Network Bandwidth Usage

[ccj64]

Hi. I was wondering if someone could help me understand network bandwidth, or probably more specifically, how the cameras communicate with other devices.

Do the cameras just generally broadcast on the network and you configure a device to 'hear' them, or do you configure a device to directly connect to a camera.

Here's an example of what I'm trying to figure out:
I have 19 cameras (FI8910W) that I inherited at a new client. I grabbed an older Dell Precision workstations and Blue Iris and configured them all on it. It maxes the CPU when viewing live video, but doesn't seem to bad (50% utilization) when not viewing live video and not recording any camera stream. The owner of the company has a 'buddy' who said we should put another computer in and use that one for viewing and leave this one for just recording. When I look at Task Manager, on the current computer, the network bandwidth is at about 45 Mbps. So I don't want to put in another computer, but of course need to justify why I don't want to do that. So my question is, if I put in another computer running Blue Iris and setup all the cameras on that, will I now double the bandwidth on the total network from 45Mbps to 90Mbps, or will adding a second 'listening' computer not increase the network bandwidth?

What I want them to do is just buy a killer i7 machine and run Blue iris on that instead of this older Dell Precision 680 which is an Intel Xeon 3.2Ghaz with 4 logical processors (1 real processor).

So I think I'm basically asking if the broadcast, which means adding another listening computer won't increase bandwidth, or is there a connection made for each listening device and I will end up using twice the bandwidth and using 90Mbps on a 100Mbps network probably sin't a good option.

Thanks!

 

[fenderman]

Welcome to the forum. I do believe your network usage will double, but im not certain. Something about those numbers doesnt sound right..seems high for 19 vga cameras. You can just use a gigabit switch and its a non issue. Regardless the justification for a new machine is power consumption. Running two old xeon machines that use tons of power 24/7 will add up really quickly. A new haswell i3 will out benchmark those old xeon's...look up the benchmarks. You can pick up a haswell refubished dell/lenovo/hp business class i5 machine for 300-400 or about 500 for an i7...its a no brainer. The next step is making sure they dont buy any more foscrap....

 

[ccj64]

Thank you! I've attached an image of the network utilization. As for the Foscams, it was a building we inherited with the cameras all there, but they took the server. Also thanks for the info on the computers, I agree that is the real solution, unfortunately I have funded their stuff too much already and refuse to buy them anymore gear until I get paid. They are a new startup, so hopefully they get money soon, until then, they will have to live with what I've given them.

 

[fenderman]

Here are a few tips to reduce CPU.
1) record with direct to disk option....record tab> file format and compression...this will save lots of cpu, but you will need to use the cameras own time/date overlays
2) Reduce live view frame rate..this will not affect recording.... general options> cameras > limit live preview rate'
3) if you can reduce recording frame rates as well...

 

[icerabbit]

It wouldn't be double, if you were to do a second system, and you set up the viewing system to just look at the substreams. So added bandwidth load would automatically be less, depending on the smaller frame size, refresh rate etc compared to the main stream it could be significantly less.

 

[ccj64]

Thanks for all the tips fenderman, I will check out these settings but also let them know that we really just need a newer machine with more processing power.

Thanks for the info icerabbit, if I interpret your post right, I could add a second system without doubling the bandwidth, but even if I took the second streams which might be a smaller frame size I think your saying that adding a second system will add to network traffic, so I would prefer not to even do that.

These guys want the world for a penny and I need to set them straight some because they don't want this system only for security, they eventually want to allow people to view them. For example its a sports center and they will eventually have their baseball fields built. They want cameras on the fields so parents or others who can't make the game can view it over the internet.

Back to the 'second' system thing. I think they should not do that and just get a good machine and then connect to the web server of blue iris for viewing.

Thanks again all!!

 

[icerabbit]

Interesting it isn't even about security.

Certainly creating a live viewing sports center is going to require the right hardware, software, internet connection and man power. I think their broadcasting goal with so many cameras is beyond the scope of standard surveillance software and equipment, the way they see it. It is one thing to just have a couple cameras, and serve an overview to maybe one or two remote viewers, with a small surveillance system. Maybe after the fact stitch together a highlight reel for training purposes or best of moments, from what was recorded. Quite another to be dealing with live sporting events, a dozen cameras, who knows how many viewers. Even if you just had 2 cams. Are people going to be happy with two bird's eye views? You might be able to get away with some web / cloud broadcasting system, where you use some existing equipment and connect through, stream once to the cloud and everybody else taps into that in the cloud, offloading a lot of needs. But I'm thinking small broadcast system, not surveillance system.

Curious how that will develop further.

 

[bp2008]

Welcome to the forum. I do believe your network usage will double, but im not certain. Something about those numbers doesnt sound right..seems high for 19 vga cameras. You can just use a gigabit switch and its a non issue. Regardless the justification for a new machine is power consumption. Running two old xeon machines that use tons of power 24/7 will add up really quickly. A new haswell i3 will out benchmark those old xeon's...look up the benchmarks. You can pick up a haswell refubished dell/lenovo/hp business class i5 machine for 300-400 or about 500 for an i7...its a no brainer. The next step is making sure they dont buy any more foscrap....

Those old Foscams use MJPEG which is really inefficient with bandwidth, which explains how each one uses more than 2 Mbps.

It wouldn't be double, if you were to do a second system, and you set up the viewing system to just look at the substreams. So added bandwidth load would automatically be less, depending on the smaller frame size, refresh rate etc compared to the main stream it could be significantly less.

I don't think old mjpeg cameras have substreams. And even if they did the quality would be incredibly poor and nobody would want to use it.

------

Responses to the OP are in bold red below.

Hi. I was wondering if someone could help me understand network bandwidth, or probably more specifically, how the cameras communicate with other devices.

Do the cameras just generally broadcast on the network and you configure a device to 'hear' them, or do you configure a device to directly connect to a camera.

The devices (i.e. Blue Iris servers) connect directly to the cameras. It is not done with broadcasting.

Here's an example of what I'm trying to figure out:
I have 19 cameras (FI8910W) that I inherited at a new client. I grabbed an older Dell Precision workstations and Blue Iris and configured them all on it. It maxes the CPU when viewing live video, but doesn't seem to bad (50% utilization) when not viewing live video and not recording any camera stream. The owner of the company has a 'buddy' who said we should put another computer in and use that one for viewing and leave this one for just recording. When I look at Task Manager, on the current computer, the network bandwidth is at about 45 Mbps. So I don't want to put in another computer, but of course need to justify why I don't want to do that. So my question is, if I put in another computer running Blue Iris and setup all the cameras on that, will I now double the bandwidth on the total network from 45Mbps to 90Mbps, or will adding a second 'listening' computer not increase the network bandwidth?

Yes, you would double the bandwidth by adding a second 'listening' computer. And then you would use even more bandwidth when you had someone trying to connect for live view.

What I want them to do is just buy a killer i7 machine and run Blue iris on that instead of this older Dell Precision 680 which is an Intel Xeon 3.2Ghaz with 4 logical processors (1 real processor).

This is probably a good idea for later on when there is some money to buy it and some better cameras. It sounds like your current workstation should be able to manage with what you have.

So I think I'm basically asking if the broadcast, which means adding another listening computer won't increase bandwidth, or is there a connection made for each listening device and I will end up using twice the bandwidth and using 90Mbps on a 100Mbps network probably sin't a good option.

It is a new connection for each device that is streaming camera video, so you would easily saturate your 100 Mbps network. It would be best to buy gigabit networking hardware. This would also require you to install a gigabit network adapter in the Blue Iris server(s) or you wouldn't see any benefit.

Thanks!

 

[icerabbit]

I apologize. My foscam has h264 and 4 streams that one can configure and access independently; and has a main stream and sub stream preference. I should have realized different model = different specs & features. Looks like that model just has one single resolution setting up to 640x480 and mjpeg.

So, yes to duplication and network load, as bp2008 replied.

 

[ccj64]

Thank you bp2008! That helps immensely! Concerning the network architecture. Yes, I think the 100mb infrastructure is good for now with these cameras but will need to move up to GB if they want higher res cameras. The blue iris has a GB NIC in it, but of course its running at 100mb now due to the switch.

I actually contacted Axis through there website and a local distributor called me. He said he might be able to setup a meeting with myself and a manufacturer and we could go through the installation we have now. I think there isn't an Axis rep near us so he mentioned onnsi or onssi. So I need to talk to the owner and he needs to start thinking long term. What is the complete camera system architecture when everything is up and running. Which cameras will be just security and which will be streaming. From there we have to figure out if we can solve both requirements with one hybrid system or we need two separate systems, etc..

Thanks again!