I know that intel is suggested for its quick sync but it leads me to wonder how a AMD cpu would do if you had a powerful enough cpu and didn’t need to off load.
Anyone using AMD for BI?
- Thread starter Tazz 316
- Start date
sebastiantombs
Known around here
With the sub stream feature available in BI it isn't as critical to use QuickSync. Sub streams will cut CPU utilization by a factor of five to 20 depending on the variables of camera resolution, frame and bit rates. That's a much more significant difference while QuickSync may do 5% or so at best.
Last edited:
Flintstone61
Known around here
Yes. People are using stuff like Ryzen multicore cpu's. Not up to speed on AMD's older offerings. I've seen a few conversations about it in here over the last several months.
Ryzen 5000 series is energy-efficient enough to be a perfectly viable option these days, even compared to Intel 12th gen. I would choose Ryzen 5000 if I was building a new high-end Blue Iris box today.
Quick Sync should be worth more than a 5% reduction in CPU usage. In the past I have measured close to 50% savings from Quick Sync, but more recent tests (tonight), the savings are closer to 25%. I don't know if it is because of any change in Blue Iris or if it is all due to my configuration and set of cameras, all of which is rather different than it was 3 years ago.
That said, Quick Sync has always had some issues in Blue Iris. I think it adds a tiny bit of video delay (I think I feel it, but I don't have a great way to measure). It causes graphical corruption sometimes with some cameras. It has caused memory leaks with a wide range of Intel GPU driver versions. Sometimes you get black frames when starting clip playback. Sometimes hardware acceleration just turns off for individual cameras for no good reason, so you cannot rely on it staying enabled. I cannot fault anyone for just using software decoding if they've had problems with Quick Sync.
Quick Sync should be worth more than a 5% reduction in CPU usage. In the past I have measured close to 50% savings from Quick Sync, but more recent tests (tonight), the savings are closer to 25%. I don't know if it is because of any change in Blue Iris or if it is all due to my configuration and set of cameras, all of which is rather different than it was 3 years ago.
That said, Quick Sync has always had some issues in Blue Iris. I think it adds a tiny bit of video delay (I think I feel it, but I don't have a great way to measure). It causes graphical corruption sometimes with some cameras. It has caused memory leaks with a wide range of Intel GPU driver versions. Sometimes you get black frames when starting clip playback. Sometimes hardware acceleration just turns off for individual cameras for no good reason, so you cannot rely on it staying enabled. I cannot fault anyone for just using software decoding if they've had problems with Quick Sync.
Flintstone61
Known around here
Now that is good data. Interesting to hear this. if I want to keep my CPU % down, unloading some of the cams from HA will d o that. If Go 100% HA, i see a 17% cpu surging to 40-50% on motion. and I get a lot of motion with wind and trees and leaves and snow blowing around. So i get worried when 4-5 cams are motion busy and the CPU is pulsing up and down from 50%.
Mike A.
Known around here
- May 6, 2017
- 4,199
- 7,067
Seemed like I got a lot more out of HA with BI 4. Since substreams came in I don't notice as much benefit now in the overall scheme of things.
My remote location is running an old, like 10-15 years old, AMD FX-6200. It is running Windows 8.1 with 16 GB and runs 5 cameras just fine with BI 5.xxx. It's been running BI since 2013 in that location. However, given the cost of used business class machines, I went with an i7-6700 in August when I had to replace my home BI machine.
Only down side to AMD is that you need a GPU for most of there CPUs, but still there MB are way cheaper than intel.
For substream in your ip cam config settings you just use stream profiles and select a sub stream over main?
sebastiantombs
Known around here
The typical method is to select both the main stream and sub stream. Then, in each camera, set them to record "continuous and when triggered". The records the sub stream 24/7 with no processing other than writing to the disk and uses the sub stream for motion detection which does use CPU cycles. On motion detection the recording switches to the main stream to record in full resolution and detail. The result is that you have the best of both worlds. Depending on the resolution the sub stream is set to, typically the lowest resolution available such as "D1", the CPU utilization is dropped dramatically. A nice side effect is a significant saving in disk space as well.