Hardware considerations for BD Rebuilder

[blusky]

I'm using Windows 7 (64 bit) for all my testing. I haven't tried Windows 8, but I have been told it works fine.

Thanks Jdobbs for the info. So then either will work fine. I'm not sure if I want to stick with what I know which is windows 7 or try the new windows 8. Still have a few more days to decide.
thanks again.
Buy the way , finally decided on what computer I am going to build. This is what I came up with:

1) Intel i7 3930K processor


2) Video card PNY VCGGTX6804XPB GeForce GTX 680 4GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support


3) Motherboard Asus Rampage 1V Extreme LGA 2011 Intel X79 Sata 6GB/S USB 3.0 extended ATX motherboard

4) Memory G.SKILL RipjawsZ F3-19200CL10Q2-64GBZHD 64GB 8X8GB DDR3-2400 CL10 240PIN Memory Kit $350.00


5)Hard drives 2 SAMSUNG 840 Pro Series MZ-7PD256BW 2.5" 256GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) in raid 0 configuration

6) Storage Hard drive Western Digital Black WD4001FAEX 4TB 7200RPM SATA3/SATA 6.0 GB/s 64MB Desktop Hard Drive (3.5 inch)


7) Power supply Corsair CMPSU-1200AX 1200-Watt Power Supply - ATX, 140mm Fan, SLI Ready, CrossFireX Model#: CMPSU-1200AX


8) Blu-Ray burner LG Black 14X BD-R 2X BD-RE 16X DVD+R 5X DVD-RAM 12X BD-ROM 4MB Cache SATA BDXL Blu-ray Burner, Bare Drive, 3D Play Back (WH14NS40)


9) Corsair Hydro Series H100 Extreme Performance Liquid CPU Cooler Liquid cooling system


10) Cooler Master HAF X RC-942-KKN1 Black Steel & Plastic ATX Full Tower Gaming Case (Black)


I will use it for BD-Rebuilder. My son will use it for gaming. I realize its a bit of an overkill but should last me a long time and very upgradable.

[RobertM]

Buy the way , finally decided on what computer I am going to build. This is what I came up with:

<snip>

I will use it for BD-Rebuilder. My son will use it for gaming. I realize its a bit of an overkill but should last me a long time and very upgradable.

Yep, that's overkill for BD-rebuilding alright, but if you want to queue up several high-quality full backups overnight then this should get it done. Nice machine. Did you manage to find sources for all this and still be under $2K?

Question:... you have only 1 main storage drive. I imagine that the paired SSD drives are going to be for the OS and apps. Are you planning to use that as your BD-RB working drive too? You'll want your source drive (the rips) and the working drive to be separate, as there is a speed gain there. I would normally reserve the SSDs for just OS/apps, and keep data files off of them for the most part (since BD files are so large), so 2 BIG HDDs are a necessity in my books.

Other than that, probably the only thing I would change is the case, but this is jut mostly personal preference. I'm not into the Klingon look - at all - and that one has a mild Klingon thing going on. Hard core gamers seem to love cases like that however, so I imagine your son would approve. Personally, I really like my Lian Li case - entirely aluminum and very nicely constructed.

Regards,
Bob

[Capsbackup]

Personally, I really like my Lian Li case - entirely aluminum and very nicely constructed.


I agree with this! ;)

[blusky]

Yep, that's overkill for BD-rebuilding alright, but if you want to queue up several high-quality full backups overnight then this should get it done. Nice machine. Did you manage to find sources for all this and still be under $2K?

Question:... you have only 1 main storage drive. I imagine that the paired SSD drives are going to be for the OS and apps. Are you planning to use that as your BD-RB working drive too? You'll want your source drive (the rips) and the working drive to be separate, as there is a speed gain there. I would normally reserve the SSDs for just OS/apps, and keep data files off of them for the most part (since BD files are so large), so 2 BIG HDDs are a necessity in my books.


Other than that, probably the only thing I would change is the case, but this is jut mostly personal preference. I'm not into the Klingon look - at all - and that one has a mild Klingon thing going on. Hard core gamers seem to love cases like that however, so I imagine your son would approve. Personally, I really like my Lian Li case - entirely aluminum and very nicely constructed.

Regards,
Bob

Thanks for your input RobertM.
Yes as you had stated I will use the 2 SSD drives in the Raid ) configuration for operating system and apps. and use the 4TB hard drive for the Rips. Would you suggest a second Hard drive for the Rips or the one 4 TB hard drive will do??


I was not to big on the case I chose but my son liked it , so I had to compromise. LOL...
As for the price came out to 3000.00. Went over budget but I am confident it will not be obsolete for a while.

As I had said before, I had found this same computer already built on Ebay for 1700.00. Buy the time I was looking at the components and adding things up, about a minute, someone sniped me and bought it before I pulled the trigger. Amazing, missed it by one minute. Don't know how they could have sold it so cheap and make some money. MOst part were purchased on Amazon which had best prices and free 2nd day shipping . could not beat that.

[RobertM]

Would you suggest a second Hard drive for the Rips
Yes. Part of the process requires a lot of reading and writing of LARGE files. For instance, extracting the BD components from the rip folders. If the source (rip) and target (working folder) are on the same drive then a single head has to do both reads and writes, plus is has to spend extra time stepping between reading and writing positions on the platter. With 2 separate HDDs each head acts independently and stays in position on their respective platters. This will yield a noticeable improvement at times.

I was not to big on the case I chose but my son liked it , so I had to compromise.
If I were compromising with my son it might go something like this: I spec it and pay for it, and you get to use it for free ;) You've got kick-ass components inside, which is great, but the only tactile interaction you have with the system is 100% determined by the case. The case is there, sitting right in front of you, even when your go-fast bits are turned off. For me, in my office, the case has to look right and feel right. It's a personal thing, of course.

As for the price came out to 3000.00. Went over budget but I am confident it will not be obsolete for a while.
No worries here. This unit will be quite competent for a long while.

I had found this same computer already built on Ebay for 1700.00
Sounds almost too good to be true. It could be you dodged a bullet.

[gonca]

@blusky
Consider getting a 128 GB SSD drive for OS and apps. Use the two you have for SOURCE and WORKING drives. This would give you max read / write for BD-RB and allow you a large drive for permanent storage. Your system specs are similar, but a bit above, mine. BD50 to BD25 under "default" settings is about 30 to 45 minutes with the cpu averaging 50% load.

[blusky]

Yes. Part of the process requires a lot of reading and writing of LARGE files. For instance, extracting the BD components from the rip folders. If the source (rip) and target (working folder) are on the same drive then a single head has to do both reads and writes, plus is has to spend extra time stepping between reading and writing positions on the platter. With 2 separate HDDs each head acts independently and stays in position on their respective platters. This will yield a noticeable improvement at times.


If I were compromising with my son it might go something like this: I spec it and pay for it, and you get to use it for free ;) You've got kick-ass components inside, which is great, but the only tactile interaction you have with the system is 100% determined by the case. The case is there, sitting right in front of you, even when your go-fast bits are turned off. For me, in my office, the case has to look right and feel right. It's a personal thing, of course.


No worries here. This unit will be quite competent for a long while.


Sounds almost too good to be true. It could be you dodged a bullet.

Thanks RobertM , Capsbackup and Gonza for your help.

RobertM , thanks for the explanation, I now understand why you should rip from one hard drive and working folder on another and the benefits of having another drive.

Gonca,
Great suggestion. Getting one more 128GB SSD drive and put all apps on that drive and using the two 256 GB SSD drives for the source and working drives. I will add another drive, makes sense to me . Thanks for the help. Greatly appreciated.

[gonca]

@blusky
With your rig you will find that with DGDecNV you will not load the cpu much past 50% when you use the normal default setting for quality. If you normally use high quality 2 pass prepare for a speed treat. The default quality setting normally gives me 135 FPS encoding speed while the cpu sits at 50%.

[blusky]

@blusky
With your rig you will find that with DGDecNV you will not load the cpu much past 50% when you use the normal default setting for quality. If you normally use high quality 2 pass prepare for a speed treat. The default quality setting normally gives me 135 FPS encoding speed while the cpu sits at 50%.

Thanks gonca, that is some great performance considering on the machine I am using now, circa 2004, it took me 27 hours for a 2.5 hour movie. This would be an amazing performance.

[gonca]

2.5 hour movie should take 30 to 45 minutes on default for BD25.

[blusky]

2.5 hour movie should take 30 to 45 minutes on default for BD25.

now that is a great improvement.

[blusky]

@blusky
Consider getting a 128 GB SSD drive for OS and apps. Use the two you have for SOURCE and WORKING drives. This would give you max read / write for BD-RB and allow you a large drive for permanent storage. Your system specs are similar, but a bit above, mine. BD50 to BD25 under "default" settings is about 30 to 45 minutes with the cpu averaging 50% load.

I am not versed at building computers so I am throwing myself into the fire on this one. I have a quick question in reference the setup your talking about above. I need to get another 250GB SSD drive above on which I will put the OS and Apps on. then do I make the 2 Samsung 840 Pro SSD drives that I have in Raid 0 configuration??

[gonca]

A 128 GB SSD should be enough for the OS and apps. The other SSD's should be used as seperate drives, one for source, and one as working drive. RAID isn't required for this purpose.

[blusky]

A 128 GB SSD should be enough for the OS and apps. The other SSD's should be used as seperate drives, one for source, and one as working drive. RAID isn't required for this purpose.

ok, now I get it. Thanks.

[steptoe]

I don't have an SSD as yet, but a lot of places recommend (as suggested) use an SSD to load your OS and software only so you can get away without having a small ? SSD and use the spare cash you save to buy more SATA hard drives for your storage

Maybe have one SATA drive for your sons games, and two more for your video use ONLY. Reading from one and writing to another does give a big speed boost. The prices of 2TB Sata hard drives is dropping to silly prices again, almost giving them away

A 2TB for your son should be more than enough for future use, considering most new games are now around the 16GB mark that will still give him plenty of space for storage or his 'other' use, and possibly a 1TB for your work files and a 2TB or even 4TB for storage purposes

As your motherboard supports it, go for SATA III hard drives for you and a SATA II hard drive for your son. He won't notice the difference but will squeeze every bit of speed out of everything for you using SATA III hard drives with 64MB cache

If money really is no object then by all means go for the i7 CPU, but I use an i5 2500k and did look at an i7, running very happily at 4.5ghz using a DarkRock Pro fan cooler and even with the CPU cooler you are saving the best part of £250 (almost $400) which could go on yet more hard drives, I use HCEnc with AviSynth which is a known killer is your system is unstable and running the Intel Burn In Test pushes it as far as it will go and still stays stable. The intel i5 2500k are very easy to overclock, but staying with your watercooling block you 'should' be able to manage 4.8Ghz without overstressing it and would take you about 5 minutes via the BIOS and be faster than the CPU you are buying. Unless you intend to overclock that as well ..... which quickly reading is achievable to 4.8ghz and with 6-cores will be pretty damn fast

I have an Antec 1200 tower which is a beast and other towers would easily fit inside it, but for looks as a 'gaming' rig what you've choosen should be plenty big enough and leave plenty of space for internal cooling. Mine's filled with hard drives and runs very very cool. But in UK it doesn't exactly get that warm too often so don't need to worry about ambient temperatures


I use Win7 64-bit Ultimate (or Win8 if you prefer that 'touchpad' look) and have used 32-bit Win7 in the past. 64-bit is quite a bit faster/smoother and BD-RB works perfectly with both


As a sidenote, they are still testing OpenCL (GPU) x264 which would give a big speed boost, handbrake OpenCL is available but staesd as only in downsizing as yet and is far too unstable for public use. So its being worked on but don't expect full GPU support for some time yet

http://li5.ziti.uni-heidelberg.de/x264gpu/
https://github.com/DarkShikari/x264-devel/commit/35d002951c26cb7e60cf27f4f474cfd5aa03cf05

[gonca]

@blusky
Your parts list is impressive but pricey. If you haven't ordered them yet there are a few things you should consider.
Your use---- BD50 to BD25 with default settings---i7 3930 is way overkill
What are your normal backup goals? etc.

Steptoe made good points about alternate solutions. If you need me to run some test encodes to give you comparison results let me know. If you want me to post my specs for comparison purposes just say so.

[blusky]

Thanks to all for the great info. You guys are a wealth of information.
Yes , i have just purchased the hardware that is listed in this post.
I thought it was a great idea that was suggested to purchase a smaller SSD HD , 128GB for the OS and Apps.

RobertM had suggested to use 4 1tb hard drives paired in two raid 0 configurations to get the best read and write speeds. I presently have 2 Samsung 840 pro series 256GB Sata3 SSD hard drives.I also have a 4TB hard drive for storage.
Should I use them for one of the raid 0 configurations and maybe purchase two smaller SSD drives for the second Raid 0 configuration.
If this is acceptable then I have read it is best to use Hardware raid card. Can anyone suggest a good one??

At this point I have gone this far might as well get the most out of the system even if it cost me more.

Buy the way, looks like I'm shying toward windows 8 for now. This is a tough one because I do like windows 7.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[gonca]

Your Samsung SSDs are each probably better than two HDDs in RAID 0 speedwise. Remember that components can be swapped or added with ease later on.
In other words, go with what you have, and then if you need to alter or add do it. This gives you the chance to see what you have and defer some expenses if need arises. By the way, If you got the i7 3930K it to is easy to overclock.

[jdobbs]

@blusky
With your rig you will find that with DGDecNV you will not load the cpu much past 50% when you use the normal default setting for quality. If you normally use high quality 2 pass prepare for a speed treat. The default quality setting normally gives me 135 FPS encoding speed while the cpu sits at 50%.If you're only using 50% of your processor in pass 2 -- you should set change the MULTIPROCESS setting to a higher value than the default in the Config/INI file. Pass 1 isn't very demanding, so you don't want to base your setting on that.

As for "overkill" -- I don't think there is a processor in existence yet that is "overkill" for HD video encoding. You just have to tweak BD-RB to make sure you use it all. You probably only need about 8GB of memory for BD-RB, though -- unless you are running a lot of instances with the MULTIPROCESS setting. Two hard drives, with the source being different from the working, is a definite time saver.

[gonca]

@jdobbs
When I mentioned the 50% I was referring to the normal default 1 pass setting for 2.5 to 3 hour content, ABR I believe. The two pass setting statement was if you use it be prepared for a speed treat, no mention of cpu usage. The OP never mentioned what his normal usage or settings for BD-RB are. I agree that depending on settings, the cpu can be easily be maxed out.
As a side note-- the Kepler 5 cards seem to hit their limit at 135 FPS, and that was what I was referring to when I mentioned the 50% usage and "normal" default settings, i.e. ABR 1 pass. Sorry for any confusion if I misstated my point.

I normally do BD>MKV crf 18 and the cpu gets maxed out easily.

[RobertM]

RobertM had suggested to use 4 1tb hard drives paired in two raid 0 configurations to get the best read and write speeds. I presently have 2 Samsung 840 pro series 256GB Sata3 SSD hard drives.I also have a 4TB hard drive for storage.
Should I use them for one of the raid 0 configurations and maybe purchase two smaller SSD drives for the second Raid 0 configuration.
If this is acceptable then I have read it is best to use Hardware raid card. Can anyone suggest a good one??


First, there really isn't any right or wrong about most of this. You've bought good components, and you are going to be happy with the performance, no matter what you do.

Pairing HDDs in Raid 0 gives you twice the speed of the original HDDs. It's a cheap way to get speed and capacity. SDDs are faster and smaller than HDDS but quite a bit more expensive per GByte. Pairing your SDDs will give a VERY fast transfer rate. If you are space-constrained, or need the ultimate in speed, SDDs are the way to go. For me, paired HDDs are fast enough. You likely don't need to use a h/w raid controller, as allowing the OS to control this will probably be fine. But you've got a lot of drives, plus at least one optical device, so you might start running out of m/b SATA plugs, in which case you would need a separate board.

The reason why we put OS/Apps on a dedicated SSD drive is that it makes boot up and loading apps quite snappy. The reason we keep large data files off that drive is that SSD drives tend to be small (relative to HDDs), and you would be forever running out of space on your "C:" drive, and having to clean-up the drive quite often. The usual way to do this is a single SSD drive in the 80GB - 128GB size. You probably don't need more than that for the OS and a usual collection of apps (unusually large apps, like games, would go on the data drives). Using a modestly sized SSD for this keeps the purpose of the drive in focus, and reduces the temptation to start storing data on it, thus keeping the clutter down. You would treat this entire drive as a "system" drive -- you wouldn't need to back it up a often as your data, since the OS and apps can be reloaded from scratch if needed, without losing your valuable data files.

The storage drives need to be larger, since your BD files will reside there, and those files are, relatively speaking, huge. Even if you plan to regularly clean up the drives (meaning that you'll manually delete the old rip an rebuild files) these files will tend to pile up a bit, so I probably wouldn't recommend less then 1TB for each.

For the purposes of BD-Rebuilder it is advisable to use 2 separate drives, as we've discussed. If you plan on deleting the rips immediately after rebuild then the source drive doesn't need to be too huge, and 1TB would be a good starting point. But, if you plan to hold onto the rips until you've eventually watched your rebuild then you'll need larger capacity. If you plan to use your PC as a HTPC, and serve your rebuilds from there to your TV, then you will want big capacity in your 'Target' (workfile) drive, and 4TB is not bad. In any case, for BD-Rebuilder you really don't need both target and source drives to be huge - you can always make a new rebuild from a saved rip file, or you can always re-rip your original discs at a later time. Big drives just give you more elbow room.

Whether or not your source and target drives are in Raid configuration is entirely up to you. If you have multiple drives then you can easily Raid them together getting a speed boost. Using the OS (Win7 and Win8) this is really easy. With a h/w raid controller the requirements for the HDDs are more stringent; identical drives are preferred. The upside of Raid0 is speed. The downside is that if either drive fails then you lose all the data, so you effectively double your potential for data loss. Not a terrible problem with rebuilds, since you can always rebuild them again, or rip them again. But if you have set up a HTPC system, with hundreds of rebuilds residing on it, then such a loss would surely be annoying. Something to keep in mind.

Here's 3 options:

1. Stick the h/w that you've already got. One SSD as OS/App drive. The other SSD and the 4TB HDD as Source and Target drives. Doesn't matter which is which - you can switch around your 'source/target' assignments in BD-Rebuilder, and it's easy to bulk copy files from one drive to the other (it's just data, after all) until you are happy.

2. Buy a new 128GB SSD for your OS/Apps. Pair your existing SSDs together for a lightning fast 500Gb drive and use that, with your 4TB HDD, for the 'source' and 'target' drives.

3. Buy a new 128GB SSD for your OS/Apps. Pair your existing SSDs together for a lightning fast 500Gb drive. Partition your 4TB HDD into 2 x 2TB drives claiming one of these partitions for yourself (as 'source' or 'target') and give the other partition to your son for his games and apps (telling him not to mess with ANY of the other drives).

Now, if I were you... I'd go with #3. ;)

[QBhd]

Just to give my config as a reference:

SYSTEM Drive: 2xMushkin Chronos 60 GB RAID0 = 109 GB
WORKING Drive: 4xWestern Digital Caviar Black 500 GB RAID0 (Short Stroke) = 300 GB
STORAGE 1 Drive: 4xWestern Digital Caviar Black 500 GB RAID0 (Long Stroke) = 1.52 TB
STORAGE 2 Drive: Western Digital Caviar Green 2 TB = 1.81 TB
MOVIES Drive: Hitachi Deskstar 2TB = 1.81 TB

I do all my work for encoding on the working drive. Files are downloaded there as well. As workload goes almost all the large file writes and reads occur there. It's not the optimal situation since I currently have none of the 10 SATA ports left on my board left to use (8 internal + 2 e-SATA)... it was not a plan to have drives configured this way (things sort of just evolved over time), but I can tell you that as an encoding machine she rocks. The 300 GB Short Stroked 4 disk RAID0 is very fast for large file reads/writes and I can do all work in a single folder. I also save a lot of wear and tear on the SSDs but doing things this way. Just food for thought and info from a guy who is very happy with his disk layouts

QB

[blusky]

First, there really isn't any right or wrong about most of this. You've bought good components, and you are going to be happy with the performance, no matter what you do.

Pairing HDDs in Raid 0 gives you twice the speed of the original HDDs. It's a cheap way to get speed and capacity. SDDs are faster and smaller than HDDS but quite a bit more expensive per GByte. Pairing your SDDs will give a VERY fast transfer rate. If you are space-constrained, or need the ultimate in speed, SDDs are the way to go. For me, paired HDDs are fast enough. You likely don't need to use a h/w raid controller, as allowing the OS to control this will probably be fine. But you've got a lot of drives, plus at least one optical device, so you might start running out of m/b SATA plugs, in which case you would need a separate board.


The reason why we put OS/Apps on a dedicated SSD drive is that it makes boot up and loading apps quite snappy. The reason we keep large data files off that drive is that SSD drives tend to be small (relative to HDDs), and you would be forever running out of space on your "C:" drive, and having to clean-up the drive quite often. The usual way to do this is a single SSD drive in the 80GB - 128GB size. You probably don't need more than that for the OS and a usual collection of apps (unusually large apps, like games, would go on the data drives). Using a modestly sized SSD for this keeps the purpose of the drive in focus, and reduces the temptation to start storing data on it, thus keeping the clutter down. You would treat this entire drive as a "system" drive -- you wouldn't need to back it up a often as your data, since the OS and apps can be reloaded from scratch if needed, without losing your valuable data files.

The storage drives need to be larger, since your BD files will reside there, and those files are, relatively speaking, huge. Even if you plan to regularly clean up the drives (meaning that you'll manually delete the old rip an rebuild files) these files will tend to pile up a bit, so I probably wouldn't recommend less then 1TB for each.

For the purposes of BD-Rebuilder it is advisable to use 2 separate drives, as we've discussed. If you plan on deleting the rips immediately after rebuild then the source drive doesn't need to be too huge, and 1TB would be a good starting point. But, if you plan to hold onto the rips until you've eventually watched your rebuild then you'll need larger capacity. If you plan to use your PC as a HTPC, and serve your rebuilds from there to your TV, then you will want big capacity in your 'Target' (workfile) drive, and 4TB is not bad. In any case, for BD-Rebuilder you really don't need both target and source drives to be huge - you can always make a new rebuild from a saved rip file, or you can always re-rip your original discs at a later time. Big drives just give you more elbow room.

Whether or not your source and target drives are in Raid configuration is entirely up to you. If you have multiple drives then you can easily Raid them together getting a speed boost. Using the OS (Win7 and Win8) this is really easy. With a h/w raid controller the requirements for the HDDs are more stringent; identical drives are preferred. The upside of Raid0 is speed. The downside is that if either drive fails then you lose all the data, so you effectively double your potential for data loss. Not a terrible problem with rebuilds, since you can always rebuild them again, or rip them again. But if you have set up a HTPC system, with hundreds of rebuilds residing on it, then such a loss would surely be annoying. Something to keep in mind.

Here's 3 options:

1. Stick the h/w that you've already got. One SSD as OS/App drive. The other SSD and the 4TB HDD as Source and Target drives. Doesn't matter which is which - you can switch around your 'source/target' assignments in BD-Rebuilder, and it's easy to bulk copy files from one drive to the other (it's just data, after all) until you are happy.

2. Buy a new 128GB SSD for your OS/Apps. Pair your existing SSDs together for a lightning fast 500Gb drive and use that, with your 4TB HDD, for the 'source' and 'target' drives.

3. Buy a new 128GB SSD for your OS/Apps. Pair your existing SSDs together for a lightning fast 500Gb drive. Partition your 4TB HDD into 2 x 2TB drives claiming one of these partitions for yourself (as 'source' or 'target') and give the other partition to your son for his games and apps (telling him not to mess with ANY of the other drives).

Now, if I were you... I'd go with #3. ;)

Thanks RobertM and QBhd for your help. Greatly appreciated.
RobertM. Thanks for giving me a great overview of the advantages and disadvantages of each. I have done some reading today on the raid0 configuration with 2 SSD drives and have found mixed results. Some say to just use them as regular drives not raid0 as they are fast enough. Others say that there is a great improvement using them as Raid0 drives. Some had said that it will be to much ware and tare on the SSD drives in Raid0 config.

Since I am just starting out I think I will try choice number 3 with a slight modification. I am purchasing a Samsung 840 Pro 128GB SSD drive for the OS and Apps. I will try first use the 2 250GB Samsung SSD drives as separate drives and see how that goes. Then in the future I could always Raid0 them later.
I will partition the 4 TB drive as you have said to give my son some room to play but not allow him to stray too far.

Jdobbs, thanks for your help. Once I get this running well then I will learn how to tweak BD-RB to use the processor more effectively.
QBhd,
appreciate you show me your setup and how you use it.

[QBhd]

Just a quick note on RAID0 and SSD's... What most people who say that one drive is fast enough are not looking at is the critical stat. That is the 4k read and write speeds. AS SSD is a good benchmark to illustrate this, and there is a great improvemnt in 4K with RAID0

QB

[blusky]

Just a quick note on RAID0 and SSD's... What most people who say that one drive is fast enough are not looking at is the critical stat. That is the 4k read and write speeds. AS SSD is a good benchmark to illustrate this, and there is a great improvemnt in 4K with RAID0

QB
Thanks for the explanation QBhd. I had looked at some of those benchmarks but did not know what to look for.

[jdobbs]

Just a note... An SSD is (as the name says) solid state. I don't think I'd listen to anyone who says you have to worry about "wear and tear". They have no moving parts.

[gonca]

Just a note... An SSD is (as the name says) solid state. I don't think I'd listen to anyone who says you have to worry about "wear and tear". They have no moving parts.

@blusky
I have my 2 SSD drives, input - source, for well over a year. Continuous and repeated writes, reads, and deletes. No problems whatsoever. As Jdobbs said...

Side note
I'm converting my DVD collection to MkV as well as BD to MKV. These two SSDs do not get a lot of down time.

As far as following RobertM 3rd option---good decision.

[RobertM]

Just a note... An SSD is (as the name says) solid state. I don't think I'd listen to anyone who says you have to worry about "wear and tear". They have no moving parts.

True, no moving parts... but they do have a published lifespan of something like 10,000 read/write cycles. You might expect (very roughly) an HDD to last around 5 yrs, and an SSD (MLC type) around 10 yrs. I read that "Single Layer Cell" (SLC) SSD drives are much better than that and can be thought of as lasting a lifetime, but they are less common and quite a bit more expensive.

I just don't want people to expect their SSD drive to last forever, or to decide to never backup their data anymore.

[QBhd]

Just a note... An SSD is (as the name says) solid state. I don't think I'd listen to anyone who says you have to worry about "wear and tear". They have no moving parts.

Of course I know an SSD has no moving parts... the "wear & tear" comment was just a euphimism. In a RAID config with no TRIM, constant reads/writes/deletes will slowly degrade performance over time. But nothing a security erase and image restore can't cure. I don't usually worry too much about it, but it doesn't hurt to keep the SSD's just for OS and apps.

QB

[blusky]

Great info, thanks to all. Been getting a lot of conflicting data on this however as Jdobbs had said therr are no moving parts makes sence.
RobertM also has a good point. Everything has a life span or else we would only need one SSD for life.
I found out what TRIM does but is it part of the OS??

[QBhd]

TRIM is an ATA command that allows an OS to tell the drive which blocks of data are no longer in use and can be cleared internally. TRIM needs an OS capable of initiating the command and also needs to be passed through to the drive (AHCI). RAID does not allow this command to passthrough with the exception of Intel 7-series chipset and RST 11.2 drivers and above... and this only works with single disks under RAID... still does not work for RAID0 disks.

TRIM is initiated (for the most part) when files are emptied from the Recycle Bin. (and I guess direct deletes when files do not get sent to the Recycle Bin)

Or at least as far as I understand things :)

QB

[blusky]

TRIM is an ATA command that allows an OS to tell the drive which blocks of data are no longer in use and can be cleared internally. TRIM needs an OS capable of initiating the command and also needs to be passed through to the drive (AHCI). RAID does not allow this command to passthrough with the exception of Intel 7-series chipset and RST 11.2 drivers and above... and this only works with single disks under RAID... still does not work for RAID0 disks.

TRIM is initiated (for the most part) when files are emptied from the Recycle Bin. (and I guess direct deletes when files do not get sent to the Recycle Bin)

Or at least as far as I understand things :)

QB


Thanks QBhd for the info. Interesting enough I had read in some forums that for the Intel 7 series it does work with Raid0 with 2 disks. I will search and see if I can find it again.

On another topic If I may, my memory connection fell through.
I was looking for the this Memory:

G.SKILL RipjawsZ F3-19200CL10Q2-64GBZHD 64GB 8X8GB DDR3-2400 CL10 240PIN Memory Kit

Seems it was built to work with the Motherboard I purchased:
Motherboard Asus Rampage 1V Extreme LGA 2011 Intel X79 Sata 6GB/S USB 3.0 extended ATX motherboard

I have been trying to find a decent price for it but know luck so far.
I did find on Ebay this memory:


G.SKILL Ripjaws Z Series 64GB (8 x 8GB) DDR3 PC3 12800 F3-12800CL10Q2-64GBZL


There is a difference from 12800CL and 19200CL Is that the Clock speed??

[RobertM]

There is a difference from 12800CL and 19200CL Is that the Clock speed??

Yes, those 2 memory selections differ in speed. One is DDR3-2400 (not really 2400MHz, but it's convenient to think of it that way) and the other is DDR3-1600.

To be honest, I can't imagine that you are going to get much real value out of that much RAM. Even 32GB is huge for any use that you are likely to throw at that machine, whether for BD-RB or gaming. Nor am I sure that you would see any real benefit from the higher speed DDR3-2400. The higher speed memory won't hurt, other than in the pocketbook, but you may not realize ANY real-world performance improvements after spending a ton of cash. I would suggest cutting back to 4x8GB sticks (fast ones if you must) and then you can always add more later if needed.

[jdobbs]

Now that you mention it, isn't there a limit on the amount of usable RAM on a 64 bit system? If I remember correctly it is 4GB for the 32 bit Windows.

[edit] I just looked it up for Win 7. It appears that it's pretty high (192GB) for the professional version -- but Home Premium has a limit of 16GB and Home Basic is limited to 8GB. I didn't see Win8 and there's a limit to how much looking I will do with this iPhone I'm using ;)

[blusky]

Thanks RobertM and Jdobbs for the help. It looks like I will give Windows 8 Pro 64 bit a shot on this computer. Looks Like a cousin of mine is going to be able to get me a good price on the G.SKILL RipjawsZ F3-19200CL10Q2.

Depending on the price I do agree, no need to spend the money there since I will not need 64GB.
I am starting to worry a little bit since there is a lot I do not know how to do or never have done with computers. As an example, I have read that these Samsung drives cannot update the firmware in Raid 0 configuration. So somehow I might have to update them before I raid 0 them. Only problem is I do not have a Sata Hard drive connection in any of my old computers so I don't quite know how I will do that.

I have read all Manuals of the Hardware that I have received so far. I have found a few guides on the best way to build a computer.

The other issue I am looking into, as QBhd has said " TRIM needs an OS capable of initiating the command and also needs to be passed through to the drive (AHCI). RAID does not allow this command to passthrough with the exception of Intel 7-series chipset and RST 11.2 drivers and above... and this only works with single disks under RAID... still does not work for RAID0 disks."
I am trying to verify that.
Just a few things like that.

[RobertM]

I am starting to worry a little bit since there is a lot I do not know how to do or never have done with computers.
You'll know a lot more once you get your machine built ;) Remember that it's unlikely that you'll do anything that isn't reversible. Just take your time, follow a respectable on-line guide and don't force the components. It's not a difficult process, but there are many steps. As long as you don't physically break something then you can always take it all apart and start again. So don't worry, it'll be OK. You should plan on a whole weekend for this project - just to be safe. Someone who's done previous builds would probably put it all together in a couple of hours. My son and I did our build on Christmas day in about 5 hrs, but I had previous experience swapping cases, which gives one good familiarity with the guts of a PC.


As an example, I have read that these Samsung drives cannot update the firmware in Raid 0 configuration. So somehow I might have to update them before I raid 0 them. Only problem is I do not have a Sata Hard drive connection in any of my old computers so I don't quite know how I will do that.
I have an easy solution: don't update the firmware. These are new drives and they should work fine as is.

I have read all Manuals of the Hardware that I have received so far. I have found a few guides on the best way to build a computer.
Good. You're following the correct path.

The other issue I am looking into, as QBhd has said " TRIM needs an OS capable of <snip>
Ideally you would tweak everything for ultimate, optimized performance. But it's more common to just let let the M/B or the OS handle the Raid configuration. Letting Win7/8 do it is the easiest but it involves a little extra overhead. Letting the M/B handle it is pretty easy too. You simply need to enter the configuration dialogue upon boot-up (your manual will tell you which keys to hold upon booting).

But don't worry about the Raid array first. Initially, just get the system running with a minimal configuration; just the OS/Apps SSD. Once you have the OS booting properly off the SSD THEN install the SSD array and your 4TB HDD. These can be added one at a time, so as to keep the incremental changes to a minimum.

[blusky]

You'll know a lot more once you get your machine built ;) Remember that it's unlikely that you'll do anything that isn't reversible. Just take your time, follow a respectable on-line guide and don't force the components. It's not a difficult process, but there are many steps. As long as you don't physically break something then you can always take it all apart and start again. So don't worry, it'll be OK. You should plan on a whole weekend for this project - just to be safe. Someone who's done previous builds would probably put it all together in a couple of hours. My son and I did our build on Christmas day in about 5 hrs, but I had previous experience swapping cases, which gives one good familiarity with the guts of a PC.



I have an easy solution: don't update the firmware. These are new drives and they should work fine as is.


Good. You're following the correct path.


Ideally you would tweak everything for ultimate, optimized performance. But it's more common to just let let the M/B or the OS handle the Raid configuration. Letting Win7/8 do it is the easiest but it involves a little extra overhead. Letting the M/B handle it is pretty easy too. You simply need to enter the configuration dialogue upon boot-up (your manual will tell you which keys to hold upon booting).

But don't worry about the Raid array first. Initially, just get the system running with a minimal configuration; just the OS/Apps SSD. Once you have the OS booting properly off the SSD THEN install the SSD array and your 4TB HDD. These can be added one at a time, so as to keep the incremental changes to a minimum.

Sounds good RobertM. Take each step one at a time making sure that it works correctly then keep adding the drives one by one. Lesson learned.

I did do a search on the Trim and the SSD's in Raid 0 config. and this is what I found:
TRIM will work in RAID 0 on Windows 8 when running a 7 series chipset, just install the newest RST drivers and make sure you Option ROM is 11 or higher.
That solves that issue.

Thanks again RobertM.

[jdobbs]

True, no moving parts... but they do have a published lifespan of something like 10,000 read/write cycles. You might expect (very roughly) an HDD to last around 5 yrs, and an SSD (MLC type) around 10 yrs. I read that "Single Layer Cell" (SLC) SSD drives are much better than that and can be thought of as lasting a lifetime, but they are less common and quite a bit more expensive.

I just don't want people to expect their SSD drive to last forever, or to decide to never backup their data anymore. Hmmm... theres an expected limitation of 10,000 read/write cycles? I never would have guessed that. I wonder what could be the technical reason for that. Interesting.

[gonca]

Michael Yang, flash marketing manager at Samsung

"There are also concerns about wear. That is, flash has the potential to wear out after tens (or hundreds) of thousands of write cycles.

This characterization, however, is too simplistic. A flash device that is rated at 100,000 write cycles, for example, can write 100,000 times to every single (memory) cell within the device. In other words, the device doesn't write to the same cell over and over again but spreads out the writes over many different cells. This is achieved through wear leveling which is carried out by the SSD's controller.

This would make it virtually impossible to wear out a flash chip. A pattern could be perpetually repeated in which a 64GB SSD is completely filled with data, erased, filled again, then erased again every hour of every day for years, and the user still wouldn't reach the theoretical write limit.


The quote above was posted at the CORSAIR forum.

[RobertM]

AnandTech did an analysis showing that the lifespan of a newer Samsung 128GB SSD (TLC type) would be about 10yrs at 10GB average read/write per day. Of course, 10GB/day isn't a lot for people in this forum ;)

An interesting table:

SLC MLC TLC
Bits per Cell 1 2 3
P/E Cycles (2Xnm) 100,000 3,000 1,000


As the technology has gotten smaller and cheaper the P/E (Program/Erase) cycles have dropped substantially. Based on these numbers it looks like the original SLC type probably could be considered to last virtually forever.

[gonca]

I agree that SSDs seem to have a limited number of write cycles, and deletes are a variety of writing. The problem is that one source says one thing and a different source says something else. As I stated previously though, I am in process of converting my DVD collection to MKV with BD-RB and I am continuously loading my source SSD and then converting to my output SSD. This is followed by a complete delete of the input drive and moving of the MKVs to an array. My input SSD sees probably 400 GB, including the BDs I am converting, per week. My output drive sees probably 150 GB. I have been doing this for quite a while and so far all is good. Used to do the DVDs with something else but I didn't like the results so I am redoing it all the DVDs again with BD_RB.

Model : OCZ VERTEX-PLUS
Firmware : 3.55
Serial Number : 2Z9Y07586G5800347418
Disk Size : 240.0 GB (8.4/137.4/240.0)
Buffer Size : >= 32767 KB
Queue Depth : 32
# of Sectors : 468862128
Rotation Rate : ---- (SSD)
Interface : Serial ATA
Major Version : ATA8-ACS
Minor Version : ----
Transfer Mode : SATA/300
Power On Hours : 2088 hours
Power On Count : 1141 count
Host Writes : 0 GB
Temparature : Unknown
Health Status : Good (100 %)
Features : S.M.A.R.T., 48bit LBA, NCQ, TRIM
APM Level : ----

This is from Crystal Disk info on one of my SSDs.

[blusky]

A lot of great info in this thread. Thanks to all. I know there is a lot of debate out there whether is is better to Raid 0 two SSD drives or Just keep them as separate disks.

I have found one review of the Samsung 840 Pro 128GB SSD in Raid 0 configuration which looks like it is the most comprehensive. I went through it and am in way over my head to determine if it is better in Raid 0 config or as a single drive.
Here is the link , hXXp://www.rwlabs.com/article.php?cat=&id=762&pagenumber=1 . If anyone would like to take a look at this and let me know what it all means, the bottom line, I would appreciate it.

[RobertM]

From their summary:

HD Tach showed our 840 Pro to have killer burst performance and incredible sequential read/write performance that scales perfectly; giving us exactly double Samsung’s specified single drive performance.

So the RAID 0 array is twice as fast as the single drives. I should think that this makes your decision relatively easy.

[blusky]

From their summary:



So the RAID 0 array is twice as fast as the single drives. I should think that this makes your decision relatively easy.

Yes I was already headed in that direction but there is so much conflicting information out there sometimes makes the choice a bit difficult. I figure if I am spending the money on this computer might as well set it up so it can preform in the best way possible.

Thanks for your help, taking the time to look at the link and for giving great advice. :)

[steptoe]

Just an update, found this while reading about Paint.net I use for a quick free editor when I don't need to use Photoshop/LightRoom. The guy who writes Paint.net has built this system and the sheer grunt it provides when compiling he says is immense, so I assume the same could also apply to video encoding

Two Xeon E5-2687W running on an ASUS server based motherboard with a maximum 256GB DDR-3, 14 very fast SATA port, 6 which are extremely fast. Upto 4 GFX cards. So you end up with a possible 256GB memory running upto 32 threads at the same time

This graph shows the possible speed is about 56% faster than i7 system you are building

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+E5-2687W+%40+3.10GHz&id=1222&cpuCount=2


So, if money really is no object but you want speed for a budget, the Intel i7 can do it running at 5ghz, but for the immense grunt the twin CPU system provides then I'd dig very deep and buy this. But then again if I had over $3000 to spend on the desktop I may even look into building a dual tower system and set up an encoding farm for two Intel i7's desktops running flat out overclocked to 5ghz each then you can see some serious encoding speeds

The twin CPU system will easily run games as well without breaking into a sweat, but the extra cores won't come in until software supports it. Apparently most games only support upto 4 cores as most gaming systems are quad core. With the GFX card you want and big memory then huge resolutions will easily be managed. Assuming you use a gaming monitor of at least 24" your son will have a ball with a good quality 5.1 or even 7.1 surround sound system. But I've seen people running gaming systems on 50" or even 60" LED which is a bit extreme



But, I don't know if BD-RB or x264 supports shared encoding across multiple workstations, so sheer grunt on an individual desktop seems the only way

[blusky]

Just an update, found this while reading about Paint.net I use for a quick free editor when I don't need to use Photoshop/LightRoom. The guy who writes Paint.net has built this system and the sheer grunt it provides when compiling he says is immense, so I assume the same could also apply to video encoding

Two Xeon E5-2687W running on an ASUS server based motherboard with a maximum 256GB DDR-3, 14 very fast SATA port, 6 which are extremely fast. Upto 4 GFX cards. So you end up with a possible 256GB memory running upto 32 threads at the same time

This graph shows the possible speed is about 56% faster than i7 system you are building

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+E5-2687W+%40+3.10GHz&id=1222&cpuCount=2


So, if money really is no object but you want speed for a budget, the Intel i7 can do it running at 5ghz, but for the immense grunt the twin CPU system provides then I'd dig very deep and buy this. But then again if I had over $3000 to spend on the desktop I may even look into building a dual tower system and set up an encoding farm for two Intel i7's desktops running flat out overclocked to 5ghz each then you can see some serious encoding speeds

The twin CPU system will easily run games as well without breaking into a sweat, but the extra cores won't come in until software supports it. Apparently most games only support upto 4 cores as most gaming systems are quad core. With the GFX card you want and big memory then huge resolutions will easily be managed. Assuming you use a gaming monitor of at least 24" your son will have a ball with a good quality 5.1 or even 7.1 surround sound system. But I've seen people running gaming systems on 50" or even 60" LED which is a bit extreme



But, I don't know if BD-RB or x264 supports shared encoding across multiple workstations, so sheer grunt on an individual desktop seems the only way

Thanks for the info Steptoe. Interesting concept. Unfortunately money is not infinite and the reason I even spent this much was because for the last 10 years I saved by buying older used Pc's to play with. So I guess you could say I splurged this time.
Still waiting on the Delivery of the replacement motherboard which I believe will arrive tomorrow. Hopefully I will have it setup in the next couple of days. Thanks for the info.

[blusky]

Here is an update. Finally resolved an issue with the motherboard and the computer is built. Still need to resolve some driver issues with the raid 0 configuration but should be done shortly and ready to give BD Rebuilder a try.

Was not easy for me since I had such limited exposure to things like SSD's and the latest CPU's but with a little help from some forums I was able to get it done. The hardware is as I posted in the first post. I would like to include some Pics but the Pics are to large a file even when zipped.

[QBhd]

You could always use Photo Bucket to host your pics. I find it very useful since it automatically resizes files and makes then more forum friendly... here is an example:

http://i820.photobucket.com/albums/zz123/QB_the_Slayer/Computer/QBs-6th-Toy/SDC13889.jpg

(BTW that's my beast, The Monster HTPC... I need to get some new pics since I now have an H80i)

QB

[blusky]

You could always use Photo Bucket to host your pics. I find it very useful since it automatically resizes files and makes then more forum friendly... here is an example:

http://i820.photobucket.com/albums/zz123/QB_the_Slayer/Computer/QBs-6th-Toy/SDC13889.jpg

(BTW that's my beast, The Monster HTPC... I need to get some new pics since I now have an H80i)

QB

wow, very nice QBhd! I will give it a try.

[blusky]

ok , here goes:

http://http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a605/blusky1980/DSCF1994_zps905b7f43.jpg (http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/blusky1980/media/DSCF1994_zps905b7f43.jpg.html)

http://http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a605/blusky1980/DSCF1996_zps366dda19.jpg (http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/blusky1980/media/DSCF1996_zps366dda19.jpg.html)

http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a605/blusky1980/DSCF1997_zpsfb2d09fc.jpg (http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/blusky1980/media/DSCF1997_zpsfb2d09fc.jpg.html)


http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a605/blusky1980/as-ssd-benchIntelRaid0Vol42520135-36-53PM_zpseafe4372.png (http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/blusky1980/media/as-ssd-benchIntelRaid0Vol42520135-36-53PM_zpseafe4372.png.html)


http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a605/blusky1980/as-ssd-benchSamsungSSD84042520135-38-29PM_zps63c03da0.png (http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/blusky1980/media/as-ssd-benchSamsungSSD84042520135-38-29PM_zps63c03da0.png.html)

hope I did that correctly. Almost finished optimizing for speed, then I will give BD Rebuilder a try.

[QBhd]

Wow... That RAID Volume of SSD's is sick fast! Nice rig.

QB

[blusky]

Wow... That RAID Volume of SSD's is sick fast! Nice rig.

QB

Thanks QBhd,
This is my first build. Took a while. I did enjoy building it. I am curious to see what it can do with BD Rebuilder.

[QBhd]

Quick question... do you have the AX1200i and the H100i connected? As an owner of an H80i I have always been curious what the Corsair Link software shows in that situation

QB

ps... it's just QB (couldn't just use QB as a username so I came up with QBhd)

[RobertM]

I am curious to see what it can do with BD Rebuilder.

Whatever it does, it'll do it fast! :)

[blusky]

Whatever it does, it'll do it fast! :)

Thanks RobertM. I did follow the setup 3 that you had suggested.

Ran into some interesting issues with Raid 0 drivers for the motherboard. Though trial and error finally found the driver that would work at a reasonable speed with the SSD's. Lucky for me with the help of a few friends and some forums I was able to get it to work. Still figuring my way around Windows 8 but in time that will come. Just need to do a few more tweak's and I will start setting up BD Rebuilder. I have to do a little reading first to make sure I setup everything correctly.

[Ch3vr0n]

If you're missing your "classic" start bar & start menu there are several tools outthere that can do the trick and bring those items back ;). even booting into the classic desktop mode and bypassing that stupid metro style start screen).

[blusky]

If you're missing your "classic" start bar & start menu there are several tools outthere that can do the trick and bring those items back ;). even booting into the classic desktop mode and bypassing that stupid metro style start screen).

Thanks Ch3vr0n. I am giving Windows 8 a chance to see if I get used to it if not Classic Desktop mode here I come.

[blusky]

On another note. Should I use BD Rebuilder Pro??

Quite a few years ago I gave a donation for the Pro version will it still work on another computer??

[jdobbs]

On another note. Should I use BD Rebuilder Pro??

Quite a few years ago I gave a donation for the Pro version will it still work on another computer??There's no such thing. There is a "DVD Rebuilder Pro" -- but that is for DVDs, not BDs. BD Rebuilder is available only in the freeware version and is completely dependent upon voluntary donations (as opposed to a "Pro" version).

Both DVD Rebuilder and BD Rebuilder should work fine.

[blusky]

There's no such thing. There is a "DVD Rebuilder Pro" -- but that is for DVDs, not BDs. BD Rebuilder is available only in the freeware version and is completely dependent upon voluntary donations (as opposed to a "Pro" version).

Both DVD Rebuilder and BD Rebuilder should work fine.

Ok great, Understood. I have been looking around, can you please point me to the location of the current BD Rebuilder post that has all the setup and supporting program installs that are needed??

Thanks jdobbs.

[jdobbs]

Ok great, Understood. I have been looking around, can you please point me to the location of the current BD Rebuilder post that has all the setup and supporting program installs that are needed??

Thanks jdobbs.Everything you need is right here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=143716). Make sure you install the exact versions that are linked in that post. Also avoid installing any "codec packs" other than FFDSHOW (which is linked).

[blusky]

Everything you need is right here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=143716). Make sure you install the exact versions that are linked in that post. Also avoid installing any "codec packs" other than FFDSHOW (which is linked).

Thank you very much Jdobbs. Will get it setup tonight and give it a shot.

[blusky]

here is some info for those that are interested:

I used BD Rebuilder to encode Men in Black 3:
I used High Quality 2 pass, everything seemed to work great:
This is what I received from task manager:

1st pass processor averaged about 80% utilization
here is the 2nd pass Data from Task Manager:

CPU

Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3930K CPU @ 3.20GHz

Maximum speed: 3.20 GHz
Sockets: 1
Cores: 6
Logical processors: 12
Virtualization: Enabled
L1 cache: 384 KB
L2 cache: 1.5 MB
L3 cache: 12.0 MB

Utilization 100%
Speed 3.75 GHz
Up time 0:01:38:13
Processes 54
Threads 718
Handles 16435

The total time BD Rebuilder took to encode was 1:23 . It reduced the file size from 26.88GB to 4.36GB

Here is the log:

04/27/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[15:46:22] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 4.36 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[15:46:22] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [15:46:22] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [15:46:22] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [15:49:14] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 4,681 Kbs
- [15:49:14] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [16:14:21] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [17:07:13] Video Encode complete
- [17:07:13] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
[17:09:17]PHASE ONE complete
[17:09:17]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [17:09:17] Rebuilding AVCHD file Structure
[17:09:52] - Encode and Rebuild complete
[17:09:52] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


Any suggestions or comments would be appreciated. Thanks to all who contributed to this post . It did help me out a lot.
:)

[jdobbs]

Try setting:

MULTIPROCESS=4

in the Config/INI file, and see how that affects it.

[blusky]

Try setting:

MULTIPROCESS=4

in the Config/INI file, and see how that affects it.

I looked in the Config/INI file and did not see that option but I believe I Just need to add MULTIPROCESS=4 anywhere in the options area of the
Config/INI ??



I did find this great explanation on what it does:

"Currently multi-processing is enabled via a "hidden" switch in the CONFIG/INI file (accessible from the FILE menu). After it has been tested more thoroughly it will be added to the SETUP dialog. For now you must add it to the "[Options]" area of the configuration file like this:

MULTIPROCESS=n



"n" represents a number between 0 and 16. Setting MULTIPROCESS to "0" (the default) disables all multiprocessing and BD Rebuilder continues to operate the way it did in previous releases. Setting it to "1" enables automatic mode -- in this mode BD Rebuilder will use a number of concurrent processes it believes to be most optimal for the number of processors and memory present on your computer. Setting MULTIPROCESS to a greater value indicates "manual mode". BD-RB will run the number of concurrent X264 processes you've specified. Please note that currently anything over 4 is probably likely to show diminished performance. I would also recommend you avoid more than 2-3 if you have 4GB or less of RAM memory on your system. You might find yourself chugging along very slowly if memory your system starts swapping to disc.
If reports indicate a benefit or if system performance Increases dictate, I will increase the maximum – but that’s unlikely for a while."



The quality of the video is amazing!

Cannot tell difference between original and encoded disk. I really tried looking up close. Amazing. Thanks for sharing your work JDobbs.
I sent a little to help out.:)

[RobertM]

The total time BD Rebuilder took to encode was 1:23 . It reduced the file size from 26.88GB to 4.36GB

That's way fast! Could you repeat that, same settings but for a target size of BD-25, so that I can compare it to my typical results?

[blusky]

That's way fast! Could you repeat that, same settings but for a target size of BD-25, so that I can compare it to my typical results?

Sure RobertM, will do.
Going out to eat now when I return it should be done. I will let you know.

[Mark_Venture]

I'd be curious how it compares to mine... If I gave you my settings (I only change a couple from default), would you mind trying again so I can compare?

Here is excerpt of log when I did "Alt Movie Only" to 1920x1080, intact audio, MKV, with a 8096 size target...

[01/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.42.08 (beta)
[16:58:14] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY/ALTERNATE OUTPUT mode enabled
- Mode: MKV Container, 1920x1080, Intact Audio
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[16:58:14] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [16:58:14] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [16:58:14] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [17:15:17] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 8,469 Kbs
- [17:15:17] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [17:53:43] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [18:32:28] Video Encode complete
- [18:32:28] Processing audio tracks
[18:32:28]PHASE ONE complete
[18:32:28]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [18:32:28] Building ALTERNATE OUTPUT Structure
[18:38:33] - Encode and Rebuild complete
[18:38:33] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.

so like 1hr 41 min?

[RobertM]

Sure RobertM, will do.
Going out to eat now when I return it should be done. I will let you know.

BTW, congrats on getting the build working. I know that you had a few bumps along the way. Without the m/b issue it likely would have been fairly straightforward. In the end, I'm sure it is quite satisfying knowing that you put it all together yourself. :)

[blusky]

BTW, congrats on getting the build working. I know that you had a few bumps along the way. Without the m/b issue it likely would have been fairly straightforward. In the end, I'm sure it is quite satisfying knowing that you put it all together yourself. :)

Yes , it was quite satisfying , since I have never built one before and I end up building a gaming rig as my first one. That's me , always bite more off than I can chew.

Anyway here is the encode log for the BD-25

[04/27/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[20:21:33] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[20:21:33] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [20:21:33] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [20:21:33] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [20:24:24] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,123 Kbs
- [20:24:24] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [20:49:39] Video Encode complete
- [20:49:39] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[20:49:39]PHASE ONE complete
[20:49:39]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [20:49:39] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[20:52:34] - Encode and Rebuild complete
[20:52:34] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


Well, it took about :31 minutes to encode

Tomorrow I will do as Jdobbs said and try it with this setting:

MULTIPROCESS=4

I assume I just add it to the the "[Options]" area of the configuration file ??

Thanks RobertM

[QBhd]

I may have to try BD-RB just to compare my results with you boys... I am MeGUI guy right now, but it seems BD-RB has changed quite a bit since the last time I tried it. My beast is a pretty good encoder, I usually do these settings in MeGUI: Authoring a professional Blu-ray Disc with x264 (http://www.x264bluray.com/home/1080i-p) but set a few things different for BD-5/9 with this info: Encoding Video for Blu-Ray using H264/AVC (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=154533). Encoding an ~1 hour TV episode from a .TS to a 1080p BD-5 runs at ~8.5 FPS (or less than 3 hours) for the second pass (DGIndex is used to index the mepg2 stream and it is set to the best quality settings as well, so that probably slows things down a wee-bit too). Although I am sure not too many people do this... It will be interesting to see what my machine can do compared to you guys with BD-RB.

Also... a full movie to a BD-5 is pretty low on the bitrate side for 1080p. I am sure quality loss is noticeable if you have a properly claibrated TV to watch it on. However a BD-9 easily fits a near lossless (at least in terms of naked eye analysis) re-encode... I have lent my discs to friends and they could not believe it was not a Blu-Ray disc.

QB

ps. blusky, you never did answer my question regarding the AX-1200i and the H100i and if you have them linked

[blusky]

I'd be curious how it compares to mine... If I gave you my settings (I only change a couple from default), would you mind trying again so I can compare?

Here is excerpt of log when I did "Alt Movie Only" to 1920x1080, intact audio, MKV, with a 8096 size target...

[01/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.42.08 (beta)
[16:58:14] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY/ALTERNATE OUTPUT mode enabled
- Mode: MKV Container, 1920x1080, Intact Audio
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[16:58:14] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [16:58:14] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [16:58:14] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [17:15:17] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 8,469 Kbs
- [17:15:17] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [17:53:43] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [18:32:28] Video Encode complete
- [18:32:28] Processing audio tracks
[18:32:28]PHASE ONE complete
[18:32:28]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [18:32:28] Building ALTERNATE OUTPUT Structure
[18:38:33] - Encode and Rebuild complete
[18:38:33] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.

so like 1hr 41 min?

Mark_Venture, no problem. Let me have your settings and I will try tomorrow and let you know.

[blusky]

I may have to try BD-RB just to compare my results with you boys... I am MeGUI guy right now, but it seems BD-RB has changed quite a bit since the last time I tried it. My beast is a pretty good encoder, I usually do these settings in MeGUI: Authoring a professional Blu-ray Disc with x264 (http://www.x264bluray.com/home/1080i-p) but set a few things different for BD-5/9 with this info: Encoding Video for Blu-Ray using H264/AVC (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=154533). Encoding an ~1 hour TV episode from a .TS to a 1080p BD-5 runs at ~8.5 FPS (or less than 3 hours) for the second pass (DGIndex is used to index the mepg2 stream and it is set to the best quality settings as well, so that probably slows things down a wee-bit too). Although I am sure not too many people do this... It will be interesting to see what my machine can do compared to you guys with BD-RB.

Also... a full movie to a BD-5 is pretty low on the bitrate side for 1080p. I am sure quality loss is noticeable if you have a properly claibrated TV to watch it on. However a BD-9 easily fits a near lossless (at least in terms of naked eye analysis) re-encode... I have lent my discs to friends and they could not believe it was not a Blu-Ray disc.

QB

ps. blusky, you never did answer my question regarding the AX-1200i and the H100i and if you have them linked

Thanks QBhd for your response. Well after I reecoded I could not tell original from BD-5. Looked pretty good to me but I am not an expert.

You asked me if I have the Ax-1200I and the H100i linked. I do have them linked but have not downloaded the software yet. From what I have read I have to turn off the the Motherboard temp sensors before I install the Corsair Link dashboard software.

[Mark_Venture]

Mark_Venture, no problem. Let me have your settings and I will try tomorrow and let you know.

Encoder settings = Normal Priority

Under the MODE pull down, three are checked...
"Quicker" encode for extras
Movie Only backup
Alternate Movie Only Output

On the Alt Movie-Only Output screen, I check "MKV Container, 1920x1080, Intact Audio" and Two Pass Target size (MB), I set to 8096.

And my setup screen is attached to this post...


If there is any way to test a single hard drive being the source (where BD is ripped to) as well as working path, in addition to your SSD setup, I'd appreciate it. Since my rig uses WD Black 1TB as both the source and working paths, I'm curious to understand the speed improvements your SSD might make over traditional HD, as well as newer CPU and video card over my 2009 vintage gear.

thank you!!

for comparison my rig is...
Intel Core i7-860 Lynnfield 2.8GHz 8MB L3 Cache LGA 1156 95W Quad-Core Processor
ASUS P7P55D Deluxe LGA 1156 Intel P55 ATX Motherboard
8 gig DDR3 - Qty2 of Corsair XMS3 CMX4GX3M2A1600C8
Antec Nine Hundred II case with Antec EarthWatts EA750 power supply
EVGA GeForce GTX 275 896-P3-1170-AR
QTY1 - 250Gb Samsung 840 SSD (OS)
Qty 1 - 1Tb Western Digital Black SATA (holds page file, Bluray rips, and BD-Rebuilder's work folder)
Qty 2 - 1Tb Western Digital Caviar GP SATA (WD10EADS and WD10EADS)
Qty 2 - 2Tb Western Digital Caviar GP SATA (WD20EARS and WD20EARX)
Lite-On SOHD-167T DVDrom
LG BH08LS20 BD-RW/DVD-RW

except for a few of the hard drives, its all from Sept 2009

[jdobbs]

Tomorrow I will do as Jdobbs said and try it with this setting:

MULTIPROCESS=4

I assume I just add it to the the "[Options]" area of the configuration file ??

Thanks RobertM Yep. Hidden options aren't there until you add them. You can open the config/INI from the FILE menu within BD-RB and just type it in and then save.

[QBhd]

blusky... just curious where you read you need to turn off the MB sensors. I am not saying it's wrong, just looking for knowledge since I own an H80i myself and any new PSU would be an i version from Corsair... I love Corsair PSU's

QB

[RobertM]

Hi Blusky,

I don't have 'Men in Black 3' for a direct comparison, but I recently did 'Escape from LA' which is similar in original size and play length. I re-ran it using the same settings as your latest MIB3 test. Here's what I got:


[04/27/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[23:35:36] Source: JC_ESCAPE_FROM_LA_00001
- Input BD size: 28.69 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:40:42.036]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=1 DTS=1 HD=0 Kbs=640
[23:35:39] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [23:35:39] Processing: VID_00001 (1 of 1)
- [23:35:39] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00001]
- [23:40:47] Reencoding video [VID_00001]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 144,864 frames
- Bitrate: 29,544 Kbs
- [23:40:47] Reencoding: VID_00001, Pass 1 of 1
- [00:15:07] Video Encode complete
- [00:15:07] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original core audio
[00:15:14]PHASE ONE complete
[00:15:14]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [00:15:14] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[00:21:21] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- Computer SHUTDOWN initiated.


The 4 main points of comparison are:


You Me
Extraction 2:51 4:52
Video encode 25:15 34:20
Rebuild 2:55 6:07
Total 31:01 45:45


The extraction and rebuild phases are largely influenced by the speed of storage devices, and here your SSD array is flying compared to my HDD array. Roughly twice as fast.

The encode phase is almost entirely governed by processor speed. You're running roughly 1/3 faster than my i7-950. My normal encodes are 'High quality, 2-pass', which take much longer than this 'good, 1-pass' test. So, for the type of encodes that I do, your faster processor would account for the majority of speed increases (maybe shave 1 hr off the job!!) while the SSD array would give a more modest improvement (5 or 6 minutes).

One funny thing that I noticed is that in my job it took about 7 seconds to 'think about' keeping the original core audio, while in your job it was virtually instantaneous. Not sure what that is about :/

[jdobbs]

Not that long ago I would have thought it to be a dream to do a complete reencode & rebuild in 46 mins. Remarkable.

[blusky]

Mark_Venture, as soon as I have second I will put in your settings and give it a try.

RobertM, those are some great times. It gives me hope , when this rig gets a little older it will still be useful for a while. Can only spend that kind of money maybe every 5 years.

Jdobbs,
I hope to give MULTIPROCESS=4 a try later today to see how it does in comparison to my first encode. From what I have read it will utilize the memory better since my Rig has 64GB of ram. On the second past the processor utilization was between 98 and 100%.
Yes the technology progresses at an incredible pace.


QBhd,
I obtained that info from one of the Techs at corsair, don't quote me on that had a lot of things going on that day. I will give them a call tomorrow before I setup the Corsair Link Dashboard Software and let you know.

[gonca]

Hello Blusky.

Good to see you have your system up and running. Nice one to start with. Next one you can approach with more comfort.
Give me a little time and I'll load a movie for comparison.
My system is similar to yours. I'll post my system specs if you want for a better comparison.

[blusky]

Mark_Venture,
In reference to this part of your post :
If there is any way to test a single hard drive being the source (where BD is ripped to) as well as working path, in addition to your SSD setup, I'd appreciate it. Since my rig uses WD Black 1TB as both the source and working paths, I'm curious to understand the speed improvements your SSD might make over traditional HD, as well as newer CPU and video card over my 2009 vintage gear.

I have my source folder on the Raid 0 SSD drive but I use Virtual CloneDrive to mount the ISO file. My setup has a Boot SSD for windows and other Apps , 2 SSD's in raid 0 config and WD 4TB drive for storage , which is where my working folder is located. Not sure I did that exactly as you wanted ??

Here is the logs with the settings you gave me:

----------------------
[04/28/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[13:09:06] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY/ALTERNATE OUTPUT mode enabled
- Mode: MKV Container, 1920x1080, Intact Audio
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[13:09:06] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [13:09:06] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [13:09:06] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [13:12:01] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 8,345 Kbs
- [13:12:01] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [13:31:58] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [13:52:17] Video Encode complete
- [13:52:17] Processing audio tracks
[13:52:17]PHASE ONE complete
[13:52:17]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [13:52:17] Building ALTERNATE OUTPUT Structure
[13:53:49] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[13:53:50] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


Looks like it took 44 minutes.
Hope that helps.

[gonca]

Hello Blusky

[Options]
VERSION=0.43.0.6
MULTIPROCESS=1
MODE=3
ENCODE_QUALITY=0
ONEPASS_ENCODING=2
AUTO_QUALITY=1
TARGET_SIZE=23500
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=eng;
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=0
RESIZE_1080=0
DEINTERLACE=1
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=1
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=0
AVCHD=1
REMOVE_WORKFILES=0
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=0
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=0
IVTC_PULLDOWN=0
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=0
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=1
OUTPUT_3D=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=1
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=1
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=23500
[Paths]
DGIndexNV=C:\Program Files (x86)\dgdecnv2044\DGIndexNV.exe
DGDecNV=C:\Program Files (x86)\dgdecnv2044\DGDecodeNV.dll
SOURCE_PATH=I:\MEN_IN_BLACK_3\
WORKING_PATH=W:\HD\


[04/28/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[13:47:41] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[13:47:41] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [13:47:41] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [13:47:41] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [13:50:40] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [13:50:40] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [14:11:00] Video Encode complete
- [14:11:00] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[14:11:00]PHASE ONE complete
[14:11:00]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [14:11:00] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[14:15:29] - Encode and Rebuild complete
[14:15:29] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


Quick comparison. If you want me to test any other settings just post your .ini and I'll be happy to run it.

CPU 60% or less, Time is about 28 minutes.

[blusky]

Ok here is the second reincode. The only thing different was adding MULTIPROCESS=4 to the INI file

here is the log:


[04/28/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[14:15:02] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 4.36 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[14:15:02] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [14:15:02] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [14:15:02] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [14:17:49] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 4,744 Kbs
- [14:17:49] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [14:44:31] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [15:41:30] Video Encode complete
- [15:41:30] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
[15:43:36]PHASE ONE complete
[15:43:36]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [15:43:36] Rebuilding AVCHD file Structure
[15:44:11] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[15:44:11] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.

took 1:29 minutes to reincode

Here is the log of the first reincode for comparison that did not have theMULTIPROCESS=4 in the ini file.

04/27/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[15:46:22] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 4.36 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[15:46:22] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [15:46:22] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [15:46:22] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [15:49:14] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 4,681 Kbs
- [15:49:14] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [16:14:21] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [17:07:13] Video Encode complete
- [17:07:13] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
[17:09:17]PHASE ONE complete
[17:09:17]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [17:09:17] Rebuilding AVCHD file Structure
[17:09:52] - Encode and Rebuild complete
[17:09:52] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


This one took 1:23

So it took 6 more minutes with the MULTIPROCESS=4 in the INI file. The Processor utilization was about the same for both about 85 to 90% on the first pass and about 100% utilization on the second pass. Memory was 4GB used on the first reincode and 5GB on the MULTIPROCESS=4 reincode.

[blusky]

Hello Blusky

[Options]
VERSION=0.43.0.6
MULTIPROCESS=1
MODE=3
ENCODE_QUALITY=0
ONEPASS_ENCODING=2
AUTO_QUALITY=1
TARGET_SIZE=23500
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=eng;
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=0
RESIZE_1080=0
DEINTERLACE=1
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=1
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=0
AVCHD=1
REMOVE_WORKFILES=0
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=0
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=0
IVTC_PULLDOWN=0
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=0
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=1
OUTPUT_3D=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=1
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=1
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=23500
[Paths]
DGIndexNV=C:\Program Files (x86)\dgdecnv2044\DGIndexNV.exe
DGDecNV=C:\Program Files (x86)\dgdecnv2044\DGDecodeNV.dll
SOURCE_PATH=I:\MEN_IN_BLACK_3\
WORKING_PATH=W:\HD\


[04/28/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[13:47:41] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[13:47:41] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [13:47:41] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [13:47:41] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [13:50:40] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [13:50:40] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [14:11:00] Video Encode complete
- [14:11:00] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[14:11:00]PHASE ONE complete
[14:11:00]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [14:11:00] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[14:15:29] - Encode and Rebuild complete
[14:15:29] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


Quick comparison. If you want me to test any other settings just post your .ini and I'll be happy to run it.

CPU 60% or less, Time is about 28 minutes.

Here is my Ini:[Options]
VERSION=0.43.0.6
MODE=3
ENCODE_QUALITY=2
ONEPASS_ENCODING=0
AUTO_QUALITY=1
TARGET_SIZE=4469
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=eng;
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=0
RESIZE_1080=0
DEINTERLACE=1
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=1
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=0
AVCHD=1
REMOVE_WORKFILES=1
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=0
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=0
IVTC_PULLDOWN=1
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=1
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=0
OUTPUT_3D=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=1
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=1
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=23500
PRIORITY_CLASS=1
QUICK_EXTRAS=1
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=0
ALTCRF=20
ALT_TARGET=8096
ALTMETHOD=2
ALTAUTOCROP=0
[Paths]
SOURCE_PATH=H:\
WORKING_PATH=E:\WORKING\
MULTIPROCESS=4


Thanks gonca.

[gonca]

The idea behind this, if you saw my previous post, is that we have, while not identical, very similar rigs. By using these comparisons you can maybe tweak out your performance a little.

[gonca]

Blusky, regarding MULTIPROCESS=4, try using 6 instead

PS When you added MULTIPROCESS=4 did you click on save, because I am not seeing 4 way split in your log. In other words, it looks like you are running without MULTIPROCESS=n set

[QBhd]

So I just tested multiprocess and while the idea is good, I don't think it works very well. I have an FX-8350 and the time it took to break up the source into 4 greatly slows the results. And I actually had a slower performance with multiprocess=4 compared to leaving out the setting (74 FPS compared to 76 FPS)

I did a BD25 test with a movie close in size to the one RobertM did (mine was 01:46:35.430, so a little longer)... and here are my results (no multiprocess set in ini):

----------------------
[04/28/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[15:39:36] Source: Test Encode
- Input BD size: 29.79 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:46:35.430]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=1 Kbs=640
[15:39:36] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [15:39:36] Processing: VID_00023 (1 of 1)
- [15:39:36] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00023]
- [15:43:04] Reencoding video [VID_00023]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 153,337 frames
- Bitrate: 24,570 Kbs
- [15:43:04] Reencoding: VID_00023, Pass 1 of 1
- [16:16:40] Video Encode complete
- [16:16:40] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[16:16:40]PHASE ONE complete
[16:16:40]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [16:16:40] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[16:19:50] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[16:19:50] JOB: Test Encode finished.

I will do the same file as a BD5 with blusky's ini to compare that as well :)

QB

[gonca]

QBhd
It does work well but the processor makes a difference in the result. I used to have a 1090t or 1100t,can't remember which, OCed th 4GHz which could not handle anything more than one instance of x264, it would just bog down. My present CPU, i7 3930K, can handle multiple instances quite well. If I use FFDshow for decoding I can get it to run with about 12 instances. Please note that MULTIPROCESS=n is not a linear relationship to time.

[Mark_Venture]

I have my source folder on the Raid 0 SSD drive but I use Virtual CloneDrive to mount the ISO file. My setup has a Boot SSD for windows and other Apps , 2 SSD's in raid 0 config and WD 4TB drive for storage , which is where my working folder is located. Not sure I did that exactly as you wanted ??So you rip your BD to ISO stored on the SSD (in Raid 0) and use Virtual CloneDrive to mount it, then your working folder for BD-Rebuilder is actually your WD 4TB drive?

For me, I rip to folder (instead of ISO) on my WD 1TB Black, and have the working folder on the same drive which is a bottle neck for me.

But at 44 min, its about 1/2 the time it takes me. That is a good gauge of what an upgrade could do for me. Time to start saving up.

Thank you for trying my settings and reporting back!!! I appreciate it!!

[RobertM]

So you rip your BD to ISO stored on the SSD (in Raid 0) and use Virtual CloneDrive to mount it, then your working folder for BD-Rebuilder is actually your WD 4TB drive?

I wonder if it would work better the other way around. Put the source on the 4TB drive and use the SSD array for the target. During the BD-Rebuilder process the first thing that happens is the extraction from the source to the working (target) drive. Then all the stuff happens on the working drive, I believe. So, it seems to me that it would be best to have the working drive as fast as possible.

So a good test, Blusky, would be to repeat one of your encodes, without changing any settings, but reverse the drives that you use and see if that makes any noticeable difference.

[gonca]

Blusky

RobertM might have hit the nail on the head. I compared your extract/ rebuild times to mine for MIB3 and your 4TB is presently your slow point. Using the raid as your working drive should shave a minute or two off your times.

[QBhd]

With the ridiculous speed of your SSD array you certainly should be do ALL work on it. In other words have the image file located on the array, and have the working directory also on the array. You will not have better read/write speeds using any other drives. It is what I do with my 4x500GB Caviar Black array, and that does not even come to the speed of your SSD's in RAID0.

Here is the latest test I did using your settings (no multiprocess):

----------------------
[04/28/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[16:45:50] Source: Test Encode
- Input BD size: 29.79 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:46:35.430]
- Target BD size: 4.36 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[16:45:50] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [16:45:50] Processing: VID_00023 (1 of 1)
- [16:45:50] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00023]
- [16:49:19] Reencoding video [VID_00023]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 153,337 frames
- Bitrate: 4,687 Kbs
- [16:49:19] Reencoding: VID_00023, Pass 1 of 2
- [17:24:05] Reencoding: VID_00023, Pass 2 of 2
- [18:37:49] Video Encode complete
- [18:37:49] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
[18:41:38]PHASE ONE complete
[18:41:38]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [18:41:38] Rebuilding AVCHD file Structure
[18:42:10] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[18:42:11] JOB: Test Encode finished.


Working Drive is a 4x500GB Caviar Black RAID0
CPU is an FX-8350 with zero tweaks for speed (4.0 GHz)
RAM is 8 GB @ 1866MHz with 7-10-8-27-1T timings

QB

[blusky]

QBhd
It does work well but the processor makes a difference in the result. I used to have a 1090t or 1100t,can't remember which, OCed th 4GHz which could not handle anything more than one instance of x264, it would just bog down. My present CPU, i7 3930K, can handle multiple instances quite well. If I use FFDshow for decoding I can get it to run with about 12 instances. Please note that MULTIPROCESS=n is not a linear relationship to time.

Thanks gonca,
I did check the Ini file and it does have MULTIPROCESS=4 at end of the options list.

I will give it a try as RobertM has suggested and switch working file to the raid 0 SSD's and the source file to the WD 4TB HDD and post back results.

Here is what I find interesting gonca. My Processor has a utilization on pass 1 averaging about 90%. on 2nd pas about 100%. This was before I changed the setting to MULTIPROCESS=4.
How can you be at 60% utilization and I be at 100%??

[RobertM]

How can you be at 60% utilization and I be at 100%??

The processor can only work with what it's given. If there a non-CPU bottleneck then the processor will be waiting for commands and will be less than 100% loaded. For instance, if you are doing a job that is easy for the processor but drive intensive, and you have a slow drive, then your processor will be lightly loaded (it could do more work, but the drive cannot feed it work fast enough). On the other hand, if you have a complex task for the processor, but one that doesn't depend on info from the drive, then the processor will likely be heavily loaded.

On my system, in a 2-pass high quality encode, pass 1 is usually 50 to 60% while pass 2 is almost 100%.

[QBhd]

blusky... just use your SSD RAID0 for ALL your work. You will not get better speeds by using a mechanical HDD in any step of the process. Your SSD array is sick fast and can easily handle reading and writing at the same time and still be 4-5 times faster than reading from an HDD.

QB

[gonca]

Thanks gonca,
I did check the Ini file and it does have MULTIPROCESS=4 at end of the options list.

I will give it a try as RobertM has suggested and switch working file to the raid 0 SSD's and the source file to the WD 4TB HDD and post back results.

Here is what I find interesting gonca. My Processor has a utilization on pass 1 averaging about 90%. on 2nd pas about 100%. This was before I changed the setting to MULTIPROCESS=4.
How can you be at 60% utilization and I be at 100%??

That was for the BD25 encode. If you post your ini file for the BD5 encode I'll run it and post the log for comparison.
Where the log says frame serving/ decoding Directshow it should have (4 way) if the multiprocess option was saved. It doesn't on your log.
Make sure you have indexing disabled on your ssd and, unless you a lot of searches on your hdd, on your 4TB.

[blusky]

That was for the BD25 encode. If you post your ini file for the BD5 encode I'll run it and post the log for comparison.
Where the log says frame serving/ decoding Directshow it should have (4 way) if the multiprocess option was saved. It doesn't on your log.
Make sure you have indexing disabled on your ssd and, unless you a lot of searches on your hdd, on your 4TB.

Thanks gonca for helping me tweak it out.

as for the multiprocess option I did as Jdobbs had suggested and Just added it to the config/ini file and saved it. I went and looked back in a previous post where I posted the ini file and it does show MULTIPROCESS=4 at the bottom of the ini.

Don't know why it is not working???

Ok here is the new reencode using the Source file located on the 4TB HDD and the Working folder located on the Raid 0 SSD's.

Log:
----------------------
[04/28/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[19:56:19] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 4.36 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[19:56:19] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [19:56:19] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [19:56:19] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [19:59:47] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 4,744 Kbs
- [19:59:47] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [20:24:52] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [21:17:52] Video Encode complete
- [21:17:52] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
[21:19:55]PHASE ONE complete
[21:19:55]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [21:19:55] Rebuilding AVCHD file Structure
[21:20:03] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[21:20:04] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


So looks like it took 1:24 minutes compared to the original encode which was 1:23

So it took one minute longer??

Tomorrow I will try both the source and working files on the Raid 0 array and see what that does.

I did not make a copy of the original encode .ini file but I believe these were the settings:

[Options]
VERSION=0.43.0.6
MODE=3
ENCODE_QUALITY=2
ONEPASS_ENCODING=0
AUTO_QUALITY=1
TARGET_SIZE=4469
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=eng;
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=0
RESIZE_1080=0
DEINTERLACE=1
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=1
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=0
AVCHD=1
REMOVE_WORKFILES=1
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=0
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=0
IVTC_PULLDOWN=1
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=1
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=0
OUTPUT_3D=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=1
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=1
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=23500
PRIORITY_CLASS=1
QUICK_EXTRAS=1
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=0
ALTCRF=20
ALT_TARGET=8096
ALTMETHOD=2
ALTAUTOCROP=0
[Paths]
SOURCE_PATH=H:\
WORKING_PATH=F:\WORKING\

Thanks gonca.

Oh , by the way I used a program called rea ltemp GT 3.70 and took a look at the core temps while at 100% cpu utilization . The average core temp was 56C. I was wondering if the H100i Liquid Cpu cooler was working well. On a side note I am getting this message on first startup of the day, "CPU Fan error! Press F1 to go into setup. Usually if I wait a few minutes and restart it will then go into windows. Sometimes I have had to restart 3 times to finally get it to boot into windows. I have checked my connections to the H100i and they are correct.
Tomorrow I will disable cpu fan sensor in bios and see what that does?? When I first start computer all fans go into high mode for about 10 seconds then they throttle down and when I start reincode they do throttle up again so I do believe the water cooler is working ok??

[gonca]

MULTIPROCESS isn't listed. Try it again and make sure to save it.

Also compare your extraction / encode /rebuild times as these relate to source drive /cpu /working drive.
Do you have antivirus running, write caching enabled etc.

[QBhd]

Write cache in Windows should NOT be enabled for a RAID array. At least that is the deal with AMD SB950 chipsets and I don't see it being different for Intel. The OS cache policy will interfere with the RAID's cache policies.

QB

[blusky]

MULTIPROCESS isn't listed. Try it again and make sure to save it.

Also compare your extraction / encode /rebuild times as these relate to source drive /cpu /working drive.
Do you have antivirus running, write caching enabled etc.

gonca, QBhd
will try it again MULTIPROCESS4 and see how it goes tomorrow.The only antivirus I have on is the one that comes with windows 8 which does not use much resources. I will look at the write cashe setting on the Raid 0.

Thanks.

,

[RobertM]

So looks like it took 1:24 minutes compared to the original encode which was 1:23

So it took one minute longer??


Not so fast, Hombre ;) Careful jumping to conclusions. Let's break this down...


Target HDD dT SSD dT
Start 15:46:22 19:56:19
Extract 15:46:22 0:02:52 19:56:19 0:03:28
Pass1 15:49:14 0:25:07 19:59:47 0:25:05
Pass2 16:14:21 0:52:52 20:24:52 0:53:00
Audio 17:07:13 0:02:04 21:17:52 0:02:03
Rebuild 17:09:17 0:00:35 21:19:55 0:00:08
Cleanup 17:09:52 0:00:00 21:20:03 0:00:01
Finish 17:09:52 1:23:30 21:20:04 1:23:45


First, the difference is actually 15 sec, not 1 minute, when you don't round off the seconds.

Your extract time has increased, since you are extracting from a slower drive. This is not unexpected.

Your re-encode times are virtually unchanged. Further proof that your processor, fast as it is, is the bottleneck here.

Your rebuild time has dropped from 35 sec to 8 sec. This is a substantial improvement, since you are writing to the SSD array.

It looks like the reason why you don't see an overall gain is that your test is a bit unbalanced. You've got the large job (extraction of 25GB) on the slow drive and a small job (4.36GB rebuild) on the fast drive. So you've got all the deficits but few gains. Try repeating this test, but rebuild to a 25GB target size, and see what happens.



When I first start computer all fans go into high mode for about 10 seconds then they throttle down and when I start reincode they do throttle up again so I do believe the water cooler is working ok??
Yep, that sounds like it's functioning as it should.

[blusky]

Thanks RobertM for breaking that down . Makes sense . I will do a comparison later today to a BD25 size and see how it does.

Will let you know.

[blusky]

Hello RobertM ,
Here is the log file for the BD25 encode and I will include the configini file so there is no confusion on my settings:

----------------------
[04/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[15:24:47] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[15:24:47] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [15:24:47] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [15:24:47] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [15:28:14] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [15:28:14] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [15:54:43] Video Encode complete
- [15:54:43] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[15:54:43]PHASE ONE complete
[15:54:43]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [15:54:43] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[15:55:11] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[15:55:12] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.



[Options]
VERSION=0.43.0.6
MODE=3
ENCODE_QUALITY=0
ONEPASS_ENCODING=2
AUTO_QUALITY=1
TARGET_SIZE=23500
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=eng;
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=0
RESIZE_1080=0
DEINTERLACE=1
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=1
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=0
AVCHD=1
REMOVE_WORKFILES=1
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=0
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=0
IVTC_PULLDOWN=1
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=1
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=0
OUTPUT_3D=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=1
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=1
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=23500
PRIORITY_CLASS=1
QUICK_EXTRAS=1
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=0
ALTCRF=20
ALT_TARGET=8096
ALTMETHOD=2
ALTAUTOCROP=0
[Paths]
SOURCE_PATH=H:\
WORKING_PATH=F:\WORKING\

I left the source folder and working folder in the same location as previous test. So it looks like it took 30:29 seconds to encode.

Next I will do the same encode but swap the Source file to the Raid 0 and the working file to the 4GB HDD and see what that does.

Thanks for your help.

[blusky]

Here is the same test but the source file is on the raid 0 and the working file is on the 4TB HDD.

----------------------
[04/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[16:18:25] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[16:18:25] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [16:18:25] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [16:18:25] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [16:21:08] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [16:21:08] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [16:48:42] Video Encode complete
- [16:48:42] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[16:48:42]PHASE ONE complete
[16:48:42]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [16:48:42] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[16:51:34] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[16:51:35] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.

So looks like it took 33:10 seconds. So looks like the source file on the 4TB HDD and the working folder on the Raid 0 was faster 33:10 - 30:29=2:41. interesting.

For the Final test I will put the folders back to original since it was faster, Source folder on the 4TB HDD and the Working folder on the Raid 0 and I will add MULTIPROCESS=4
in the confi.ini folder and see if that works better.

Here is the final test. The Source folder on the 4TB HDD and the Working folder on the Raid 0 and I will add MULTIPROCESS=4

here is the log:

----------------------
[04/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[17:14:30] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[17:14:30] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [17:14:30] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [17:14:30] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [17:18:04] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [17:18:04] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [17:45:42] Video Encode complete
- [17:45:42] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[17:45:42]PHASE ONE complete
[17:45:42]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [17:45:42] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[17:46:10] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[17:46:11] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.

This time it took 31:41

Can anyone please verify that the MULTIPROCCESS=4 is working?? Here is the Config.ini file::


[Options]
VERSION=0.43.0.6
MODE=3
ENCODE_QUALITY=0
ONEPASS_ENCODING=2
AUTO_QUALITY=1
TARGET_SIZE=23500
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=eng;
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=0
RESIZE_1080=0
DEINTERLACE=1
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=1
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=0
AVCHD=1
REMOVE_WORKFILES=1
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=0
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=0
IVTC_PULLDOWN=1
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=1
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=0
OUTPUT_3D=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=1
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=1
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=23500
PRIORITY_CLASS=1
QUICK_EXTRAS=1
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=0
ALTCRF=20
ALT_TARGET=8096
ALTMETHOD=2
ALTAUTOCROP=0
[Paths]
SOURCE_PATH=H:\
WORKING_PATH=F:\WORKING\
MULTIPROCESS=4

[gonca]

Hello Blusky
Sorry I took so long to respond but I just got home from work.
First, antivirus may be checking every new file, slowing it down.
Second, for clarity of comparison here are some of my specs
SOURCE DRIVE Vertex Plus SSD SATA 2
WORKING DRIVE Vertex Plus SSD SATA 2
CPU i7 3930K @4.4GHZ
COOLER H100
VIDEO GTX680 with DGDecNV for frame serving / decoding.
I use hwmonitor for temps, mine are at mid 60's Celsius on balanced, so yours are about right, and they look darn good.

I ran a encode withe DGDecNV and your settings for BD5 so you can judge your times.
Pass 1 cpu> 45 to 50%
Pass 2 cpu>100%

[04/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[16:39:36] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 4.36 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[16:39:36] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [16:39:36] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [16:39:36] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [16:42:36] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 4,744 Kbs
- [16:42:36] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [17:02:56] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [17:42:35] Video Encode complete
- [17:42:35] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
[17:44:20]PHASE ONE complete
[17:44:20]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [17:44:20] Rebuilding AVCHD file Structure
[17:44:42] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[17:44:42] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.

Time for encode 1:05:06

I am running an encode with Directshow right now for a closer analysis of your settings.

[blusky]

Hello Blusky
Sorry I took so long to respond but I just got home from work.
First, antivirus may be checking every new file, slowing it down.
Second, for clarity of comparison here are some of my specs
SOURCE DRIVE Vertex Plus SSD SATA 2
WORKING DRIVE Vertex Plus SSD SATA 2
CPU i7 3930K @4.4GHZ
COOLER H100
VIDEO GTX680 with DGDecNV for frame serving / decoding.
I use hwmonitor for temps, mine are at mid 60's Celsius on balanced, so yours are about right, and they look darn good.

I ran a encode withe DGDecNV and your settings for BD5 so you can judge your times.
Pass 1 cpu> 45 to 50%
Pass 2 cpu>100%

[04/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[16:39:36] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 4.36 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[16:39:36] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [16:39:36] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [16:39:36] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [16:42:36] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 4,744 Kbs
- [16:42:36] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [17:02:56] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [17:42:35] Video Encode complete
- [17:42:35] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
[17:44:20]PHASE ONE complete
[17:44:20]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [17:44:20] Rebuilding AVCHD file Structure
[17:44:42] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[17:44:42] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.

Time for encode 1:05:06

I am running an encode with Directshow right now for a closer analysis of your settings.

Wow, Gonca that is a really good time. Thanks, I would be interested on how it does with directshow.
Do you know the settings I have to change in Bd Rebuilder so I can get better quality encodes.

In post # 104 I did a reincode to a BD25 using the MULTIPROCESS=4 in the Config.ini file. Can you please take a look at post 104 and see if you can confirm that indeed MULTIPROCESS=4 was working??

Thanks Gonca.

[gonca]

Blusky, this is the directshow encode

[04/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[17:56:19] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 4.36 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[17:56:19] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [17:56:19] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [17:56:19] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [17:57:59] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 4,744 Kbs
- [17:57:59] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [18:20:52] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [19:06:01] Video Encode complete
- [19:06:01] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
[19:07:47]PHASE ONE complete
[19:07:47]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [19:07:47] Rebuilding AVCHD file Structure
[19:08:09] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[19:08:10] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


1:12 approximately

[Options]
VERSION=0.43.0.6
MODE=3
MULTIPROCESS=1
ENCODE_QUALITY=2
ONEPASS_ENCODING=0
AUTO_QUALITY=1
TARGET_SIZE=4469
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=eng;
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=0
RESIZE_1080=0
DEINTERLACE=1
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=1
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=0
AVCHD=1
REMOVE_WORKFILES=1
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=0
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=0
IVTC_PULLDOWN=1
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=1
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=0
OUTPUT_3D=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=1
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=1
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=23500
PRIORITY_CLASS=1
QUICK_EXTRAS=1
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=0
ALTCRF=20
ALT_TARGET=8096
ALTMETHOD=2
ALTAUTOCROP=0
[Paths]
SOURCE_PATH=I:\MEN_IN_BLACK_3\
WORKING_PATH=W:\HD\

DGIndexNV=C:\Program Files (x86)\dgdecnv2044\DGIndexNV.exe
DGDecNV=C:\Program Files (x86)\dgdecnv2044\DGDecodeNV.dll

[gonca]

According to post #104 you are not running multiprocess=4

Try this *.ini. It is basically the one you posted except for the MULTIPROCESS and the source and working paths. Change these two paths to suit your system and give it a try. Please remember that our two systems are similar, but not identical.

[Options]
VERSION=0.43.0.6
MODE=3
MULTIPROCESS=1
ENCODE_QUALITY=2
ONEPASS_ENCODING=0
AUTO_QUALITY=1
TARGET_SIZE=4469
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=eng;
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=0
RESIZE_1080=0
DEINTERLACE=1
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=1
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=0
AVCHD=1
REMOVE_WORKFILES=1
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=0
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=0
IVTC_PULLDOWN=1
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=1
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=0
OUTPUT_3D=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=1
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=1
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=23500
PRIORITY_CLASS=1
QUICK_EXTRAS=1
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=0
ALTCRF=20
ALT_TARGET=8096
ALTMETHOD=2
ALTAUTOCROP=0
[Paths]
SOURCE_PATH=I:\MEN_IN_BLACK_3\
WORKING_PATH=W:\HD\

[gonca]

Blusky
I just took a closer look at your ini file in post 104.
Move the MULTIPROCESS=4 line above the [Paths] line. Your outside of the options section and so that setting is being ignored.

[QBhd]

Also I strongly suggest you forgoe using your HDD during any step of the process. Your SSD RAID array is stupid fast and should be used as both the source and the working drive. And yes you had the Multiprocess option in the wrong place as gonca has said.

QB

[blusky]

Thanks Gonca and QBhd for the help. Ok , now I see where my error is in placing the MULTIPROCESS=4 in the Ini. Thanks will fix that. Thanks for running the encode . Now I have a benchmark to see a similar system like mine.
I will run it again with the MULTIPROCESS=4 in the Ini and then put both the Source and working folders on the Raid 0 and see how that does. Will ,post back. thanks.

[blusky]

This test the Source folder stayed the same on the 4TB HDD and the Working folder was on the Raid 0 SSD's. I did see this time in Task manager 4 instances off H264 running using approx. a total of 8.2GB of memory.

What I am thinking, since I have 64GB of memory, I could even try maybe MULTIPROCESS=8 and see how much memory that uses and adjust accordingly.
I am not sure if I can assume since MULTIPROCESS=4 used 8.2GB of memory then MULTIPROCESS=8 will use approx. 16.4GB??
here is the log file:

----------------------
[04/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[20:28:34] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[20:28:34] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [20:28:34] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [20:28:34] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [20:32:06] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [20:32:06] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [21:02:18] Video Encode complete
- [21:02:18] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[21:02:18]PHASE ONE complete
[21:02:18]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [21:02:18] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[21:08:09] - Aborted per user request

I had forgotten to delete the reincode from previous run that's why it said aborted per user request.

[gonca]

blusky
Change your MULTIPROCESS to 1. This makes it automatic, however you should still see a four way split. If on your normal settings the cpu gets maxed out then increasing the number could actually slow it down. You asked about increasing the quality, try High 2 pass

[blusky]

blusky
Change your MULTIPROCESS to 1. This makes it automatic, however you should still see a four way split. If on your normal settings the cpu gets maxed out then increasing the number could actually slow it down. You asked about increasing the quality, try High 2 pass

Thanks Gonca for all your help. Before I reads your post I did a multiprocess=12 to see if the memory use is linear and it looks like it is. This time I used 16.6GB memory(26%) but the processor was at 100% utilization.

Here is the log:

----------------------
[04/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[21:33:55] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow [12-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[21:33:55] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [21:33:55] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [21:33:55] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [21:34:34] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [21:34:34] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [22:05:04] Video Encode complete
- [22:05:04] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[22:05:04]PHASE ONE complete
[22:05:04]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [22:05:04] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[22:05:32] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[22:05:34] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.
----------------------


This one took 31:05


The last test for the night will be a MULTIPROCESS=1

I use clone drive to mount the .iso file onto a virtual drive H, so I am not sure how to use both Source and working file from the raid 0 ssd's??

[blusky]

her is the test with MULTIPROCESS=1

----------------------
[04/29/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[22:17:00] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[22:17:00] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [22:17:00] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [22:17:00] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [22:17:42] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [22:17:42] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [22:48:11] Video Encode complete
- [22:48:11] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[22:48:11]PHASE ONE complete
[22:48:11]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [22:48:11] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[22:48:39] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[22:48:40] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


This one took 31:48 to encode. Looks like the MULTIPROCESS=12 was a little faster at 31:05

[QBhd]

When mounting an image it is actually read from the drive the image is located on. Even though it is from a virtual drive the actual image file location is where the information is read from. So just make sure your image is located on the SSD RAID array, mount it and set your working folder also on the SSD RAID array. Basically all your work should be done on the SSD RAID. Rip to the RAID, mount the image from the RAID and output your encodes to the RAID. Your array has more than enough speed to read and write at the same time and still be many times faster than my 4 x Caviar Black RAID. If you want a simple test. Take any single large file on your SSD RAID (mkv, m2ts, etc etc) and copy it in the same location (it will read and write at the same time) Like this:

http://i.imgur.com/vY0WaTh.png

This will give a real world benchmark of your system's performance for working on the same drive

BTW, the above image is my 4x500GB Caviar Black RAID0 short stroked at 4 x 80.74GB or 300GB Drive size:

http://i.imgur.com/PzwpPfB.png

Not saying you should Short Stroke SSD's (I don't think it would be a boost and may actually be harmful)... it is information for others who may be reading this with HDD's in RAID0

QB

[RobertM]

Blusky,

Your tests confirm that your SSD array is significantly faster at both the extraction and the rebuild phases - but it really shines during the final, rebuilding stage. The best workflow depends on the relative sizes of the source material to the target material, but it looks to be the following:

BD25 Backup: HDD>SSD
BD5 Backup: SSD>HDD
BD9 Backup: probably HDD>SSD

There was discussion about using the SSD for both source and target, but I didn't notice that scenario in the log reports.

You just need to decide what type of backups you'll do most often and set up BDRebuilder for that case.


BTW,... remember one of your original posts:
Reason , I am way overdue on building a computer. Still using a 2004 Old Dell demensions XPS computer and it took 28 hours to encode.

28 hours to approx 30 min!! You've come a long way, Buddy :)

[blusky]

Blusky,

Your tests confirm that your SSD array is significantly faster at both the extraction and the rebuild phases - but it really shines during the final, rebuilding stage. The best workflow depends on the relative sizes of the source material to the target material, but it looks to be the following:

BD25 Backup: HDD>SSD
BD5 Backup: SSD>HDD
BD9 Backup: probably HDD>SSD

There was discussion about using the SSD for both source and target, but I didn't notice that scenario in the log reports.

You just need to decide what type of backups you'll do most often and set up BDRebuilder for that case.


BTW,... remember one of your original posts:


28 hours to approx 30 min!! You've come a long way, Buddy :)

Thanks RobertM for your help. Yes we have come a long way.
I am pretty happy with both the performance of my rig and how well BD Rebuilder works thanks to Jdobbs. With my older computer I did have some issues but that was because it was old and probably had a lot of old codecs in it that caused conflicts.
I will keep this rig as mainly a Rebuilder rig as to avoid that issue in the future.
Thanks goes to QBhd for the explanation on how the Virtual clone drive works. So later on today I will put both Source and working on the Raid 0 SSD's and see how that works.

Interesting enough the MULTIPROCESS=12 seemed to work the best. Just for grins it did work up to MULTIPROCESS=16 but the times began to slow down. Above that I did get this error: ffdshow vc-1 set incorrectly 0. I am sure it is just to many H264 processes running and the processor cannot handle it??
Does not really matter since the times were slower but I like to put in all the details in case it may help others in the future.

Will post results of both source and working folders on Raid 0 SSD's.
Next I need to find an explanation of all the option settings that there are so I can set up BD Rebuilder to give the best quality rein code.

Thanks

[QBhd]

At best an HDD can read OR write at 120 MB/s. When it comes to extracting/rebuilding this will be the biggest bottleneck if it is used in any step in your workflow (rip>extraction>encode>rebuild). Your SSD RAID is easily 4-5 times this speed if not more. Like I mentioned above just do some simple copy tests with a large file (m2ts, ts, mkv, etc etc). Copy to the HDD from RAID, copy to the RAID from HDD and copy to the RAID from the RAID... compare the results. I have zero doubt that the final test will be insanely fast.

QB

[RobertM]

I have zero doubt that the final test will be insanely fast.

Parts of it. But the encode time is still limited by the processor, so that will not likely change. I'm guessing that he'll shave a minute or so off the total; not a huge difference, but real time savings, to be sure.

The other thing Blusky will want to consider is where does he want the final result to sit. If he's going to burn the backup right away and clean off the working files then the SDD is fine for both source and target. But if he takes a while to get around to burning them then the SDD will prove to be too small. The extra step (moving the file from SDD to HDD), plus the time involved, may make some of the extreme speed gains moot.

[blusky]

Ok RobertM and QBhd,

Here is the Log for both the Source and Working folder on the Raid 0 SSD's.

----------------------
[04/30/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[13:16:12] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow [12-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[13:16:12] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [13:16:12] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [13:16:12] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [13:17:40] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [13:17:40] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [13:49:45] Video Encode complete
- [13:49:45] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[13:49:45]PHASE ONE complete
[13:49:45]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [13:49:45] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[13:50:14] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[13:50:15] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


This one took 34:03 but I set the Multiprocess=12. Can"t understand why it took longer?? The original multiprocess=12 with the Source on the 4TB HDD and the Working on the Raid 0SSD's had a time of 31:05??

I will try one more time with the same setup but Multiprocess=1 and see.
I will try this again and set multiprocess=1 and then we can have a good comparison.

[jdobbs]

Ok RobertM and QBhd,

Here is the Log for both the Source and Working folder on the Raid 0 SSD's.

----------------------
[04/30/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[13:16:12] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow [12-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[13:16:12] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [13:16:12] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [13:16:12] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [13:17:40] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [13:17:40] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [13:49:45] Video Encode complete
- [13:49:45] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[13:49:45]PHASE ONE complete
[13:49:45]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [13:49:45] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[13:50:14] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[13:50:15] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


This one took 34:03 but I set the Multiprocess=12. Can"t understand why it took longer?? The original multiprocess=12 with the Source on the 4TB HDD and the Working on the Raid 0SSD's had a time of 31:05??

I will try one more time with the same setup but Multiprocess=1 and see.
I will try this again and set multiprocess=1 and then we can have a good comparison.Lots of things impact it. With as much memory as you have, I'm wouldn't be surprised if you ran it two times in a row the second run would be faster -- because the entire disc could be kept in cache.

[blusky]

Lots of things impact it. With as much memory as you have, I'm wouldn't be surprised if you ran it two times in a row the second run would be faster -- because the entire disc could be kept in cache.

Thanks Jdobbs for the info. Yes, there a lot of variables like you said. Trying to figure out what MULTIPROCESS works best for my system. The memory use seemed to be linear so I could calculate approximate memory use at a certain number. The highest I was able to go was 16. After that I did get an error message but I am pretty sure it's the processor that can't handle it.

[jdobbs]

Thanks Jdobbs for the info. Yes, there a lot of variables like you said. Trying to figure out what MULTIPROCESS works best for my system. The memory use seemed to be linear so I could calculate approximate memory use at a certain number. The highest I was able to go was 16. After that I did get an error message but I am pretty sure it's the processor that can't handle it.Do you have a CUDA enabled nVidia video card (your first post mentioned the GTX680)? If so, you could also see speed improvements with DGDecNV. MULTIPROCESS also works faster with it (because the file splitting isn't necessary).

[blusky]

here is the last test. Multiprocess=1

Log
----------------------
[04/30/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[14:18:09] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Auto Quality: Good (Very Fast), ABR
- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[14:18:09] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [14:18:09] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [14:18:09] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [14:18:48] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [14:18:48] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 1
- [14:51:41] Video Encode complete
- [14:51:41] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[14:51:41]PHASE ONE complete
[14:51:41]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [14:51:41] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[14:52:09] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[14:52:10] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.

This one took 34:01 and the last one with Multiprocess=1 was
31:48 Interesting.....

[Ch3vr0n]

how can multiprocess work faster with DGDecNV if the filesplitting isn't necessairy? Isn't multiprocess exactly the thing that splits the stream by running multi-x264 instances.

[blusky]

Quick question... do you have the AX1200i and the H100i connected? As an owner of an H80i I have always been curious what the Corsair Link software shows in that situation

QB

ps... it's just QB (couldn't just use QB as a username so I came up with QBhd)

QBhd,
Yes I do have the AX-12300i power supply and the H100i water cooler. Yesterday I downloaded the latest Corsair Link Software and installed it. here is what it looks like:

http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a605/blusky1980/Screenshot10_zps4423d881.png (http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/blusky1980/media/Screenshot10_zps4423d881.png.html)


http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a605/blusky1980/Screenshot11_zpsc14af93a.png (http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/blusky1980/media/Screenshot11_zpsc14af93a.png.html)

Interesting Proggy. Tells you all temps and fan speeds. You can change the color of the Led on the pump to signify temp. I have it sait to white= cool Blue= warm and Red= hot. So it will change according to temp. Can control fan speeds and other good uses.

I was going to install the Asus Ai suit II but have heard a lot of of peeps have had issues with it so I will wait a little.

Hope this helps.

[blusky]

how can multiprocess work faster with DGDecNV if the filesplitting isn't necessairy? Isn't multiprocess exactly the thing that splits the stream by running multi-x264 instances.

Sorry ch3vr0n. Just saw your post after I posted above. I cannot answer that question but hope others that can will.

[blusky]

Do you have a CUDA enabled nVidia video card (your first post mentioned the GTX680)? If so, you could also see speed improvements with DGDecNV. MULTIPROCESS also works faster with it (because the file splitting isn't necessary).

Yes Jdobbs, I do have an Nvidea GEFORCE GTX 680 GPU.
I have found an old post of yours on how to install it, just waiting on the License.

Thanks

[QBhd]

blusky... thanks for sharing the images of the Corsair Link. If and when my PSU dies (although that may still be a long time away, LOL it is a Corsair HX750) I will certainly be getting an i version. I have my H80i colors set to go from blue>green>red depending on temps... pretty cool little feature :)

QB

[jdobbs]

how can multiprocess work faster with DGDecNV if the filesplitting isn't necessairy? Isn't multiprocess exactly the thing that splits the stream by running multi-x264 instances. To do it with DirectshowSource you can't simply seek by frame number -- because DirectshowSource isn't frame accurate. So BD-RB has to break up the file into smaller parts that are aligned on true breaks based upon what is listed in the EPMAP. With DGDecNV all I have to do is provide each X264 instance with a "--seek" command line option to point to the correct frame and each instance can read simultaneously from the original source.

Having written the code that does all this, I would have thought my saying so would have been enough.

[Ch3vr0n]

Oh i wasn't questioning you mate, just wondering how it works. So basically having DGDecNV & multiprocess enabled would be the fastest way of processing on "any" system?

[jdobbs]

Oh i wasn't questioning you mate, just wondering how it works. So basically having DGDecNV & multiprocess enabled would be the fastest way of processing on "any" system? Yes. The indexing associated with DGDecNV would theoretically increase time -- but I set it up so it happens concurrently with the audio extraction. That way it adds virtually no time (because they are both accessing the same source -- and the physical reads are cached).

[Ch3vr0n]

Sweet, thx for enlightening me.

[blusky]

Yes. The indexing associated with DGDecNV would theoretically increase time -- but I set it up so it happens concurrently with the audio extraction. That way it adds virtually no time (because they are both accessing the same source -- and the physical reads are cached).

Thanks Jdobbs for the explanation. Trying to get a better understanding of the process.
I did get the license for DGDecNV. Just want to make sure I use the correct one.

Should I use the 64 Bit version of DGIndexNV.EXE and DGDecodeNV.dll.??
I am using Windows 8 64bit.

[gonca]

Blusky
I think you should stick with the 32 bit version

[blusky]

Blusky
I think you should stick with the 32 bit version
Ok , great will use the 32 bit version. Thanks Gonca. Can't test it out till Friday, work got in the way.

[jdobbs]

Blusky
I think you should stick with the 32 bit versionDefinitely.

[blusky]

Definitely.

Thanks Jdobbs.

will use the 32bit version.

Appreciate your help.:thanks:

[blusky]

Here is another test using BD25, High Quality pass 2 , Multiprocess=1 and using Decoding/Frame serving: Dgdecnv2045. I do have an Invidea GEFORCE GTX 680 Vpu. Both the Source and Working folder on the Raid 0 array. Same movie Men in Black 3.
Here is the log:
----------------------
[05/03/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[14:05:01] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[14:05:01] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [14:05:01] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [14:05:01] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [14:08:14] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [14:08:14] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [14:30:18] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [16:09:02] Video Encode complete
- [16:09:02] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[16:09:02]PHASE ONE complete
[16:09:02]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [16:09:02] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[16:09:31] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[16:09:32] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


This what I have observed. Both in pass 1 and pass 2 the processor was utilized at 100%. I did see 4x H264 and each used about 25% of the processor utilization. On pass 1 the GPU was utilized about 90%. Pass 2 was about 6%.

My question is this. Since the processor is being utilized at 100% in both pass 1 and 2 am I getting any benefit by using Multiprocess=1??

Here is a screen shot of pass 2 using GPU-Z. Unfortunately I did not get a screen shot of pass 1 that was using more GPU utilization as I thought pass 2 would use more GPU utilization.

http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a605/blusky1980/Screenshot15_zpsd92e2793.png (http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/blusky1980/media/Screenshot15_zpsd92e2793.png.html)

Here are my BD Rebuilder settings:

http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a605/blusky1980/Screenshot13_zps44de1344.png (http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/blusky1980/media/Screenshot13_zps44de1344.png.html)

[jdobbs]

The goal of MULTIPROCESS is to get your processors to 100%, that's when you are using all horsepower available. After you've hit 100% there is no benefit in going higher. At some point there will also be diminishing returns.

Also, a quote from Neuron2:DGDecNV uses the PureVideo engine, not the GPU cores, for decoding.

[blusky]

The goal of MULTIPROCESS is to get your processors to 100%, that's when you are using all horsepower available. After you've hit 100% there is no benefit in going higher. At some point there will also be diminishing returns.

Ok, Thanks jdobbs, I will give it another try same settings except remove Multiprocess. I am curious about my CPU utilization to see if it differs.

Thanks.

[jdobbs]

Ok, Thanks jdobbs, I will give it another try same settings except remove Multiprocess. I am curious about my CPU utilization to see if it differs.

Thanks.Also, note my edit to my last post... the GPU isn't being used by DGDecNV.

Another note: It's common for Pass 2 to use more CPU than Pass 1. You want to get to a point at which you are using 100% on both passes.

[blusky]

Also, note my edit to my last post... the GPU isn't being used by DGDecNV.

Another note: It's common for Pass 2 to use more CPU than Pass 1. You want to get to a point at which you are using 100% on both passes.

Ok, Thanks Jdobbs. That is what I was looking for. I am running the second test now with the no Multiprocess and I ran a CPU usage of about 82% to 95% on the 1st pass. 100% on the 2nd pass.
Multiprocess=1 gave me 100% on both passes so There is the setting I was looking for. Only used about 4GB of memory in Multiprocess=1

This is the part that I was missing[QUOTE]
a quote from Neuron2:
Quote:
DGDecNV uses the PureVideo engine, not the GPU cores, for decoding.



I will post the no Multiprocess reincode for comparison. Its almost done.
By the way I did the test that QBhd had suggested by copying a large file from Raid 0 to raid 0, Raid 0 to HDD and HDD to raid 0. The raid 0 to raid 0 was by far the speed winner with a transfer rate of 500MB's. So what I will do once the encode is complete I will burn to disk and deleted contents of working file.

Thanks for helping me understand it all. I still have a lot to learn.

Thanks Jdobbs:cool:

[blusky]

Here is a test using BD25, High Quality pass 2 , Multiprocess=1 and using Decoding/Frame serving: Dgdecnv2045. Both the Source and Working folder on the Raid 0 array. Same movie Men in Black 3.
Here is the log:
[14:05:01] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[14:05:01] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [14:05:01] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [14:05:01] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800] - [14:08:14] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs - [14:08:14] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [14:30:18] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2 -
[16:09:02] Video Encode complete - [16:09:02] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio [16:09:02]PHASE ONE complete [16:09:02]PHASE TWO
- Rebuild Started - [16:09:02] Rebuilding BD file Structure [16:09:31]
- Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed. [16:09:32] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished]

Here is the no multiprocess:
[05/03/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[17:52:40] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[17:52:40] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [17:52:40] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [17:52:40] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [17:55:53] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [17:55:53] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [18:19:57] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [19:54:58] Video Encode complete
- [19:54:58] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[19:54:58]PHASE ONE complete
[19:54:58]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [19:54:58] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[19:55:27] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[19:55:28] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.



Interesting enough the no Multiprocess total time was 2:02 48 and the Multiprocess=1 was 2:04 31.

The no multiprocess was faster by 1 min. 42 seconds.

I would have thought that the Multiprocess=1 would have been faster??

The Multiprocess=1 did max out the CPU at 100% in pass 1 and pass 2.

[jdobbs]

So would I. Lots of variables. Cache, maybe, but it doesn't look like it? I think the only way to truly be sure is to reboot your machine between the two encodes.

Interesting that pass 1 was faster in the MULTIPROCESS encode, but MULTIPROCESS was slower in pass 2. Hmmm...

[QBhd]

I have done many test with multi process encoding using MeGUI. There is usually a loss of time when doing 2 encodes at the same time during the second pass. The reason for this is that the 2nd pass almost always uses 100%. So if you do two processes at the same time there is greater chance of saturation and a loss of efficiency. The way I figured this out was encoding episodes of TV... many smaller runs. I would queue up all the encodes and then run two workers. All the 1st passes I would split between the two workers (thus using 100% CPU for first pass) but ALL the 2nd passes would run on the same worker one after the other (again using 100% CPU). This would shave a lot of time during the 1st passes. Going to 3 workers for the 1st passes did not work well since like the 2nd passes the CPU was already at 100% and times would suffer. I think your attempts at multiprocess greatly improve the times of the first pass, but kill the times of the second pass and as such the overall time is either the same or worse. From my experiments, two processes for the 1st pass and one process for the second pass is the best way to boost encoding times. Now the question is, how do you achieve this with just One source file (my testing involved multiple files). I think it is do-able, but I will leave that up to the developer to say if it is or isn't :)

QB

[blusky]

I have done many test with multi process encoding using MeGUI. There is usually a loss of time when doing 2 encodes at the same time during the second pass. The reason for this is that the 2nd pass almost always uses 100%. So if you do two processes at the same time there is greater chance of saturation and a loss of efficiency. The way I figured this out was encoding episodes of TV... many smaller runs. I would queue up all the encodes and then run two workers. All the 1st passes I would split between the two workers (thus using 100% CPU for first pass) but ALL the 2nd passes would run on the same worker one after the other (again using 100% CPU). This would shave a lot of time during the 1st passes. Going to 3 workers for the 1st passes did not work well since like the 2nd passes the CPU was already at 100% and times would suffer. I think your attempts at multiprocess greatly improve the times of the first pass, but kill the times of the second pass and as such the overall time is either the same or worse. From my experiments, two processes for the 1st pass and one process for the second pass is the best way to boost encoding times. Now the question is, how do you achieve this with just One source file (my testing involved multiple files). I think it is do-able, but I will leave that up to the developer to say if it is or isn't :)

QB

Thanks for the info QBhd,
I could not figure out why it was slower in Multiprocess=1 than in no multiprocess.

[blusky]

So would I. Lots of variables. Cache, maybe, but it doesn't look like it? I think the only way to truly be sure is to reboot your machine between the two encodes.

Interesting that pass 1 was faster in the MULTIPROCESS encode, but MULTIPROCESS was slower in pass 2. Hmmm...

Thanks jdobbs, I was thinking that myself that it may be the Cache. I will try again and reboot between the encodes and see what that does.

[jdobbs]

Thanks jdobbs, I was thinking that myself that it may be the Cache. I will try again and reboot between the encodes and see what that does.It could be that your SSD drives are so fast that you hit the point of diminishing returns very early. You could also try MULTIPROCESS=2 and MULTIPROCESS=3. But, frankly, you're already to a point where the overall differences are very small.

[Groucho2004]

Also, note my edit to my last post... the GPU isn't being used by DGDecNV.
That's not entirely true. By default, DGDecodeNV uses CUDA (which uses the GPU) for MPEG-2 decoding.

[jdobbs]

That's not entirely true. By default, DGDecodeNV uses CUDA (which uses the GPU) for MPEG-2 decoding. I would not pretend to be an expert in how CUDA works, but I think Neuron2 is (he wrote DGDecNV) and I was simply quoting him from this post (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1595435#post1595435).

[Groucho2004]

I would not pretend to be an expert in how CUDA works, but I think Neuron2 is (he wrote DGDecNV) and I was simply quoting him from this post (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1595435#post1595435).
For reference, here are a couple of screen shots showing how the graphics card is utilized with the 2 different decoding modes (MPEG-2 HD stream):

Cuda:
http://s22.postimg.org/stqmldlap/cuda.gif (http://postimage.org/)

CuVid:
http://s18.postimg.org/dasevyzih/cuvid.gif (http://postimage.org/)

[blusky]

Her is the Comparison of No Multiprocess and Multiprocess=1 with a reboot after each encode to clear cache.

No Multiprocess


[05/04/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[11:58:04] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[11:58:04] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [11:58:04] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [11:58:04] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [12:01:16] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [12:01:16] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [12:26:28] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [14:08:22] Video Encode complete
- [14:08:22] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[14:08:22]PHASE ONE complete
[14:08:22]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [14:08:22] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[14:08:51] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[14:08:52] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.



Here is MULTIPROCESS=1

----------------------
[05/04/13] BD Rebuilder v0.43.06 (beta)
[14:27:38] Source: MEN_IN_BLACK_3_00800
- Input BD size: 26.88 GB
- Approximate total content: [01:45:50.385]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.2 [9200]
- MOVIE-ONLY mode enabled
- Quality: High Quality (Default), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [4-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640
[14:27:38] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [14:27:38] Processing: VID_00800 (1 of 1)
- [14:27:38] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00800]
- [14:30:57] Reencoding video [VID_00800]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 152,257 frames
- Bitrate: 27,186 Kbs
- [14:30:57] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 1 of 2
- [14:52:22] Reencoding: VID_00800, Pass 2 of 2
- [16:25:23] Video Encode complete
- [16:25:23] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
[16:25:23]PHASE ONE complete
[16:25:23]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [16:25:23] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[16:25:53] - Encode and Rebuild complete
- WORKFILES folder removed.
[16:25:54] JOB: MEN_IN_BLACK_3 finished.


Here are the results: the No Multiprocess took 2:10 48sec.
The Multiprocess=1 took 1:58:16

The Multiprocess=1 encode was faster by 12: 32 sec.

Looks like clearing the cache did have a measurable effect on the time.

Tomorrow , just for fun I will try Multiprocess=2 and 3 to see how it compares.
Thanks jdobbs for the suggestion.

[Darksoul71]

That's not entirely true. By default, DGDecodeNV uses CUDA (which uses the GPU) for MPEG-2 decoding.

I think CUDA != PureVideo:
Pure Video (http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo.html)
vs.
CUDA (http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_home_new.html)

To my limited understanding of GPU architecture PureVideo is an integrated video processing engine while CUDA uses the GPU cores directly.

[Groucho2004]

I think CUDA != PureVideo
And nobody is disputing that.
I was just pointing out that DGDecodeNV can make use of CUDA (and therefore the GPU) when decoding MPEG-2 streams. However, the CPU load also increases in this scenario.

[Darksoul71]

And nobody is disputing that.
I was just pointing out that DGDecodeNV can make use of CUDA (and therefore the GPU) when decoding MPEG-2 streams. However, the CPU load also increases in this scenario.

Ah, sorry...this wasn't too obvious to me from the previous postings...
Then simply ignore my previous post ;)

[Mark_Venture]

Sorry, I'm a little confused as I read the last 20 or so posts of this thread with the talk and tests around DGDecNV.

Did it help speed up BD-Rebuilder in this case?

For DGDecNV, is the video card the limiting factor in how much it improves? or the CPU?

Is blusky's machine now optimized to give the best speed and quality output?

[emilio99]

How can I activate that the BD Rebuilder use CUDA for acceleration? Actually it uses:

- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow

[Ch3vr0n]

you can't. It doesn't. DGdecNV does that.

[jdobbs]

How can I activate that the BD Rebuilder use CUDA for acceleration? Actually it uses:

- Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShowYou'd need to install DGDecodeNV/DGIndexNV. If you don't have it, something you might want to try would be the OpenCL capability of X264 and see if you get any speed improvement. You can enable it by adding the following to your Config file under [Options]:

TWEAK_PASS_ONE=--opencl
TWEAK_PASS_TWO=--opencl

I haven't done any speed testing using this. So if you try it, please let me know how it works out.

[soneca]

You'd need to install DGDecodeNV/DGIndexNV. If you don't have it, something you might want to try would be the OpenCL capability of X264 and see if you get any speed improvement. You can enable it by adding the following to your Config file under [Options]:

TWEAK_PASS_ONE=--opencl
TWEAK_PASS_TWO=--opencl

I haven't done any speed testing using this. So if you try it, please let me know how it works out.

Experienced with the r2309 and no difference in speed here.
There were also conflicts with the nvidia drivers, so I stopped testing.:mad:

[jdobbs]

Experienced with the r2309 and no difference in speed here.
There were also conflicts with the nvidia drivers, so I stopped testing.:mad:Have you tried it with the latest release of BD-RB which includes r2334?

[soneca]

I tried now but got this message.:confused:
Later try on another pc.

http://s20.postimg.org/r95eqnvgt/x264_erro.jpg

[jdobbs]

I tried now but got this message.:confused:
Later try on another pc.

http://s20.postimg.org/r95eqnvgt/x264_erro.jpgOne of two things. Either the video driver doesn't support opencl -- or the opencl.dll stub is still in the folder with X264. If it is you should delete it (opencl should be in the system32 folder if installed with the video card).

[soneca]

Went to work, after opencl.dll be erased from the tools folder.
Later come back to do some tests.

[jdobbs]

Went to work, after opencl.dll be erased from the tools folder.
Later come back to do some tests.Yeah. That needed to be there at one time -- it will be removed in the next release.

[soneca]

There are still problems with this implementation of OpenCL, I have had problems(conflicts) on two machines(with recent nVidia boards and latest drivers installed) using both BD Rebuilder as RipBot264.

[Mark_Venture]

Sorry to revive an old thread, but with all this talk about optimizing the hardware to help encoding, since my BD-ROM just died, I thought about ripping speed, and since that will likely involve hardware, I thought this the best rather than starting a new thread.

I had an LG BH08LS20 BD-RW/DVD-RW. Using AnyDVD HD, I could rip (bluray) discs to my hard drive in under an hour. I don't recall if I used MediaCodeSpeedEdit to remove the RipLock, or not, it was so long ago. It has now died.

As a replacement, I got an LG BH16NS40 BD-RW/DVD-RW drive. Despite reading some older postings from across the web that it is a fast ripper, some blurays have taken nearly 2 hours to rip. MCSE doesn't appear to support this drive to remove riplock, and I haven't found any other solutions out there.

So, along with beefier processors, SSDs, etc... what do you do to speed up your ripping? What Bluray drive do you use? How long does it take you to rip a bluray to your hard drive?

[soneca]

I use PIONEER BD-RW BDR-208D(1.10) with AnyDVD HD and DVDFab but I can almost always higher speeds using AnyDVD HD. The time is from 10 to 45 minutes, depending on the content, and extracting BD-25 speeds are always higher. Never got similar speed with both LG have ever used.
http://s20.postimg.org/6lha7y3d9/anydvd.png
Have you tried updating the cable, sata drivers/chipset package?

[jdobbs]

I use PIONEER BD-RW BDR-208D(1.10) with AnyDVD HD and DVDFab but I can almost always higher speeds using AnyDVD HD. The time is from 10 to 45 minutes, depending on the content, and extracting BD-25 speeds are always higher. Never got similar speed with both LG have ever used.
http://s20.postimg.org/6lha7y3d9/anydvd.png
Have you tried updating the cable, sata drivers/chipset package? I have an LG drive (BH16NS40), and I'm peaking at about 25MB/s. So your numbers look pretty good to me.

[gonca]

LG WH14NS40 gets 7x to 8x on BD-DL

[Mark_Venture]

I have an LG drive (BH16NS40), and I'm peaking at about 25MB/s. So your numbers look pretty good to me.Hmm.. reading Cliffhanger, I topped out at 8.5 MB/s per Anydvd HD with my BH16NS40.

What firmware is on your BH16NS40? 1.0 or 1.01?

[jdobbs]

Hmm.. reading Cliffhanger, I topped out at 8.5 MB/s per Anydvd HD with my BH16NS40.

What firmware is on your BH16NS40? 1.0 or 1.01?I'm using 1.01.

The speed changes quite a bit between discs. 25 MB/s is where I peak. But I don't think I ever get down as low at 8.5 MB/s (maybe for a DVD, but not a BD). It's connected via SATA.

[Mark_Venture]

I'm using 1.01.

The speed changes quite a bit between discs. 25 MB/s is where I peak. But I don't think I ever get down as low at 8.5 MB/s (maybe for a DVD, but not a BD). It's connected via SATA.

do you have AnyDVD HD set for speed control enabled? or do you leave that unchecked?

[jdobbs]

do you have AnyDVD HD set for speed control enabled? or do you leave that unchecked? It is unchecked.

[Mark_Venture]

It is unchecked.
Thank you.

I did another rip yesterday, The Family, and it appears just the smaller files rip way slow. There was one M2TS which is about 30 gig. It did get up over 22MB/S for that file. Rip time was less than one hour.