Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  

FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
  

Archive 2013 · External HD crashed
  
 
Rogue416
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · External HD crashed


15Bit wrote:
You are in the minority - there is a reason they were nicknamed "Deathstars". I believe those drives were in a large part responsible for IBM selling up and leaving the HDD market.


They were.

I guess I got one of the good drives.

Trent



Jan 21, 2013 at 04:13 AM
Rogue416
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · External HD crashed


Bifurcator wrote:
I too have always had exceptionally good luck with the IBM DS drives. They last forever. I was using 2 cases of them all at once at one point. (24 in a case). Great drives in their day! I was using the 360GB (I think?) models in a VOD system I maintain as a PT job. That was when they were still branded IBM. They had a very good reputation with system engineers too - in spite of their (apparent) reputation with end users. <shrug>



Yeah, I guess wrong as often as I get things right - maybe more. But
...Show more

Let's try this again. Messed up my first reply.

I miss my IBM drives. Never had any problems with them either. I can not imagine 24 in a case, let alone being responsible for their maintenance. The most I have had in a single case was six, with two in RAID. I was just dabbling in it at the time (just curious) but got away from it after a while. Wish I hadn't.

I'm right there with ya about guessing wrong as often as I get things right.

Talk about some wicked benchmarks! Wow! I see I have much to learn.

Trent



Jan 21, 2013 at 04:46 AM
Rogue416
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · External HD crashed


15Bit wrote:
I seem to remember it was the 75Gb IBM's that were mostly the problem. A little google work even suggests that there was a class action suit filed about their reliability. I have a suspicion a lot of reliability problems at the time related to cooling - consumer level cases at the time were not well designed, and a lot of folk did tend to stuff as many drives as they could in a case. I remember i used to buy dedicated cooling fans for my drives, and i did tend to have less trouble than my friends. Your reliability
...Show more

I had the option to join that suit, but didn't because my drive was working. I agree with you on your suspicions about the cooling, and how many get stuffed in a case. Like you I also had less trouble than my friends. That drive went into my first home built computer which was housed in a full tower, with lots of fans. I built that system after doing months of research, mostly about enterprise level systems. What I took away from the research? Cooling was king.

Trent



Jan 21, 2013 at 05:02 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #4 · External HD crashed


Bifurcator wrote:





Here's what the 2-drive 6TB RAID0 stripes profile like. This is with lots of data already on too.
With a 3-drive RAID0 stripe I get about 750MB/s and with four drives I get close to 1GB/s.
And of course with 4 of these drives we are talking about 12TB of storage space for $400.




Aaron D wrote:
Holy crap! 500+ MB/s write on a 2 drive RAID0?

I have a question for you sir. I have been toying with the idea of building something to capture uncompressed 1080 video. We're talking close to 200MB/s of bandwidth at 24bits of color depth. What kind of write speed are you getting on files in excessive size? Say 500MB and up? Have you tested sizes this large Bif? These are 'cudas, correct?

How are you getting 200+MB/s out of a single, rotary type, HDD What kind of controller are you using if I may ask?


I get the same for large files; about 4000MB/s when I drag and drop files over 5GB and time it. The controller isn't important here I think. I guess any decent on-board controller from 2010 onward will do the job fine. Most of them are 6Gb per SATA port and that works out to a max of about 560MB/s real-world with probably a system bandwidth limit of around 1.6GB/s. The controller in this particular box is 3Gb and the real-world limits are 285MB/s per drive port with a system limit of about 880 to 900MB/s and even that is enough for uncompressed 2K 4:4:4 12bit. With just these two drives I can almost get there now. I can do about 20fps at that and achieve a full 24fps if I drop it down to 10bit - still within most professional editing standards.


BlackMagic Disk Speed Test
My 2-Drive RAID 0 Results.



I think the drives are maybe the most critical factor these days. As mentioned I'm using the Seagate Barracuda ST3000DM001 drives. I had just finished reading a tech write-up on these which praised them for their near workstation grade specs when I saw a pile of them at a regular department store for 9,000 (about $100) each so I bought the lot of them. I think those prices are reproducible with a little mouse-work tho. Here's what the system reports on one of them:

      ST3000DM001-1CH166:

      Capacity: 3 TB (3,000,592,982,016 bytes)
      Model: ST3000DM001-1CH166
      Revision: CC43
      Serial Number: Z1F0VHVT
      Native Command Queuing: Yes
      Queue Depth: 32
      Removable Media: No
      Detachable Drive: No
      BSD Name: disk5
      Rotational Rate: 7200
      Medium Type: Rotational
      Bay Name: Bay 2
      Partition Map Type: GPT (GUID Partition Table)
      S.M.A.R.T. status: Verified

      Volumes:
      disk5s1:
      Capacity: 209.7 MB (209,715,200 bytes)
      BSD Name: disk5s1
      Content: EFI
      disk5s2:
      Capacity: 3 TB (3,000,249,008,128 bytes)
      BSD Name: disk5s2
      Content: Apple_RAID
      Boot OS X:
      Capacity: 134.2 MB (134,217,728 bytes)
      BSD Name: disk5s3
      Content: Apple_Boot


Edited on Jan 21, 2013 at 07:30 AM · View previous versions



Jan 21, 2013 at 05:37 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #5 · External HD crashed


15Bit wrote:
Aaron, if you want to capture at that sort of rate, streaming onto hard disks might not be the best solution. We've set up equipment that streams data at quite high data rates in the lab, and the best solution is a RAM drive if you can stuff enough RAM into a computer for the data you want to collect. Also, how are you intending to feed the data into the computer? Good quality i/o cards are essential for this sort of work.


This might be good if he were capturing uncompressed 4K video or trying to composite multiple 1080p streams in real-time. But it's not needed for capturing uncompressed 1080p or even 2K video these days. RAID0 is fine. A 3-drive RAID level 0 setup (using these Seagates or any that show a throughput of 180MB/s or so) will ensure he never has a hiccup of any kind. I wouldn't be afraid to capture lowly 1080p/30 with just my two from a typical 8bit 4:4:4 HDMI feed. Should be smooth sailing! I should be able to triple that with my system actually. I have 3 of these RAID 0 configs in the system and I should easily be able to write 3 different (or one split to 3) streams simultaneously - even on this older box. In system display of all three during the capture is another matter tho.






Rogue416 wrote:
Let's try this again. Messed up my first reply.
I miss my IBM drives. Never had any problems with them either. I can not imagine 24 in a case, let alone being responsible for their maintenance. The most I have had in a single case was six, with two in RAID. I was just dabbling in it at the time (just curious) but got away from it after a while. Wish I hadn't.

I'm right there with ya about guessing wrong as often as I get things right.

Talk about some wicked benchmarks! Wow! I see I have much to learn.

Trent


Just to be clear "24 to a case" refers to the cardboard box they shipped in. They were installed and ran in small rack type enclosures at three different sites. Multiple arrays per enclosure serving up video (VOD) in large-ish hotels. The reason this distinction is interesting at all is because I usually round-robin different makes and models. But the IBMs specd so nicely and did so well with the first set that at one point anyway, I went with all IBM DS drives - which also all did very well.

Edited on Jan 21, 2013 at 04:08 PM · View previous versions



Jan 21, 2013 at 05:44 AM
15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · External HD crashed


Aaron D wrote:
That was a thought. I remember playing with RAM drives back in DOS. But when talking about an hour or so's worth of footage, 500GB to 1TB is A LOT of RAM. Gives me food for thought though. Cost has to be low, and so does size. Capturing to a RAM drive would help by eliminating physical drives. It would also reduce power requirement. You've opened my eyes to some new ideas to look into. Thanks!

Data would be fed via HDMI due to lack of BNC. Have been able to find 1 or 2 cards that will capture 1080/30p,
...Show more

If you are needing to capture 500GB+ of data then even an SSD is probably out of the question, and a computer that takes that much RAM would probably cost you more than a house. For streaming at high data rates, SCSI used to be the way to go, but things have changed with SATA. Bifurcator has more experience with this than me i think. My only comment would be to reiterate the importance of the capture card and the speed of the Bus it is plugged into - one of the problems we had with our data capture machine in the lab (which was pulling 40-50MB/sec over ethernet) was that whilst the ethernet card was "gigabit", it was consumer rather than server grade and couldn't keep up a high sustained transfer rate.

Edited on Jan 23, 2013 at 06:03 AM · View previous versions



Jan 21, 2013 at 09:15 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #7 · External HD crashed


Yup, knowing the bandwidth and port speeds of the target system (so you know what you can expect) is needed.

Also I think 15bit is right about getting a quality card - depending on your source feed and intended pipeline that is. HDMI is already digital (thus no concerns about digitization, signal decoders, and so on) but when splitting a signal amplification is needed and for that quality is of concern. And probably some other things that can affect signal integrity and quality as well. It's not like in the analogue to digital days tho so a "high quality" device can still be inexpensive. Before in order to get quality, the price of admission was $2k at lowest. These days with digital to digital the price for HQ interfaces is more like $200.




$150 ~ $200 - http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/intensity/ (although 4:2:2 )



Here's a review: http://www.cameralabs.com/PC_Hardware_reviews/HDMI_capture/Blackmagic_Design_Intensity_Pro_review.shtml

Be aware of HDCP too tho - even tho it failed in its purpose and is a failure in its intent & design.



Jan 21, 2013 at 02:26 PM
Rogue416
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · External HD crashed


Bifurcator wrote:
This might be good if he were capturing uncompressed 4K video or trying to composite multiple 1080p streams in real-time. But it's not needed for capturing uncompressed 1080p or even 2K video these days. RAID0 is fine. A 3-drive RAID level 0 setup (using these Seagates or any that show a throughput of 180MB/s or so) will ensure he never has a hiccup of any kind. I wouldn't be afraid to capture lowly 1080p/30 with just my two from a typical 8bit 4:4:4 HDMI feed. Should be smooth sailing! I should be able to triple that with my system actually.
...Show more

Thanks for clearing that up.

Trent



Jan 21, 2013 at 11:35 PM
Aaron D
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #9 · External HD crashed


I like the thought of a RAM drive. It would eliminate a lot of things, like energy consumption, which in the field is a big issue. The other would be weight and size. Unfortunately, the only motherboards that would be capable of supporting up to 1TB of RAM are costly, and large, server boards. There are a few different products that allow RAM to be used as a drive, but they all have a cap as to logical capacity, which is far from the close to 1TB I would need. They also use SATA connection. However, there is a product called DDRdrive which utilizes a PCI slot. However, I don't know what the logical cap is on it, or the price. Using RAM would not be cost sufficient.

As for the capture card itself, I had chosen to use this -
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16815158317

I chose against the BM Intensity due to horrible motherboard chipset compatibility. Check out the poor reviews on Amazon to see what I'm talking about. I poured over specs and info on quite a few capture devices for hours. Including speaking with individuals that actually use any of the products I'm sure any of you could recommend. I'm pretty much decided on using that specific card linked above. I'm not aware of any consumer grade video cameras being HDCP, so compliance shouldn't be an issue. If anyone knows of any, please let me know.

Although I can't find specifics about the colorspace this card captures in, it seems all consumer grade cards are only 4:2:2 capable. But that's fine. It's better than the 4:2:0 that a lot of cameras capture to internally.






Jan 22, 2013 at 01:24 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #10 · External HD crashed


Eh, the system allocated RAM drives of today are only cost prohibitive. They don's show much of a performance boost over two or three SSDs in a RAID0 configuration. Maybe 8% over 3 and 15% over a 2-drive SSD RAID0 - (given fast SSDs of course). We want to think our RAM is SO FAST but it isn't. With a three drive SSD RAID0 configuration (these days) we're already bumping up against the limits of new-ish system bandwidth limits.

I used to use a 4GB RAM Drive when developing and I didn't see that much of an increase over a 4-drive rotational RAID0 array. Compiles which took 90min on the array took about an hour off the RAM drive. And as pointed out system based RAM drives can be expensive. Motherboards with 8, 12 or 16 memory slots aren't really that expensive (or weren't last I looked) compared to the higher capacity RAM modules! 8GB and 16GB modules are still astronomically priced.

I recently upgraded from 12GB to 32GB on this surfing machine here and while I could find 32GB (8x4GB) for $340 the same in 8GB modules (4x8GB) was getting pretty close to $2k. And it's another big jump again when gong to 16GB modules. Additionally with large amounts or RAM (say, about over 8GB total) ECC becomes very desirable and that bumps the prices up even higher. For just 64GB of system RAM we're talking around four or five grand. Compare that even to the very fastest SSD drives and they offer 256GB or 512GB. You could put 4 or 6 of those in your system on RAID0 for less, end up with EXACTLY the same throughput, and have two or three terabytes of SSD storage - Which of course doesn't erase with a system crash, reboot, or power down like a system memory RAM drive will. The same is true with 6 or 8 rotational drives too only now we're down to like $600 to $800 for the full setup with 8 to 10 times the number of terabytes.







Edited on Jan 22, 2013 at 07:01 AM · View previous versions



Jan 22, 2013 at 06:09 AM
15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · External HD crashed


Poking around Intel's website and looking at their server boards, i see the greatest RAM support Intel offer on a single socket motherboard is 256MB, on a dual socket 768GB, and on a quad socket 1.5TB. The number of memory slots is not the only limitation though - you need to get a processor that will actually address that much RAM. A standard i7 quad for example, maxes out at 32GB. So if you want to support those really big amounts of RAM you need to move to the more expensive end of the Xeon E5 or E7 range (costing $thousands per cpu), and probably buy 2 or 4 actual processors also.

Just for fun i had a quick poke round the HP website and the only machine i could find with 1TB RAM support was a quad Itanium...

I think i would give up on the RAM drive idea if i were you

Oh, and don't touch any peripheral that plugs into a standard PCI slot - the PCI bus maxes out at around 133MB/sec, which was fast in 1995 or whenever it was introduced, but is snail pace today. PCIe is the way to go.


Edited on Jan 23, 2013 at 06:03 AM · View previous versions



Jan 22, 2013 at 06:59 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #12 · External HD crashed


b = bit
B = byte



But just to add that there are Xeon procs which are down around $500 ea used with MBs that support 256GB of RAM.

And if you wanna go back a few product cycles 3.0GHz 4-core Xeons will cost you only about $100ea. and they also have MBs which can cram 256GB on. This Mac Pro MB tops out at 128GB but there's no way I'm paying the current asking price for 16GB modules!




Jan 22, 2013 at 07:09 AM
15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · External HD crashed


Bifurcator wrote:
b = bit
B = byte



You say potato, i say potato (this doesn't work so well in print, does it?). It's still early morning here and i'm only halfway through my coffee so typos are expected...



Jan 22, 2013 at 07:27 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #14 · External HD crashed


Mmmmm... coffee!!!!!!!!!


Jan 22, 2013 at 08:43 AM
Shutterbug2006
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #15 · External HD crashed


I think some people are mixing up megabytes per second with megabits per second.

Big difference!



Jan 23, 2013 at 12:44 AM
15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · External HD crashed


Shutterbug2006 wrote:
I think some people are mixing up megabytes per second with megabits per second.

Big difference!


Nah, its as typing problem, not an understanding problem. Its not such a big difference - only 8x...

Previous posts are now edited to fix the problem



Jan 23, 2013 at 06:00 AM
15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #17 · External HD crashed


Aaron - I came across something that might be of interest:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-dc-s3700-enterprise-storage,3352-8.html



Jan 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM
1       2      
3
       end




FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password