Video Editing Over NAS

X

xFuryofFivex

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 28, 2004
Messages
1,696
I wanted to centralize my all my data. I also want to have a lower power device to manage that. I looked into assembling a cheaper low power pc, but the power still exceeded that of a NAS.
I dont like the idea of leaving my rig on throughout the day or even all day.(Electric rates in CT raised again recently.
I record video with an HD camera at sometimes 24Mbps. my rig is an i7-4790k, 16GB ram, gtx 970. So it has enough power behind it. my question is.

If i throw a nas in the mix and try to video edit, Which cpu would do the computing. THe nas or my rig?
 
The NAS will only handle storage. All of the real computing will be done by your i7.

You're best off having a NAS for the content you always need / data consolidation, and then put whatever video projects that you're working on local.

I'd recommend the following:

Low Power NAS (better to go for a few big hard drives)

and then keep whatever files you're actively editing on your actual editing workstation, which you shut down whenever you're not using.


(that made more sense in my head. I need more coffee)
 
iamwhoiamtoday said:
The NAS will only handle storage. All of the real computing will be done by your i7.

You're best off having a NAS for the content you always need / data consolidation, and then put whatever video projects that you're working on local.

I'd recommend the following:

Low Power NAS (better to go for a few big hard drives)

and then keep whatever files you're actively editing on your actual editing workstation, which you shut down whenever you're not using.


(that made more sense in my head. I need more coffee)
Click to expand...

I was looking into the QNAP TS-451 or QNAP TS-453 pro. Not sure if i need that much horsepower. Im not even sure i need a 4-bay, i just like to have the ability to expand if i wanted to.
I would like to be able to stream any of my blu-ray rips.(i own about 20 blu-ray movies)

someone suggested using my machine and putting it in sleep when im not using it, then turn on wake on lan when i try to access the data. Would that be sufficient in this respect?
 
I'd say you should figure out what your CPU can handle for "video editing" and match the disk IO to the max workload, with room to spare for other disk access (IE: movies watching while video editing!).

IE: If you're CPU @ 100% only uses (or needs) 200mb/s then you don't need a 450MB/s NAS, but if your CPU can handle 1000MB/s then you should probably go local for cost, and ability to do that with SSD for not much nowadays. But keep in mind other usage of disks and network while video editing as limiting factors too.
 
ToddW2 said:
I'd say you should figure out what your CPU can handle for "video editing" and match the disk IO to the max workload, with room to spare for other disk access (IE: movies watching while video editing!).

IE: If you're CPU @ 100% only uses (or needs) 200mb/s then you don't need a 450MB/s NAS, but if your CPU can handle 1000MB/s then you should probably go local for cost, and ability to do that with SSD for not much nowadays. But keep in mind other usage of disks and network while video editing as limiting factors too.
Click to expand...

Ill try to understand :) Is there a program that can test my throughput? I'm reading that the ts-453 works better for Plex than the ts-451
 
xFuryofFivex said:
Ill try to understand :) Is there a program that can test my throughput? I'm reading that the ts-453 works better for Plex than the ts-451
Click to expand...

I don't think that's worth it. You won't be throughput limited on 1Gbps link. Latency might be an issue given the program, but throughput won't be. Furthermore, at the prices those units are going for ( $600 essentially) you could easily build your own and easily get below or match the power usage of that NAS. Those two models aren't using Atom, Jaguar or ARM. You would also have more storage expansion capabilities and all of that would cost less than than either of those units.

If you are not adverse to building your own I would do it that way.
 
kac77 said:
I don't think that's worth it. You won't be throughput limited on 1Gbps link. Latency might be an issue given the program, but throughput won't be. Furthermore, at the prices those units are going for ( $600 essentially) you could easily build your own and easily get below or match the power usage of that NAS. Those two models aren't using Atom, Jaguar or ARM. You would also have more storage expansion capabilities and all of that would cost less than than either of those units.

If you are not adverse to building your own I would do it that way.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the response, I decided at the moment, i don't have enough data to warrant a NAS purchase. I'm also not adverse to building a nas. Im just not sure the kind of power to put in. Do i go with something like an intel celeron or one of those Quad-core AM1 25W cpus. I was just not interested in spending 600$ on just the box alone.
 
Last edited:
xFuryofFivex said:
Thank you for the response, I decided at the moment, i don't have enough data to warrant a NAS purchase. I'm also not adverse to building a nas. Im just not sure the kind of power to put in. Do i go with something like an intel celeron or one of those Quad-core AM1 25W cpus. I was just not interested in spending 600$ on just the box alone.
Click to expand...

If you are not transcoding then Atom, Celeron J and Athlon 5350 are perfectly fine. If you are though i would seriously consider moving to a Core i3.
 
kac77 said:
If you are not transcoding then Atom, Celeron J and Athlon 5350 are perfectly fine. If you are though i would seriously consider moving to a Core i3.
Click to expand...

I would probably want to run a home plex server. I hear plex works better for home streaming.

Edit - I found the celeron j1900 thanks :)

Is the celeronJ not powerful enough to transcode?

8GB vs 16GB? i would imagine for a NAS setup, 16GB might be overkill?
 
Last edited:
xFuryofFivex said:
I would probably want to run a home plex server. I hear plex works better for home streaming.

Edit - I found the celeron j1900 thanks :)

Is the celeronJ not powerful enough to transcode?

8GB vs 16GB? i would imagine for a NAS setup, 16GB might be overkill?
Click to expand...

I would not opt for the J1900. It has a 1916 passmark score. Plex recommends a score of 2000 for each 1080P/10Mbps stream.

https://support.plex.tv/hc/en-us/ar...kind-of-CPU-do-I-need-for-my-Server-computer-
 
j.yonke said:
How many individuals do you want to plan to stream for? With Plex you can share your library with friends, and access it away from your home network. How many and what platforms do you plan on playing Plex media on?
Click to expand...
currently it would be me, from multiple machines. However going forward i may share it out with like my immediate family (mother,brother,sister, etc)

i found somehting like
Intel Core i3-4130T Haswell Dual-Core at 35W (didnt realize they made low power i3's) or i5-4570T (price difference of about 80) pass mark 4148 vs 4852 seems like the I3 is the better buy for the lower price
 
xFuryofFivex said:
currently it would be me, from multiple machines. However going forward i may share it out with like my immediate family (mother,brother,sister, etc)

i found somehting like
Intel Core i3-4130T Haswell Dual-Core at 35W (didnt realize they made low power i3's) or i5-4570T (price difference of about 80) pass mark 4148 vs 4852 seems like the I3 is the better buy for the lower price
Click to expand...

That i3 would be an excellent candidate for a mid-range machine. If you ever need more compute power, you can always drop in a high end i5 or i7 later on down the road. My recomendation for playing media back at home is to use Plex Home Theater on as many TV's as possible. It typically with playback 99% of your library without the need to transcode. That will leave your compute power on the table to transcode for mobile devices, and your shared library outside your network.
 
j.yonke said:
That i3 would be an excellent candidate for a mid-range machine. If you ever need more compute power, you can always drop in a high end i5 or i7 later on down the road. My recomendation for playing media back at home is to use Plex Home Theater on as many TV's as possible. It typically with playback 99% of your library without the need to transcode. That will leave your compute power on the table to transcode for mobile devices, and your shared library outside your network.
Click to expand...

Is going Quad worth the extra jump in price. Is it possible to keep the device low power though? i see i5's hitting the 55,65,75W range.add additional components, would increase it further.
 
xFuryofFivex said:
Is going Quad worth the extra jump in price. Is it possible to keep the device low power though? i see i5's hitting the 55,65,75W range.add additional components, would increase it further.
Click to expand...

It depends on what you all want to do with your server. If you are only planning on using it as a file server, and Plex with a few individuals, I would not see a need to spend the money. On the other hand if you plan on running some other CPU intensive applications, or experimenting with docker/VM's you may want the extra resources. If you are concerned with power usage, the i5-4690 should use close to the same power as the i3 at idle, and only when it needs to ramp up will it use that extra juice. Considering your server will probably be idle the majority of the time, that would not concern me, but electricity is dirt cheap in IN as well.
 
j.yonke said:
It depends on what you all want to do with your server. If you are only planning on using it as a file server, and Plex with a few individuals, I would not see a need to spend the money. On the other hand if you plan on running some other CPU intensive applications, or experimenting with docker/VM's you may want the extra resources. If you are concerned with power usage, the i5-4690 should use close to the same power as the i3 at idle, and only when it needs to ramp up will it use that extra juice. Considering your server will probably be idle the majority of the time, that would not concern me, but electricity is dirt cheap in IN as well.
Click to expand...

thanks, ill definitely take that into consideration. CT raised their rates once again. 12.629¢/kWh for us.

I probaly wont do anything crazy. I did notice the Qnaps have video surveillance software or recording ability. Does freenas support that as well?
 
xFuryofFivex said:
thanks, ill definitely take that into consideration. CT raised their rates once again. 12.629¢/kWh for us.

I probaly wont do anything crazy. I did notice the Qnaps have video surveillance software or recording ability. Does freenas support that as well?
Click to expand...

Freenas has a feature it calls jails. That should give you a lot of flexibility to install either FreeBSD ports for the jail, or run a virtualbox instance for a non FreeBSD OS. That gives you a ton of options and flexibility for video surveillance software.

http://doc.freenas.org/9.3/freenas_jails.html
 
For haha's i pieced together a cheap build. does it seem sufficient
I went for a motherboard and case that would support up to 4 drives( in case i wanted to go that direction)

Cpu - Intel Core i3-4130T 119.99
GPU - w/ cpu
Mobo - Foxconn B85MX-D LGA $54.99
Case - APEX TX-373 Black Steel MicroATX Mid Tower Computer Case 39.99
PSU - w/ case
Ram - Team Elite 8GB DDR3 DDR3 1600
HDD - HGST Deskstar NAS H3IKNAS30003272SN (3TB)
OS - Freenas
Total cost - $395.00 (not including shipping)

Would this work? the cpu is 35W and has a passmark over 4000.
 
xFuryofFivex said:
For haha's i pieced together a cheap build. does it seem sufficient
I went for a motherboard and case that would support up to 4 drives( in case i wanted to go that direction)

Cpu - Intel Core i3-4130T 119.99
GPU - w/ cpu
Mobo - Foxconn B85MX-D LGA $54.99
Case - APEX TX-373 Black Steel MicroATX Mid Tower Computer Case 39.99
PSU - w/ case
Ram - Team Elite 8GB DDR3 DDR3 1600
HDD - HGST Deskstar NAS H3IKNAS30003272SN (3TB)
OS - Freenas
Total cost - $395.00 (not including shipping)

Would this work? the cpu is 35W and has a passmark over 4000.
Click to expand...

I would opt for a higher quality PSU, and utilize more hard drives right off the bat. THat CPU would be fine.

I put an alternative together for you.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/VNyzRB
 
j.yonke said:
I would opt for a higher quality PSU, and utilize more hard drives right off the bat. THat CPU would be fine.

I put an alternative together for you.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/VNyzRB
Click to expand...

thanks,

i did a similar build while at work

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Ksmc7P

would the 300W not be enough? Wouldnt the gpu be built into the cpu and the motherboard and HDD's shouldnt take up that much? 150-175 at the most?

I noticed you used 2x4GB instead of 1x8GB. is 16GB overkill?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top