding and rendering. For H.264, that PC client uses zero-to-nothing CPU, to answer your question; the GPU does the H.264 decoding and rendering.
Back in November 2012 I released a Costco Cam viewer. I ran 5 minutes at 1280x720 @ 30 FPS and used 0 CPU seconds (0 seconds if you have a graphics card that has a media foundation MFT, and most GPU cards do). Try it. You can still download it. I posted the link (Nov2012) at another ipcam website. Google this: "QC_costcocam_40th.com"
The stats seen in that particular screenshot are of CAMNET server, for the most part. The QSG I mentioned in the prior reply details this just fine.
Back in November 2012 I released a Costco Cam viewer. I ran 5 minutes at 1280x720 @ 30 FPS and used 0 CPU seconds (0 seconds if you have a graphics card that has a media foundation MFT, and most GPU cards do). Try it. You can still download it. I posted the link (Nov2012) at another ipcam website. Google this: "QC_costcocam_40th.com"
The stats seen in that particular screenshot are of CAMNET server, for the most part. The QSG I mentioned in the prior reply details this just fine.
I search camnet surveillance, not much results. Can you give some explanations what is camnet, where can be found, what it does? Is running on Windows, right? What services in windows are enabled? Once I get the answer, I will tell you what I believe.
Thanks
Thanks
fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
Its something he developed himself....I am all for more options and development..though I doubt this will come close to a full featured vms..
Thank you. I am no developer, I do networking and specialized in Microsoft architecture. That setup looks good, and from what it says, 1% CPU on a Atom is really really good. But without further explanations and or some testing, that might not be true. Leaving just Windows clean install in that machine with network services on, from experience will take a lot more than 1%. Well, hopefully he's development will work as he said it does and everyone will be happy.
Hello,
I was not able to stop the cameras from loosing signal. I did the following combinations:
- on the camera, over the web, I tried vbr, cbr and cbvr. I change bitrate from 3000 to 4000 to 5000 (default). I changed i-frame to 30 and back to 100(default). I unchecked all notifications, alarm input output and so.
-on BI, I changed frames to 25fps and 30fps. I tried also adjust automatically. I tried frame rate limiting compatibility mode. I changed buffer to 3,5,10 and 20. On motion I unchecked object detect and use mask. I set recording to manual.
Cameras are connected directly to the switch with the computer. Firewall in PC is down. There is no firewall anywhere else, no antivirus, nothing. Not even recording, I keep loosing signal. One camera, sometimes 2 at the time out of four every 5 minutes or so.
in BI status windows frames are between 25-28fps, bitrate a little over 500kbs (my cameras are set to 5000). I watch live in we browser in the same time with BI. BI says that I loose signal and restarts camera, but on the web action keeps going on without any interruptions.
I am 100% sure that the network signal is not dropped by the cameras. I don't know what will make BI to drop random cameras on my screen that often. In a period of 30 minutes or so each camera was dropped 3 times (12 drops). I don't know if it has to do anything with watchdog.
I should mention that I have no idea if I'm pulling the right stream, The IP, http port and rtsp port are all setup under configuration. Path was blank, I also tried settings from iSpy for rtsp (rtsp://user.password@ip
ort/mpeg4 . I don't believe that BI uses rtsp stream, but http on port 80. My http settings on the web interface of the cameras is 80 for all of them.
I am out of ideas. Some pictures below:
I was not able to stop the cameras from loosing signal. I did the following combinations:
- on the camera, over the web, I tried vbr, cbr and cbvr. I change bitrate from 3000 to 4000 to 5000 (default). I changed i-frame to 30 and back to 100(default). I unchecked all notifications, alarm input output and so.
-on BI, I changed frames to 25fps and 30fps. I tried also adjust automatically. I tried frame rate limiting compatibility mode. I changed buffer to 3,5,10 and 20. On motion I unchecked object detect and use mask. I set recording to manual.
Cameras are connected directly to the switch with the computer. Firewall in PC is down. There is no firewall anywhere else, no antivirus, nothing. Not even recording, I keep loosing signal. One camera, sometimes 2 at the time out of four every 5 minutes or so.
in BI status windows frames are between 25-28fps, bitrate a little over 500kbs (my cameras are set to 5000). I watch live in we browser in the same time with BI. BI says that I loose signal and restarts camera, but on the web action keeps going on without any interruptions.
I am 100% sure that the network signal is not dropped by the cameras. I don't know what will make BI to drop random cameras on my screen that often. In a period of 30 minutes or so each camera was dropped 3 times (12 drops). I don't know if it has to do anything with watchdog.
I should mention that I have no idea if I'm pulling the right stream, The IP, http port and rtsp port are all setup under configuration. Path was blank, I also tried settings from iSpy for rtsp (rtsp://user.password@ip
ort/mpeg4 . I don't believe that BI uses rtsp stream, but http on port 80. My http settings on the web interface of the cameras is 80 for all of them.I am out of ideas. Some pictures below:
Attachments
fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
First update to the latest version..download the update from the website..(the demo will not have an option to update)
Also take a look at this thread..Its a longshot as that is a hikvision and milestone...but the issue may be related..
http://forum.milestonesys.com/yaf_p...s-lost-connection-to-the-camera--problem.aspx
Finally, this may be something you need to have support work out with you..
Also take a look at this thread..Its a longshot as that is a hikvision and milestone...but the issue may be related..
http://forum.milestonesys.com/yaf_p...s-lost-connection-to-the-camera--problem.aspx
Finally, this may be something you need to have support work out with you..
Thank you. I followed your advice and I did change registry as I read on that forum. Still no change, same issue.
One more update. I switched one of the camera on UDP RTP with default port 7000. Worked all night without dropping the signal. All others dropped the signal all night. I tried today to set a second camera to UDP, but it looks like I have to give it a different port than 7000. Assuming that BI using rtsp stream, should I use those ports in UDP configuration? So far, for about one hour, one camera is set on 7000 UDP and one on 80 UDP. They work good, I only loose signal on the ones left on TCP. If I recall correctly, rule for UDP should be streaming port (rtsp) +2. But maybe I'm wrong. I can't use UDP with the same port, it won't work (as http).
thank you
thank you
Ha, makes sense now. Just gotta figure out the ports. Check this picture:
Cam 1 and 3 run on 7000 and 80 UDP. Can 2, keeps dropping, is on TCP. As the picture says, BI won't check bitrate on UDP cams, so maybe that's the answer. Due the bitrate I loose cams. Also, I mentioned above, BI bitrate stays in 5xx.xx (hundreds) but my cam settings are 5xxx.xx (thousands). The UC software reads bitrate in thousands too (lower right corner overlay is from cam, is somewhere around 4000 kbs.
I believe Im getting somewhere.
Cam 1 and 3 run on 7000 and 80 UDP. Can 2, keeps dropping, is on TCP. As the picture says, BI won't check bitrate on UDP cams, so maybe that's the answer. Due the bitrate I loose cams. Also, I mentioned above, BI bitrate stays in 5xx.xx (hundreds) but my cam settings are 5xxx.xx (thousands). The UC software reads bitrate in thousands too (lower right corner overlay is from cam, is somewhere around 4000 kbs.
I believe Im getting somewhere.
Attachments
Igroup, when you mentioned that TCP connection may be linked to the dropouts, it made me think of something I saw a while ago about this camera firmware having a bug in the TCP implementation. http://blog.quindorian.org/2013/10/new-firmware-version-2500-for.html
A guy who commented there has a web site where he hosts "fixed" versions of the firmware. Though I can't begin to guess which file would be compatible with your cams.
A guy who commented there has a web site where he hosts "fixed" versions of the firmware. Though I can't begin to guess which file would be compatible with your cams.
Thank you for the info. Is based on tpsee, I have up to date firmwares on all cams. I don't know if I would use TCP fix due the mix firmwares versions in there. A lot of issues mentioned there got solved.
I did not tried milestone, but I did Genius Vision. Also ISpy, xeoma, sighthound and a few others including original UC2 software. I don't loose signal with any of them. Not this way as in BI. Every once in a while, maybe a day or so a cam goes out and starts over. But that's all. Is that minor I wouldn't even try to check why.
My assumption using UDP - packets will not be tested for integrity. Years back VoIP was based on UDP, now they switched. But if your packet drops somewhere, the connection will be lost if not resend in a certain time in TCP.
A couple of things I've seen in BI:
- bitrate is about 10 times lower that settings on cam.
- image is fragmented sometimes, not smooth as seen on others
normaly, on 30fps or close to that frames should be unnoticeable to human eye, well, is not.
I will try more options tonight or so, I will try to pull substream with cif, lower bit rate even lower, drop the frame even lower. Is hard for me to say might be the firmware, when other works. Worst come to worse, I will try that TCP fix too. I really want to get BI working right, but if not, so bee it. At least for now. I will have BI working in background for its features and keep UC2 as main monitor. Both recording, so if something goes down, won't be so bad.
I am also thinking to try an older version of BI or 32 bit, to see if any changes. I've already tried another workstation.
I believe that if I get this right, a lot of users will get the info. I've read a lot of issues similar with hickvision, dahua and others. Tpsee it's been on the market for a while, so will see a lot of those soon. China or USA rebranded. Just my opinion. And since lack of recording software, BI is still a winner. Even with my minor issue.
thank you all,
I asked Ken for support, I will keep this post going if it's ok with my findings.
I did not tried milestone, but I did Genius Vision. Also ISpy, xeoma, sighthound and a few others including original UC2 software. I don't loose signal with any of them. Not this way as in BI. Every once in a while, maybe a day or so a cam goes out and starts over. But that's all. Is that minor I wouldn't even try to check why.
My assumption using UDP - packets will not be tested for integrity. Years back VoIP was based on UDP, now they switched. But if your packet drops somewhere, the connection will be lost if not resend in a certain time in TCP.
A couple of things I've seen in BI:
- bitrate is about 10 times lower that settings on cam.
- image is fragmented sometimes, not smooth as seen on others
normaly, on 30fps or close to that frames should be unnoticeable to human eye, well, is not.
I will try more options tonight or so, I will try to pull substream with cif, lower bit rate even lower, drop the frame even lower. Is hard for me to say might be the firmware, when other works. Worst come to worse, I will try that TCP fix too. I really want to get BI working right, but if not, so bee it. At least for now. I will have BI working in background for its features and keep UC2 as main monitor. Both recording, so if something goes down, won't be so bad.
I am also thinking to try an older version of BI or 32 bit, to see if any changes. I've already tried another workstation.
I believe that if I get this right, a lot of users will get the info. I've read a lot of issues similar with hickvision, dahua and others. Tpsee it's been on the market for a while, so will see a lot of those soon. China or USA rebranded. Just my opinion. And since lack of recording software, BI is still a winner. Even with my minor issue.
thank you all,
I asked Ken for support, I will keep this post going if it's ok with my findings.