USB video grabbers and computer speed
Posted 30 July 2014 - 04:50 PM
Posted 30 July 2014 - 05:47 PM
Posted 30 July 2014 - 06:39 PM
Posted 30 July 2014 - 08:13 PM
Posted 30 July 2014 - 08:35 PM
Posted 30 July 2014 - 08:50 PM
Posted 30 July 2014 - 09:08 PM
Posted 30 July 2014 - 10:04 PM
Please also check this CN post. By running the "USB connection chain" displaying software, you can identify how your "heavy bandwidth" consuming USB dongles are arranged.
I am not claiming USB bandwidth is the only bottleneck that will be THE issue; other components in your PC (CPU, memory, and hard drive) can also be issues as well.
By using that USB displaying tool, the goal is trying to spread the traffic to three different root hubs, if you can make it happen that way.
Three big bandwidth eaters (isochronous feeds at CCIR656 rate) competing over the same fixed sized pipe can be an issue.
Posted 30 July 2014 - 10:41 PM
Hopefully your CPU can be swapped out for a quad core, that's always a good idea if one can be found inexpensively and extends the life of a system. The GPU can be upgraded and you can put in a solid state drive.
Posted 31 July 2014 - 01:14 PM
- jfunai likes this
Posted 31 July 2014 - 09:43 PM
Posted 31 July 2014 - 10:15 PM
Posted 31 July 2014 - 11:44 PM
Al, I think a video card will help you a lot. As long as you have an open slot, you could try one with 1gb RAM. Nothing fancy is needed because it's much less intensive than gaming, a $50 one is fine. At some point, all the Windows updates and spam overwhelm an older system, no matter what the CPU speed, RAM, etc. I also only use Miloslick 1.x because I couldn't switch between frame grabbers without shutting it down.
I am running 2 frame grabbers on one USB 2.0 long repeater chain and another on another long run USB repeater. I find the system handles this load ok until I use splitcam to broadcast on NSN.. Then it just hangs and slows down huge... So I think it's the splitcam and NSN that crushes the speed and responsiveness... Is this a GPU or a CPU or a RAM problem you think?
Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:43 PM
Posted 11 August 2014 - 02:31 PM
That is true Charles, but if I understand correctly most are trying to get the best picture quality so encoding into a compressed format goes against that. Having said that, if there are ancillary channels that quality isn't as important then this would be a good solution. For example, I'm thinking of putting one of those LN300 based astro cams on my Celestron Firstscope as a finder, in such a case I don't really care about quality but mostly sensitivity is what I'm looking for.