This IS the Avid L2: 11/22/20

Saturday, November 28, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Semi OT: Bandwidth Bragging Rights!!!

John:

Which QNAP chassis did you get? There appear to be a couple of different classes — one is roughly $1200, another is 4x that. Very curious.

Jeff Kreines

Kinetta

jeff@kinetta.com

kinetta.com

Sent from iPhone.

On Nov 28, 2020, at 10:45 PM, John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

Mr. Zelin guided me through the purchase of a 16 Bay QNAP 10 gig drive chassis. This thing is amazing. Sonnet Presto 10 gig card in my expansion chassis, had to go for the more expensive card to work on 10.12.6, the card that works on 10.13.6 but not 10.12.6 is a couple hundred dollars less but my system is more stable with all my Nvidia gpus on 10.12.6, I can even plug drives directly into the QNAP and bypass the computer altogether. A 4TB Glyph SSD shuttle drive I'm connected with the usb C connector on the QNAP. I'm transferring two folder simultaneously and each transfer is running at 300+ MB/sec.

The AJA drive speed test showed 980 MB/sec read and 880 MB/sec write. I can finally see if I can play DPX sequences in real time. I transfered my entire internal raid of approx 15 TB to the QNAP in about 7 hours.

I can't wait to see how fast I can export DPX sequences from Avid. I'm wondering if using the QNAP as source media and export location is faster than bouncing between my internal raid and the QNAP. Depending on the partition my internal Raid will get somewhere from 500 to 400 MB/sec read.

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

[Avid-L2] Semi OT: Bandwidth Bragging Rights!!!

Mr. Zelin guided me through the purchase of a 16 Bay QNAP 10 gig drive chassis. This thing is amazing. Sonnet Presto 10 gig card in my expansion chassis, had to go for the more expensive card to work on 10.12.6, the card that works on 10.13.6 but not 10.12.6 is a couple hundred dollars less but my system is more stable with all my Nvidia gpus on 10.12.6, I can even plug drives directly into the QNAP and bypass the computer altogether. A 4TB Glyph SSD shuttle drive I'm connected with the usb C connector on the QNAP. I'm transferring two folder simultaneously and each transfer is running at 300+ MB/sec.

The AJA drive speed test showed 980 MB/sec read and 880 MB/sec write. I can finally see if I can play DPX sequences in real time. I transfered my entire internal raid of approx 15 TB to the QNAP in about 7 hours.

I can't wait to see how fast I can export DPX sequences from Avid. I'm wondering if using the QNAP as source media and export location is faster than bouncing between my internal raid and the QNAP. Depending on the partition my internal Raid will get somewhere from 500 to 400 MB/sec read.

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

On the plus side for Resolve - you can see the audio track metadata on the timeline clips. Not sure if the metadata survived autosync/merging (it doesn’t in PP)

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

It’s a terrible idea but someone has to go first & tell BM what all the problems are. They certainly seem to want to push the editing side of Resolve (the DS crew mostly seem to be there or Flame for finishing now).

Even Premiere (which is much better for shared projects since Productions was introduced) is pretty terrible for multicam audio / autosynced clips (plus lacks about 50 little Avid features).

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

I've always found the cost of edit software to be a small part of the overall budget. The cost of buying and maintaining hardware (monitors, storage etc) is the area where more savings can be made by switching brands or going for cheaper service providers for things like cloud storage.

Assuming you have something like 3-5 perpetual Avid licences, the maintenance costs are around $1500 per year, so not a huge amount to be able to stay up to date with software upgrades. I find a lot of production houses choose a stable version of MC and stick with it for the duration of the project. If that's the case, there's no need to upgrade or pay the yearly fee to Avid, so in that sense (like Resolve) it costs nothing more. At the end of the day, it's a business expense and can be set against any company taxes.

The potential cost in lost hours due to limitations in software would make me think seriously about turning any long-running show over to a new edit system.

On 27/11/2020 17:24, Jeff Krebs via groups.io wrote:

A friend of mine is asking me my thoughts about this the concept of Resolve replacing MC for a Multi cam double system sound reality show environment.
My immediate thought is that this is an insane terrible idea, notwithstanding that to retrain editors is a mountain of a task. (I believe most would rebel and quit having to change)

They said the reason is that resolve is cheaper (terrible reason)

I already see issues with

Sync Maps,

Multigroups

Basic Editorial Speed

Protools aaf export

simplicity of search

Training

Shared storage

Cloud future.

And the list goes on.

Has anyone successfully seen resolve work in a multi-editor offline environment.

Any other thoughts are appreciated.

Friday, November 27, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

Many of the items in your list have been greatly improved in Resolve v17, but that is not near a master release. In v16 and below, I don't see how anyone could trust it for as robust a workflow in multicam as MC, and even when 17 drops officially, it still needs to be kicked around before it'd pass. But yes, sync maps , AAF exports, etc. look great in v17.

In my house, I am a finishing editor working closely with a colorist, and we're in collaboration on Resolve v16. It works fantastically for our uses, but this is far from what your purpose is. Project sharing is a snap but could be faster to negotiate. We make up for it with the sheer speed we can operate together on the same timeline at the same time. Resolve has worked out a lot of potential issues with read/write and locking between an editor and a colorist - I can vouch for that part. But even I don't think I'd be nearly as comfortable setting up and cutting multicam in Resolve. They are getting there, and the eventuality of so much being able to be accomplished under one hood is why I'm staying sharp with Resolve.

MC's updates are nothing to roll our eyes at though. They're doing everything they can to stay relevant in this field.

On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 1:24 PM Dave Spraker <avid@spraker.tv> wrote:

Jeff –

I don't know of any one actually doing this…but, EditShare just released a Resolve panel so there must be ways to share.

https://editshare.com/editshares-flow-panel-for-davinci-resolve-studio-creates-gateway-to-wider-media-ecosystem-and-remote-proxy-editing/

- Dave

dave@spraker.tv
(971) 267-7661

From: Avid-L2@groups.io <Avid-L2@groups.io> On Behalf Of Jeff Krebs
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2020 9:24 AM
To: Avid-L2@groups.io
Subject: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

A friend of mine is asking me my thoughts about this the concept of Resolve replacing MC for a Multi cam double system sound reality show environment.
My immediate thought is that this is an insane terrible idea, notwithstanding that to retrain editors is a mountain of a task. (I believe most would rebel and quit having to change)
They said the reason is that resolve is cheaper (terrible reason)
· I already see issues with
· Sync Maps,
· Multigroups
· Basic Editorial Speed
· Protools aaf export
· simplicity of search
· Training
· Shared storage
· Cloud future.

And the list goes on.

Has anyone successfully seen resolve work in a multi-editor offline environment.
Any other thoughts are appreciated.

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Happy Thanksgiving

Happy Thanksgiving

Paul Darrigo
CHULA - Citizens for a Humane Los Angeles
https://www.facebook.com/groups/773416409436730/
323-244-8020

On Friday, November 27, 2020, 1:21:03 PM PST, Ofer Raveh <o.raveh@att.net> wrote:

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Best,

Ofer Raveh

Web: TheBestWeCanBe.net

Soundcloud: soundcloud.com/oferrave

Spotify: open.spotify.com/artist/7GZLyBELkT7SYKQcXlI0nq

On Wednesday, November 25, 2020, 8:02:26 PM PST, owen <owen@thenowcorporation.com> wrote:

Best wishes

> On Nov 25, 2020, at 9:58 PM, JBeck <jb30343@windstream.net> wrote:
>
>
> Happy Thanksgiving to those who celebrate it. --J.B.
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Avid-L2] Happy Thanksgiving

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Best,

Ofer Raveh

Web: TheBestWeCanBe.net

Soundcloud: soundcloud.com/oferrave

Spotify: open.spotify.com/artist/7GZLyBELkT7SYKQcXlI0nq

On Wednesday, November 25, 2020, 8:02:26 PM PST, owen <owen@thenowcorporation.com> wrote:

Best wishes

> On Nov 25, 2020, at 9:58 PM, JBeck <jb30343@windstream.net> wrote:
>
>
> Happy Thanksgiving to those who celebrate it. --J.B.
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

Jeff –

I don't know of any one actually doing this…but, EditShare just released a Resolve panel so there must be ways to share.

https://editshare.com/editshares-flow-panel-for-davinci-resolve-studio-creates-gateway-to-wider-media-ecosystem-and-remote-proxy-editing/

- Dave

dave@spraker.tv

(971) 267-7661

From: Avid-L2@groups.io <Avid-L2@groups.io> On Behalf Of Jeff Krebs
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2020 9:24 AM
To: Avid-L2@groups.io
Subject: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

A friend of mine is asking me my thoughts about this the concept of Resolve replacing MC for a Multi cam double system sound reality show environment.

My immediate thought is that this is an insane terrible idea, notwithstanding that to retrain editors is a mountain of a task. (I believe most would rebel and quit having to change)

They said the reason is that resolve is cheaper (terrible reason)

· I already see issues with

· Sync Maps,

· Multigroups

· Basic Editorial Speed

· Protools aaf export

· simplicity of search

· Training

· Shared storage

· Cloud future.

And the list goes on.

Has anyone successfully seen resolve work in a multi-editor offline environment.

Any other thoughts are appreciated.

[Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

A friend of mine is asking me my thoughts about this the concept of Resolve replacing MC for a Multi cam double system sound reality show environment.

My immediate thought is that this is an insane terrible idea, notwithstanding that to retrain editors is a mountain of a task. (I believe most would rebel and quit having to change)

They said the reason is that resolve is cheaper (terrible reason)

I already see issues with
Sync Maps,
Multigroups
Basic Editorial Speed
Protools aaf export
simplicity of search
Training
Shared storage
Cloud future.

And the list goes on.

Has anyone successfully seen resolve work in a multi-editor offline environment.

Any other thoughts are appreciated.

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

_._,_._,_

Thursday, November 26, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Capital B for Byte (8 bits) little b for bit. That's the terminology I've always gone by. Perhaps I mistyped along the way?

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 11:25 AM, Jeff Kreines wrote:

John, you use the terms MB/s and Mb/s interchangeably. They are not the same thing!

Jeff Kreines
Kinetta

jeff@kinetta.com

kinetta.com

Sent from iPhone.

On Nov 26, 2020, at 11:31 AM, Marcel B. <bncrcaxlr@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,
All I can contribute to this discussion is my experience with USB 3.1 gen 1, 3.1 gen 2.

My CalDigit dock provides USB 3.1 gen 1 and 3.1 gen 2. Using PNY SSD 6GB/s on a USB 3.1 gen 2 Startech Toaster I get around 325 MB/s with gen 1 and 490 with gen 2.

Marcel

On 26/11/2020 12:12, pale.edit@gmail.com wrote:

I’d definitely put more stock in what Dom (Gowanus Canal) says, he’s way more knowledgeable than me, but I did notice a speed boost with the same hardware when I switched to a PCI 3 PC from a PCI 2 Mac Pro 2010 recently. There are lots of factors involved.

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 10:10 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I was thinking that but thought I was bypassing that by going through the expansion chassis. Now you point out what I hadn't considered. The expansion chassis is connected through the MacPro PCI 2.0 16 lane slot so I thought it would have tons of bandwidth potential but I hadn't thought about if my expansion chassis being PCI 2.0. Even though the backplane has 16 lanes the Allegro USB 3 card is probably sitting in a PCI 2.0 slot.

Here's specs I found:

Summary of PCI Express Interface Parameters:
Data Rate: PCIe 3.0 = 1000MB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 500MB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 250MB/s. Total Bandwidth: (x16 link): PCIe 3.0 = 32GB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 16GB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 8GB/s.

From this it looks like with the 16 lane and 2.0 I should have 16GB/sec and PCIe 2.0 is 500MB/sec. So it would seem the food chain feeding up to the dock should handle at least something closer to 500 MB/sec. From this it still makes me think the dock itself may support 6G but could be built with SATA II chipset. Given I got it off the shelf at Fry's I wouldn't be surprised. The spec said it supports 6G but does that really mean it has 6G technology components or is it just limiting a 6G drive to 3G SATA II?

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:37 PM, <pale.edit@gmail.com> wrote:

I think you are maxing out the PCI 2.0 slots in the old Mac Pro. In a PCI 3.0 system you will get better performance.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:17 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I've got a pair of Seagate IronWolf SSDs that are Sata III and spec says they can get approx 550 Mbps in Sata III. The dock(s) are connected to a Sonnet Allegro PCIe card with 4 USB 3.0 connections. I can only seem to get around 300 MB/sec per individual drive but when I raid 0 them I still only get around 300 MB/sec. I had thought given the vintage of my docks they were all SATA II. I went to Fry's and got the dual dock because it said it supports 1.5, 3.0 & 6.0G Sata drives. I took that to mean it the dock slots are 6G Sata III. When I test the individual slots on the dual dock I only get the 300MB/sec. This leads me to believe that the dock is only Sata II slots. Even given that if I raid 0 the two slots I still only get just a little over 300 MB/sec. I figured it wouldn't double but may get 1.5 times the individual drive speed. I then split the drive set across two docks both USB 3 to the Sonnet Allegro card. I get a little better like 333 Mbps. The Allegro is in my cyclone microsystems expansion chassis hooked up to my mid 2012 MacPro using the 16 lane slot to connect the two. I know the MacPro is Sata II in the tower but I would have thought if the dual dock is truly 6G Sata III then I should be able to get close to 550 Mbps for an individual SSD .

So what in the food chain is limiting things to around 300 Mbps regardless of whether I raid or not. The conversion of USB 3 5 Gbps to Mega Bytes per second is 625MB/sec. So in theory I should be able to get close to the IronWolf spec of 550 MB/sec shouldn't I. I know there is only one controller in the Allegro card I have. I've ordered another to get more USB 3 connections and the new one is the dual controller version. Maybe when I get that in I'll see if splitting across two USB 3 cards helps. Am I missing some overall architecture limitation under the hood? I know sometimes I think in theoretical terms without the experience of practical application.

Someone please bit slap me into a better understanding of what's going on. ;-)

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Bits and bytes. Eight bits to a byte.

On Nov 26, 2020, at 2:25 PM, Jeff Kreines <jeff@kinetta.com> wrote:

John, you use the terms MB/s and Mb/s interchangeably. They are not the same thing!

Jeff Kreines
Kinetta
jeff@kinetta.com
kinetta.com

Sent from iPhone.

On Nov 26, 2020, at 11:31 AM, Marcel B. <bncrcaxlr@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,
All I can contribute to this discussion is my experience with USB 3.1 gen 1, 3.1 gen 2.

My CalDigit dock provides USB 3.1 gen 1 and 3.1 gen 2. Using PNY SSD 6GB/s on a USB 3.1 gen 2 Startech Toaster I get around 325 MB/s with gen 1 and 490 with gen 2.

Marcel

On 26/11/2020 12:12, pale.edit@gmail.com wrote:

I'd definitely put more stock in what Dom (Gowanus Canal) says, he's way more knowledgeable than me, but I did notice a speed boost with the same hardware when I switched to a PCI 3 PC from a PCI 2 Mac Pro 2010 recently. There are lots of factors involved.

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 10:10 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I was thinking that but thought I was bypassing that by going through the expansion chassis. Now you point out what I hadn't considered. The expansion chassis is connected through the MacPro PCI 2.0 16 lane slot so I thought it would have tons of bandwidth potential but I hadn't thought about if my expansion chassis being PCI 2.0. Even though the backplane has 16 lanes the Allegro USB 3 card is probably sitting in a PCI 2.0 slot.

Here's specs I found:

Summary of PCI Express Interface Parameters:
Data Rate: PCIe 3.0 = 1000MB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 500MB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 250MB/s. Total Bandwidth: (x16 link): PCIe 3.0 = 32GB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 16GB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 8GB/s.

From this it looks like with the 16 lane and 2.0 I should have 16GB/sec and PCIe 2.0 is 500MB/sec. So it would seem the food chain feeding up to the dock should handle at least something closer to 500 MB/sec. From this it still makes me think the dock itself may support 6G but could be built with SATA II chipset. Given I got it off the shelf at Fry's I wouldn't be surprised. The spec said it supports 6G but does that really mean it has 6G technology components or is it just limiting a 6G drive to 3G SATA II?

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:37 PM, <pale.edit@gmail.com> wrote:

I think you are maxing out the PCI 2.0 slots in the old Mac Pro. In a PCI 3.0 system you will get better performance.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:17 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I've got a pair of Seagate IronWolf SSDs that are Sata III and spec says they can get approx 550 Mbps in Sata III. The dock(s) are connected to a Sonnet Allegro PCIe card with 4 USB 3.0 connections. I can only seem to get around 300 MB/sec per individual drive but when I raid 0 them I still only get around 300 MB/sec. I had thought given the vintage of my docks they were all SATA II. I went to Fry's and got the dual dock because it said it supports 1.5, 3.0 & 6.0G Sata drives. I took that to mean it the dock slots are 6G Sata III. When I test the individual slots on the dual dock I only get the 300MB/sec. This leads me to believe that the dock is only Sata II slots. Even given that if I raid 0 the two slots I still only get just a little over 300 MB/sec. I figured it wouldn't double but may get 1.5 times the individual drive speed. I then split the drive set across two docks both USB 3 to the Sonnet Allegro card. I get a little better like 333 Mbps. The Allegro is in my cyclone microsystems expansion chassis hooked up to my mid 2012 MacPro using the 16 lane slot to connect the two. I know the MacPro is Sata II in the tower but I would have thought if the dual dock is truly 6G Sata III then I should be able to get close to 550 Mbps for an individual SSD .

So what in the food chain is limiting things to around 300 Mbps regardless of whether I raid or not. The conversion of USB 3 5 Gbps to Mega Bytes per second is 625MB/sec. So in theory I should be able to get close to the IronWolf spec of 550 MB/sec shouldn't I. I know there is only one controller in the Allegro card I have. I've ordered another to get more USB 3 connections and the new one is the dual controller version. Maybe when I get that in I'll see if splitting across two USB 3 cards helps. Am I missing some overall architecture limitation under the hood? I know sometimes I think in theoretical terms without the experience of practical application.

Someone please bit slap me into a better understanding of what's going on. ;-)

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

John, you use the terms MB/s and Mb/s interchangeably. They are not the same thing!

Jeff Kreines

Kinetta

jeff@kinetta.com

kinetta.com

Sent from iPhone.

On Nov 26, 2020, at 11:31 AM, Marcel B. <bncrcaxlr@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,
All I can contribute to this discussion is my experience with USB 3.1 gen 1, 3.1 gen 2.

My CalDigit dock provides USB 3.1 gen 1 and 3.1 gen 2. Using PNY SSD 6GB/s on a USB 3.1 gen 2 Startech Toaster I get around 325 MB/s with gen 1 and 490 with gen 2.

Marcel

On 26/11/2020 12:12, pale.edit@gmail.com wrote:

I'd definitely put more stock in what Dom (Gowanus Canal) says, he's way more knowledgeable than me, but I did notice a speed boost with the same hardware when I switched to a PCI 3 PC from a PCI 2 Mac Pro 2010 recently. There are lots of factors involved.

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 10:10 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I was thinking that but thought I was bypassing that by going through the expansion chassis. Now you point out what I hadn't considered. The expansion chassis is connected through the MacPro PCI 2.0 16 lane slot so I thought it would have tons of bandwidth potential but I hadn't thought about if my expansion chassis being PCI 2.0. Even though the backplane has 16 lanes the Allegro USB 3 card is probably sitting in a PCI 2.0 slot.

Here's specs I found:

Summary of PCI Express Interface Parameters:
Data Rate: PCIe 3.0 = 1000MB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 500MB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 250MB/s. Total Bandwidth: (x16 link): PCIe 3.0 = 32GB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 16GB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 8GB/s.

From this it looks like with the 16 lane and 2.0 I should have 16GB/sec and PCIe 2.0 is 500MB/sec. So it would seem the food chain feeding up to the dock should handle at least something closer to 500 MB/sec. From this it still makes me think the dock itself may support 6G but could be built with SATA II chipset. Given I got it off the shelf at Fry's I wouldn't be surprised. The spec said it supports 6G but does that really mean it has 6G technology components or is it just limiting a 6G drive to 3G SATA II?

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:37 PM, <pale.edit@gmail.com> wrote:

I think you are maxing out the PCI 2.0 slots in the old Mac Pro. In a PCI 3.0 system you will get better performance.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:17 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I've got a pair of Seagate IronWolf SSDs that are Sata III and spec says they can get approx 550 Mbps in Sata III. The dock(s) are connected to a Sonnet Allegro PCIe card with 4 USB 3.0 connections. I can only seem to get around 300 MB/sec per individual drive but when I raid 0 them I still only get around 300 MB/sec. I had thought given the vintage of my docks they were all SATA II. I went to Fry's and got the dual dock because it said it supports 1.5, 3.0 & 6.0G Sata drives. I took that to mean it the dock slots are 6G Sata III. When I test the individual slots on the dual dock I only get the 300MB/sec. This leads me to believe that the dock is only Sata II slots. Even given that if I raid 0 the two slots I still only get just a little over 300 MB/sec. I figured it wouldn't double but may get 1.5 times the individual drive speed. I then split the drive set across two docks both USB 3 to the Sonnet Allegro card. I get a little better like 333 Mbps. The Allegro is in my cyclone microsystems expansion chassis hooked up to my mid 2012 MacPro using the 16 lane slot to connect the two. I know the MacPro is Sata II in the tower but I would have thought if the dual dock is truly 6G Sata III then I should be able to get close to 550 Mbps for an individual SSD .

So what in the food chain is limiting things to around 300 Mbps regardless of whether I raid or not. The conversion of USB 3 5 Gbps to Mega Bytes per second is 625MB/sec. So in theory I should be able to get close to the IronWolf spec of 550 MB/sec shouldn't I. I know there is only one controller in the Allegro card I have. I've ordered another to get more USB 3 connections and the new one is the dual controller version. Maybe when I get that in I'll see if splitting across two USB 3 cards helps. Am I missing some overall architecture limitation under the hood? I know sometimes I think in theoretical terms without the experience of practical application.

Someone please bit slap me into a better understanding of what's going on. ;-)

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Hi,
All I can contribute to this discussion is my experience with USB 3.1 gen 1, 3.1 gen 2.

My CalDigit dock provides USB 3.1 gen 1 and 3.1 gen 2. Using PNY SSD 6GB/s on a USB 3.1 gen 2 Startech Toaster I get around 325 MB/s with gen 1 and 490 with gen 2.

Marcel

On 26/11/2020 12:12, pale.edit@gmail.com wrote:

I'd definitely put more stock in what Dom (Gowanus Canal) says, he's way more knowledgeable than me, but I did notice a speed boost with the same hardware when I switched to a PCI 3 PC from a PCI 2 Mac Pro 2010 recently. There are lots of factors involved.

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 10:10 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I was thinking that but thought I was bypassing that by going through the expansion chassis. Now you point out what I hadn't considered. The expansion chassis is connected through the MacPro PCI 2.0 16 lane slot so I thought it would have tons of bandwidth potential but I hadn't thought about if my expansion chassis being PCI 2.0. Even though the backplane has 16 lanes the Allegro USB 3 card is probably sitting in a PCI 2.0 slot.

Here's specs I found:

Summary of PCI Express Interface Parameters:
Data Rate: PCIe 3.0 = 1000MB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 500MB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 250MB/s. Total Bandwidth: (x16 link): PCIe 3.0 = 32GB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 16GB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 8GB/s.

From this it looks like with the 16 lane and 2.0 I should have 16GB/sec and PCIe 2.0 is 500MB/sec. So it would seem the food chain feeding up to the dock should handle at least something closer to 500 MB/sec. From this it still makes me think the dock itself may support 6G but could be built with SATA II chipset. Given I got it off the shelf at Fry's I wouldn't be surprised. The spec said it supports 6G but does that really mean it has 6G technology components or is it just limiting a 6G drive to 3G SATA II?

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:37 PM, <pale.edit@gmail.com> wrote:

I think you are maxing out the PCI 2.0 slots in the old Mac Pro. In a PCI 3.0 system you will get better performance.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:17 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I've got a pair of Seagate IronWolf SSDs that are Sata III and spec says they can get approx 550 Mbps in Sata III. The dock(s) are connected to a Sonnet Allegro PCIe card with 4 USB 3.0 connections. I can only seem to get around 300 MB/sec per individual drive but when I raid 0 them I still only get around 300 MB/sec. I had thought given the vintage of my docks they were all SATA II. I went to Fry's and got the dual dock because it said it supports 1.5, 3.0 & 6.0G Sata drives. I took that to mean it the dock slots are 6G Sata III. When I test the individual slots on the dual dock I only get the 300MB/sec. This leads me to believe that the dock is only Sata II slots. Even given that if I raid 0 the two slots I still only get just a little over 300 MB/sec. I figured it wouldn't double but may get 1.5 times the individual drive speed. I then split the drive set across two docks both USB 3 to the Sonnet Allegro card. I get a little better like 333 Mbps. The Allegro is in my cyclone microsystems expansion chassis hooked up to my mid 2012 MacPro using the 16 lane slot to connect the two. I know the MacPro is Sata II in the tower but I would have thought if the dual dock is truly 6G Sata III then I should be able to get close to 550 Mbps for an individual SSD .

So what in the food chain is limiting things to around 300 Mbps regardless of whether I raid or not. The conversion of USB 3 5 Gbps to Mega Bytes per second is 625MB/sec. So in theory I should be able to get close to the IronWolf spec of 550 MB/sec shouldn't I. I know there is only one controller in the Allegro card I have. I've ordered another to get more USB 3 connections and the new one is the dual controller version. Maybe when I get that in I'll see if splitting across two USB 3 cards helps. Am I missing some overall architecture limitation under the hood? I know sometimes I think in theoretical terms without the experience of practical application.

Someone please bit slap me into a better understanding of what's going on. ;-)

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

I'd definitely put more stock in what Dom (Gowanus Canal) says, he's way more knowledgeable than me, but I did notice a speed boost with the same hardware when I switched to a PCI 3 PC from a PCI 2 Mac Pro 2010 recently. There are lots of factors involved.

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 10:10 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I was thinking that but thought I was bypassing that by going through the expansion chassis. Now you point out what I hadn't considered. The expansion chassis is connected through the MacPro PCI 2.0 16 lane slot so I thought it would have tons of bandwidth potential but I hadn't thought about if my expansion chassis being PCI 2.0. Even though the backplane has 16 lanes the Allegro USB 3 card is probably sitting in a PCI 2.0 slot.

Here's specs I found:

Summary of PCI Express Interface Parameters:
Data Rate: PCIe 3.0 = 1000MB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 500MB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 250MB/s. Total Bandwidth: (x16 link): PCIe 3.0 = 32GB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 16GB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 8GB/s.

From this it looks like with the 16 lane and 2.0 I should have 16GB/sec and PCIe 2.0 is 500MB/sec. So it would seem the food chain feeding up to the dock should handle at least something closer to 500 MB/sec. From this it still makes me think the dock itself may support 6G but could be built with SATA II chipset. Given I got it off the shelf at Fry's I wouldn't be surprised. The spec said it supports 6G but does that really mean it has 6G technology components or is it just limiting a 6G drive to 3G SATA II?

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:37 PM, <pale.edit@gmail.com> wrote:

I think you are maxing out the PCI 2.0 slots in the old Mac Pro. In a PCI 3.0 system you will get better performance.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:17 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I've got a pair of Seagate IronWolf SSDs that are Sata III and spec says they can get approx 550 Mbps in Sata III. The dock(s) are connected to a Sonnet Allegro PCIe card with 4 USB 3.0 connections. I can only seem to get around 300 MB/sec per individual drive but when I raid 0 them I still only get around 300 MB/sec. I had thought given the vintage of my docks they were all SATA II. I went to Fry's and got the dual dock because it said it supports 1.5, 3.0 & 6.0G Sata drives. I took that to mean it the dock slots are 6G Sata III. When I test the individual slots on the dual dock I only get the 300MB/sec. This leads me to believe that the dock is only Sata II slots. Even given that if I raid 0 the two slots I still only get just a little over 300 MB/sec. I figured it wouldn't double but may get 1.5 times the individual drive speed. I then split the drive set across two docks both USB 3 to the Sonnet Allegro card. I get a little better like 333 Mbps. The Allegro is in my cyclone microsystems expansion chassis hooked up to my mid 2012 MacPro using the 16 lane slot to connect the two. I know the MacPro is Sata II in the tower but I would have thought if the dual dock is truly 6G Sata III then I should be able to get close to 550 Mbps for an individual SSD .

So what in the food chain is limiting things to around 300 Mbps regardless of whether I raid or not. The conversion of USB 3 5 Gbps to Mega Bytes per second is 625MB/sec. So in theory I should be able to get close to the IronWolf spec of 550 MB/sec shouldn't I. I know there is only one controller in the Allegro card I have. I've ordered another to get more USB 3 connections and the new one is the dual controller version. Maybe when I get that in I'll see if splitting across two USB 3 cards helps. Am I missing some overall architecture limitation under the hood? I know sometimes I think in theoretical terms without the experience of practical application.

Someone please bit slap me into a better understanding of what's going on. ;-)

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

By our experience the Allegro 3.0 USB cards are helpful in only some limited ways.

We found the card only reliably working in 10.8.5. We tried the card/s in 10.10.x(latest), 10.11.6 and 10.15.6 but were less than impressed, even figured some system freezes due to this card. However, we haven't found a liable replacement yet.

So, were are transferring materials from USB 3.0 through a MacMini attached to our FC network (via Atto TB1 — 8GB/FC) with a much better speed. That is: not eth but FC since the mini is limited to 1G eth (err: was limited until the latest refurb).

Topography is MacMini (2018), several MacPro4.1 / 5.1 up to MacPro2019. Cards are Atto FC 16GB and MacMini runs on Atto 8GB FC, one additional MacPro 4.1 runs on 10.8.5 with the Allegro.

By our experience Allegro in MacPro OS > 10.8.5 and even in the current MacPro 2019: is a disaster.

@Sonnet: you read me?

my 2¢

On 26. Nov 2020, at 16:10, John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I was thinking that but thought I was bypassing that by going through the expansion chassis. Now you point out what I hadn't considered. The expansion chassis is connected through the MacPro PCI 2.0 16 lane slot so I thought it would have tons of bandwidth potential but I hadn't thought about if my expansion chassis being PCI 2.0. Even though the backplane has 16 lanes the Allegro USB 3 card is probably sitting in a PCI 2.0 slot.

Here's specs I found:

Summary of PCI Express Interface Parameters:
Data Rate: PCIe 3.0 = 1000MB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 500MB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 250MB/s. Total Bandwidth: (x16 link): PCIe 3.0 = 32GB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 16GB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 8GB/s.

From this it looks like with the 16 lane and 2.0 I should have 16GB/sec and PCIe 2.0 is 500MB/sec. So it would seem the food chain feeding up to the dock should handle at least something closer to 500 MB/sec. From this it still makes me think the dock itself may support 6G but could be built with SATA II chipset. Given I got it off the shelf at Fry's I wouldn't be surprised. The spec said it supports 6G but does that really mean it has 6G technology components or is it just limiting a 6G drive to 3G SATA II?

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:37 PM, <pale.edit@gmail.com> wrote:

I think you are maxing out the PCI 2.0 slots in the old Mac Pro. In a PCI 3.0 system you will get better performance.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:17 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I've got a pair of Seagate IronWolf SSDs that are Sata III and spec says they can get approx 550 Mbps in Sata III. The dock(s) are connected to a Sonnet Allegro PCIe card with 4 USB 3.0 connections. I can only seem to get around 300 MB/sec per individual drive but when I raid 0 them I still only get around 300 MB/sec. I had thought given the vintage of my docks they were all SATA II. I went to Fry's and got the dual dock because it said it supports 1.5, 3.0 & 6.0G Sata drives. I took that to mean it the dock slots are 6G Sata III. When I test the individual slots on the dual dock I only get the 300MB/sec. This leads me to believe that the dock is only Sata II slots. Even given that if I raid 0 the two slots I still only get just a little over 300 MB/sec. I figured it wouldn't double but may get 1.5 times the individual drive speed. I then split the drive set across two docks both USB 3 to the Sonnet Allegro card. I get a little better like 333 Mbps. The Allegro is in my cyclone microsystems expansion chassis hooked up to my mid 2012 MacPro using the 16 lane slot to connect the two. I know the MacPro is Sata II in the tower but I would have thought if the dual dock is truly 6G Sata III then I should be able to get close to 550 Mbps for an individual SSD .

So what in the food chain is limiting things to around 300 Mbps regardless of whether I raid or not. The conversion of USB 3 5 Gbps to Mega Bytes per second is 625MB/sec. So in theory I should be able to get close to the IronWolf spec of 550 MB/sec shouldn't I. I know there is only one controller in the Allegro card I have. I've ordered another to get more USB 3 connections and the new one is the dual controller version. Maybe when I get that in I'll see if splitting across two USB 3 cards helps. Am I missing some overall architecture limitation under the hood? I know sometimes I think in theoretical terms without the experience of practical application.

Someone please bit slap me into a better understanding of what's going on. ;-)

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

I was thinking that but thought I was bypassing that by going through the expansion chassis. Now you point out what I hadn't considered. The expansion chassis is connected through the MacPro PCI 2.0 16 lane slot so I thought it would have tons of bandwidth potential but I hadn't thought about if my expansion chassis being PCI 2.0. Even though the backplane has 16 lanes the Allegro USB 3 card is probably sitting in a PCI 2.0 slot.

Here's specs I found:

Summary of PCI Express Interface Parameters:

Data Rate: PCIe 3.0 = 1000MB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 500MB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 250MB/s. Total Bandwidth: (x16 link): PCIe 3.0 = 32GB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 16GB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 8GB/s.

From this it looks like with the 16 lane and 2.0 I should have 16GB/sec and PCIe 2.0 is 500MB/sec. So it would seem the food chain feeding up to the dock should handle at least something closer to 500 MB/sec. From this it still makes me think the dock itself may support 6G but could be built with SATA II chipset. Given I got it off the shelf at Fry's I wouldn't be surprised. The spec said it supports 6G but does that really mean it has 6G technology components or is it just limiting a 6G drive to 3G SATA II?

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:37 PM, <pale.edit@gmail.com> wrote:

I think you are maxing out the PCI 2.0 slots in the old Mac Pro. In a PCI 3.0 system you will get better performance.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:17 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

I've got a pair of Seagate IronWolf SSDs that are Sata III and spec says they can get approx 550 Mbps in Sata III. The dock(s) are connected to a Sonnet Allegro PCIe card with 4 USB 3.0 connections. I can only seem to get around 300 MB/sec per individual drive but when I raid 0 them I still only get around 300 MB/sec. I had thought given the vintage of my docks they were all SATA II. I went to Fry's and got the dual dock because it said it supports 1.5, 3.0 & 6.0G Sata drives. I took that to mean it the dock slots are 6G Sata III. When I test the individual slots on the dual dock I only get the 300MB/sec. This leads me to believe that the dock is only Sata II slots. Even given that if I raid 0 the two slots I still only get just a little over 300 MB/sec. I figured it wouldn't double but may get 1.5 times the individual drive speed. I then split the drive set across two docks both USB 3 to the Sonnet Allegro card. I get a little better like 333 Mbps. The Allegro is in my cyclone microsystems expansion chassis hooked up to my mid 2012 MacPro using the 16 lane slot to connect the two. I know the MacPro is Sata II in the tower but I would have thought if the dual dock is truly 6G Sata III then I should be able to get close to 550 Mbps for an individual SSD .

So what in the food chain is limiting things to around 300 Mbps regardless of whether I raid or not. The conversion of USB 3 5 Gbps to Mega Bytes per second is 625MB/sec. So in theory I should be able to get close to the IronWolf spec of 550 MB/sec shouldn't I. I know there is only one controller in the Allegro card I have. I've ordered another to get more USB 3 connections and the new one is the dual controller version. Maybe when I get that in I'll see if splitting across two USB 3 cards helps. Am I missing some overall architecture limitation under the hood? I know sometimes I think in theoretical terms without the experience of practical application.

Someone please bit slap me into a better understanding of what's going on. ;-)

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

_._,_._,_

Wednesday, November 25, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

There are several factors. In short, USB 3.0 has a theoretical limit of around 500MB/s but in practice around 400MB. Depending on USB controller design, you will get 200-350MB/s.

So 330MB/s is good number.

DQS

On Nov 25, 2020, at 11:37 PM, pale.edit@gmail.com wrote:

I think you are maxing out the PCI 2.0 slots in the old Mac Pro. In a PCI 3.0 system you will get better performance.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:17 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
I've got a pair of Seagate IronWolf SSDs that are Sata III and spec says they can get approx 550 Mbps in Sata III. The dock(s) are connected to a Sonnet Allegro PCIe card with 4 USB 3.0 connections. I can only seem to get around 300 MB/sec per individual drive but when I raid 0 them I still only get around 300 MB/sec. I had thought given the vintage of my docks they were all SATA II. I went to Fry's and got the dual dock because it said it supports 1.5, 3.0 & 6.0G Sata drives. I took that to mean it the dock slots are 6G Sata III. When I test the individual slots on the dual dock I only get the 300MB/sec. This leads me to believe that the dock is only Sata II slots. Even given that if I raid 0 the two slots I still only get just a little over 300 MB/sec. I figured it wouldn't double but may get 1.5 times the individual drive speed. I then split the drive set across two docks both USB 3 to the Sonnet Allegro card. I get a little better like 333 Mbps. The Allegro is in my cyclone microsystems expansion chassis hooked up to my mid 2012 MacPro using the 16 lane slot to connect the two. I know the MacPro is Sata II in the tower but I would have thought if the dual dock is truly 6G Sata III then I should be able to get close to 550 Mbps for an individual SSD .

So what in the food chain is limiting things to around 300 Mbps regardless of whether I raid or not. The conversion of USB 3 5 Gbps to Mega Bytes per second is 625MB/sec. So in theory I should be able to get close to the IronWolf spec of 550 MB/sec shouldn't I. I know there is only one controller in the Allegro card I have. I've ordered another to get more USB 3 connections and the new one is the dual controller version. Maybe when I get that in I'll see if splitting across two USB 3 cards helps. Am I missing some overall architecture limitation under the hood? I know sometimes I think in theoretical terms without the experience of practical application.

Someone please bit slap me into a better understanding of what's going on. ;-)

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

This IS the Avid L2

Saturday, November 28, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Semi OT: Bandwidth Bragging Rights!!!

[Avid-L2] Semi OT: Bandwidth Bragging Rights!!!

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

Friday, November 27, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

Re: [Avid-L2] Happy Thanksgiving

Re: [Avid-L2] Happy Thanksgiving

Re: [Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

[Avid-L2] BM Resolve as offline editor replacing Media Composer

Thursday, November 26, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Wednesday, November 25, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Disk Speed limited to 300 Mbs on dock that supports Sata III?

Translation

Blogs of note!

Blog Archive

TwitterL2