Which CPU for Blue Iris?

We are running 11 cameras running at 1080p with an i5 3570 and 8gb ram, in an office with a significant amount of triggering between the work hours, we are getting ~90% CPU utilization most of the time, and are thinking about upgrading to an i7, would we get a significant performance increase with lower CPU load with this upgrade? or is it reccommended to lower the resolution on some of the cameras?

Thanks.
 
ChrisMarkwell said:
We are running 11 cameras running at 1080p with an i5 3570 and 8gb ram, in an office with a significant amount of triggering between the work hours, we are getting ~90% CPU utilization most of the time, and are thinking about upgrading to an i7, would we get a significant performance increase with lower CPU load with this upgrade? or is it reccommended to lower the resolution on some of the cameras?
Click to expand...

For comparison, I'm running an i7-6700 (Dell Optiplex 3040), 11 Cameras (8x 3MP, 3x 4MP), Dahua and Hikvision, Direct to disk recording 24x7, Highest quality setting on the camera, as well as motion detection enabled. My CPU is at 15-20% (and this is with a remote viewer (webpage) always running on a 10inch tablet in my hallway). Blue Iris runs as a service. When I RDP into the BI server, and launch the UI, CPU usage goes up to 20-25%. I've also set the cameras (and BI) to do 10 fps.
So, if you are at 90% CPU with 11 cams on that i5, then yes, I'd say upgrade, *BUT* I'd also recommend to check your settings, ESPECIALLY "direct-to-disk" recording for all cameras. (Camera Properties->Record->Video file format and compression->Video Compression->Direct-to-disc). I'm also using the Blue Iris DVR format (also on that page).

As for a recommendation to lower resolution, personally, I'd say no. The whole idea is to have the best possible image if there is an event where you need to identify someone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aristobrat
ChrisMarkwell said:
Okay, thats great, we are not using direct to disk. so it is definitely recommended to use this over encoding to a "Blue iris Video" format
Click to expand...
Use both... get in there and start messing aroud. The Blue Iris Video format is just the file type on the hard drive. Also keep in mind, as mentioned in this thread that without re-encoding, your video will not have timestamps, but usually the camera itself can add these. I have all my cameras setup to sync with the ntp server on my router every hour.
 
yes, okay adding the timestamp isn't an issue, we have a ntp server also :) will test around later on this week if i have time. Thanks for your help.
 
In the link to the Wiki a few posts up, there’s a guide to optimizing Blue Iris performance. Direct-to-disc is probably the biggest one, but you might get some other tips from there too (like hardware acceleration).

Also to lower the impact on your BI server while keeping the same resolution you might have an opportunity with FPS. If you’re running more than 15 FPS, you can try lowering it down towards that. For most folks, 15 pictures every second is enough, but you’ll have to see how it works with your environment.
 
Last edited:
personally I have
  • Quadcore low-power xeon L5420
  • low profile/power Nvidia GT 730
  • 3TB HGST
  • 2TB WD Purple
  • 2 1080p IP cameras
  • 1 720p camera
BI works fine at 50 - 60 % load and everything runs cool too except the CPU (I need a better cooler)
 
yeahman said:
personally I have
  • Quadcore low-power xeon L5420
  • low profile/power Nvidia GT 730
  • 3TB HGST
  • 2TB WD Purple
  • 2 1080p IP cameras
  • 1 720p camera
BI works fine at 50 - 60 % load and everything runs cool too except the CPU (I need a better cooler)
Click to expand...
It "works fine" because you have almost no load on it, a total of 3 megapixels...also note its not working fine, its using TONS of power that costs you WAY more than replacing it with a 100-150 dollar computer that will run much more efficiently. Put a killawatt meter on that machine and it will shock you..
 
Power consumption is ok.
It is also good for remote access s via web server and Android app.

There are also 3 analogue old cameras connected leveraging from a network stream of a dvr
 
yeahman said:
Power consumption is ok.
It is also good for remote access s via web server and Android app.

There are also 3 analogue old cameras connected leveraging from a network stream of a dvr
Click to expand...
power consumption is not ok as you have not tested it.....if you would test it you would see that its insanely high...you are wasting way more money running it than replacing it...penny wise pound foolish..
the 3 analog cameras add almost zero load...you system is not suitable for more than a few low res cams...its already at 60 percent...it would not work for the OP or anyone else...terrible choice..
 
Nopes power consumption is pretty good. The cpu is pretty good although it is quite old.


I recommend the cpu if you can get a good mobo.
 
yeahman said:
Nopes power consumption is pretty good. The cpu is pretty good although it is quite old.


I recommend the cpu if you can get a good mobo.
Click to expand...
1) stop lying you have not tested power consumption. Otherwise you would have told us what it is. I hate liars and folks like you who deliberately mislead others. I will not allow it on my forum.
2) That cpu is will not work on the op's load, dont you understand that the only reason why your system is even working is because you have a VERY low load, if you added another 1080p camera or two it would choke..
3) that cpu is garbage and a 100 dollar pc can run circles around it and use much less power, why would you mislead others into buying and using it?
 
Cuz it is working fine? It is affordable.
16 and 20% cpu on 'idle' and 50% to 60% when on load viewing via teamviewer/splashtop..
 
yeahman said:
Cuz it is working fine? It is affordable.
16 and 20% cpu on 'idle' and 50% to 60% when on load viewing via teamviewer/splashtop..
Click to expand...
So you lied when you said you tested power consumption? hmmmm
Now your numbers change ...hmmmm
how affordable is it..more affordable than a BETTER much more EFFICIENT 100 dollar i5 second/third gen?
I HATE LIARS. Stop lying...
its a terrible choice..you are taking about a 2008 processor...please..enough..
 
fenderman said:
So you lied when you said you tested power consumption? hmmmm
Now your numbers change ...hmmmm
how affordable is it..more affordable than a BETTER much more EFFICIENT 100 dollar i5 second/third gen?
I HATE LIARS. Stop lying...
its a terrible choice..you are taking about a 2008 processor...please..enough..
Click to expand...

Intel Core i5-6400 vs Xeon L5420
=> The processor is 23% more energy efficient than the Intel i5-6400 microprocessor.

Intel Xeon L5420 vs Core i5 6600
=> Lower typical power consumption
=> Lower annual commercial energy cost
=> Lower annual home energy cost

nuff said... -.-
 
yeahman said:
Intel Core i5-6400 vs Xeon L5420
=> The processor is 23% more energy efficient than the Intel i5-6400 microprocessor.

Intel Xeon L5420 vs Core i5 6600
=> Lower typical power consumption
=> Lower annual commercial energy cost
=> Lower annual home energy cost

nuff said... -.-
Click to expand...
You're an idiot.. you're comparing tdp and also failing to consider your video card...buy a power meter liar... your inexperience is shining.....even processors with the same tdp can have radically different power consumption... not to mention your processors can't handle an average Ioad of 4-8 1080p cameras.. stop being stupid...nuff said, try again..
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom