Multiprocessor settings and hard drive...

Hello everyone,

I'm new to AE so I'd appreciate a little help with a few settings, the preferences are a little more complex than the familiar Photoshop and Illustrator ones.

I'll list my PC specs and hopefully it'll make it easier to answer.

Intel i7 975 Extreme (4 cores)

6GB DDR3 Triple Channel Ram

64 bit OS (Vista)

|

Hard Drive Set-Up

X2 150GB WD Velociraptor (set RAID 0) This is the main drive that the operating system and all the programs are installed.

X1 150GB WD Velociraptor (This drive is blank and is used solely has a scratch disk in Photoshop and Illustrator)

X1 1TB WD Caviar Black (used as storage)

X2 750GB External Seagate Drives. (Storage)

The graphics card is an Asus GTX 295 (Very powerful Multi-GPU. 1792 MB)

|

Basically I'd like an expert opinion on what the best settings would be for my system, mainly the Memory %26amp; Multiprocessing settings. Should I use all the cores or should I leave some for other programs. I know this question is dependent on how I would be using AE but I don't know the answer to that because I've only just started using it, therefore I don't know if I'll be bouncing from Illustrator and Photoshop... I think I'll be doing a mix of everything but mainly motion graphics - is it common practice to jump from Photoshop to After Effects? etc.

|

I'd also like to know what would be the best way of working when it comes to hard drives. How should I use my hard drive set up to get the most out of AE?

Hope this makes sense!?

Cheers

Ps. I'm using After Effects CS4. I'm also upgrading the RAM to 12GB... (I know 12GB is an overkill but I want to future proof myself.)

Multiprocessor settings and hard drive... I know 12GB is an overkill but I want to future proof myself.

Multiprocessor settings and hard drive...

Thanks for taking the time to answer my question Mylenium. It's got to be a habit writing the ''I know it's an overkill'' line, I'm mainly Photoshop and Illustrator which I'm sure you know runs easily on 6GB. I've just this minute purchased another 6GB so hopefully this will suffice. Would you say 24GB is an overkill? I only ask because my motherboard can accommodate this amount of RAM. However, I'd have to replace all my 2GB strips with 4GB strips.

Regarding footage, should I run the input footage from the RAID and then output to my 1TB drive or vice versa? Which would benefit more from the RAID, input or output? The RAID drives run at 10,000 rpm (each) just to let you know.

Do I have to use the same drive with the Conformed Media Cache or would you recommend I use one of my other internal drives? Regarding these settings, should I change the ''Database'' folder or just the ''Cache'' folder? What does the ''Enable Disk Cache'' check box do? Is that the temporary disk cache you mentioned?

I'm sorry for all these questions but it's difficult to find any information that's absolute, I'd rather get the opinion of an expert rather than trying to sift through heaps of information myself.

Many thanks

Luke

Thanks
for taking the time to answer my question Mylenium. It's got to be a
habit writing the ''I know it's an overkill'' line, I'm mainly Photoshop
and Illustrator which I'm sure you know runs easily on 6GB. I've just
this minute purchased another 6GB so hopefully this will suffice. Would
you say 24GB is an overkill? I only ask because my motherboard can
accommodate this amount of RAM. However, I'd have to replace all my 2GB
strips with 4GB strips. Would you say 24GB is an overkill? I only ask because my motherboard can accommodate this amount of RAM. However, I'd have to replace all my 2GB strips with 4GB strips.

OK. I'm confused.?You said ''On a quad core machine, AE can use up to 16 GB of RAM (4 GB per core) when using the ''Render Multiple Frames Simulataneously'' feautre. Having more than that could help you run other applications with less disk swapping, for example''

But you also said: http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/2/957712#957714

This is an i7 machine we are talking about here.?So do we turn MP on or off?

I have to slightly contradict Mr. Rozenfeld on that one. While
generally input is more critical, on the output end it's quite possible
to just as well choke up things. The point here realyl is, which output
types and file formats you use in combination with what effects and
features. On a Core7i with decently optimized plug-ins like e.g.
Particular 2 it's quite well possible to quickly render even complex
projects and at that point, writing multiple images simultanously may
put some stress on your disks, especially in 32bpc mode with large HD
files. You will not notice any such thing with most movie formats,
though - because the frames need to be appended sequentially, most of
them cause the MP render to throttle down, i.e. wait for the BG
instances to finish in the correct order.

OK. I'm confused.?You said ''On a
quad core machine, AE can use up to 16 GB of RAM (4 GB per core) when
using the ''Render Multiple Frames Simulataneously'' feautre. Having more
than that could help you run other applications with less disk
swapping, for example''

But you also said: http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/2/957712#957714

This is an i7 machine we are talking about here.?So do we turn MP on or off?

That's awesome!!!! Thanks!

BTW: does the update also fix the ''Locking Existing Frames'' situation? (Sorry, I'm not trying to hijack this thread. I Promise)

The 9.02 update doesn't fix the issue with how AE sees the cores on the i7, as far as I know the update fixes a few bugs with some of the CC effects. Technically the i7 has 4 cores with 8 threads so I'm not sure how AE handles the hyper threading under 64bit Vista. According to the Adobe website AE counts the virtual CPU's so it should recognise hyper-threading and display the i7 has having 8 cores.

Quote

'' After Effects can also use multiple processes to accelerate rendering of a single frame. This form of multiprocessing can take advantage of hyper-threading. The number of CPUs that After Effects reports in the Multiprocessing Preferences dialog box for accelerating rendering within a single frame counts the virtual (logical) CPUs available due to hyper-threading.''

I'm seeing only 4 cores in AE with my i7 975, possible 2.8GB RAM per core. Hyper-threading is enabled in the BIOS and the operating system, Vista 64bit, sees 8 cores (in Task Manager and Device Manager). I read elsewhere on the internet that i7 on Macs have no problem with this and will display 8 cores within the preferences in AE.

Can anyone actually confirm running a i7 under 64Bit Vista and seeing 8 cores in the preferences?

I'm seeing the same thing.?Vista 64bit sees 8 cores.?AE only sees the 4.?That's with the update.

Actually, that's the right thing for AE to do, Shawn.

Your i7 processor has four physical cores and it uses a technology called hyperthreading, which makes the system see another four logical or virtual cores. In other words, they are not real, physical cores.

The kind of render-farm-in-a-box model AE uses needs real, physical cores. If it saw the logical/virtual cores as real ones, AE would launch a rendering instance for each of them, they would take a lot of RAM and finally be counterproductive for rendering speeds. In other words, you don't want AE to treat virtual cores as if they were physical cores.

Note that AE can benefit from hyperthreading by using other multiprocessing optimizations it has. It's just not a great idea to launch separate rendering instances for virtual cores with the render multiple frames feature.

In fact, for some Xeon-based machines (recent Mac Pros, for example), AE could report the virtual cores as physical cores, and under those circumstances telling AE not to use those cores could be the best idea.

The issues 9.02 addressed with i7 processors were about reliability/stability, not about treating virtual cores as physical ones. Because they are not that.

Semlon: The paragraph you quoted is contrary to what I heard so far.

I楹搇l try to get a statement about this. Because the important thing is not if AE reports or not the virtual cores, but if launching separate rendering instances for virtual cores would provide any benefit or be directly counterproductive.

Note that if AE really treated the four virtual cores as actual cores (ie, 8 cores in total), you'd need at least 16 GB of RAM (as always, 2 GB per rendering instance) for the backround instances to work correctly.

OK, Semlon.

No need for a statement.

I re-read the quote you posted and it says something very similar to what I just posted in a previous message in this thread,

AE can and does take advantage of hypethreading by using all physical and virtual cores when using multiprocessing optimizations to render a single frame. This happens independently from the ''Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously'' settings. For the latter feature, you wouldn't get much or any advantage from launching rendering instances for the virtual cores. And RAM requirements would be much, much higher.

The last bit of the quote is not ''selling'' the fact that the virtual cores appear in some cases in the multiprocessing preferences, but explains why that could happen.

I've only seen the virtual cores appear in MP preferences in Xeon-based systems, but that's not a good thing per se. You would probably want to turn off those virtual CPUs if they appeared there.

As I said, AE will use them but not in the context of this specific feature.

Lots of great answers here, but after months of trying to figure these questions out for Production Houses in NYC, I got a excellent response from the AE engineers.

here it is: ''leave the Multiprocessor option OFF - Leave the Memory and Multiprocessing option to the default settings''

It bears repeating that in most all cases, the default setting works great. The trade-off for turning it on (mentioned before by others) is pushing and pulling frames. This is the same reason a lot of people never used Watch Folders and Network Rendering....it was and is a great solution, but only when the number of layers and complexity of the project make exchanging files worthwhile.

Again, according to the After Effects engineers, 9 out of 10 times it should be left OFF.

Here is my ''personal'' rule of thumb....if you are waiting for screen redraw of the comp window that takes more than 6 seconds after you move the Timeline Indicator....trying Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously is worth the effort. Saying that, you need to test this by mapping out your similar projects and seeing when and if it helps, this will give you a basis on whether to use it.

my 2 cents

Steve

Steve: What AE engineer told you that the best thing is to leave multiprocessing off? Where did you read that AE engineers say that 9 out of 10 times it should be left off? I think the most likely thing they told you is, when you enable multiprocessing, leave everything else in the Memory and Multiprocessing preferences at default values.

Your i7 processor has four physical cores and it uses a technology called hyperthreading, which makes the system see another four logical or virtual cores. In other words, they are not real, physical cores.

I hope this does not offend, but I don't know who you are.

Would you mind updating me?

Steve

Note that AE can benefit from hyperthreading by using other multiprocessing optimizations it has. It's just not a great idea to launch separate rendering instances for virtual cores with the render multiple frames feature.

I hope this does not offend, but I don't know who you are.

Would you mind updating me?

I'm
sorry but to me the quote, which is from the Adobe website, seems to
elucidate that fact that AE will see the 8 threads on the i7 and
display them as 8 cores in the Multiprocessing dialogue box. It clearly
states that AE ''counts the virtual (logical) CPUs available due to
hyper-threading''

Adolfo,

Does this reply go only to you?

Steve

No, Steve.

This is posted to the forum.

If you need to ask or say something privately, you can use private messaging in the forum site.