Blue Iris Performance Statistics

Q™

Q™

IPCT Contributor
Feb 16, 2015
4,939
3,987
Megatroplis, USA
Somehow I missed this and just came across it yesterday.

Wow! What fabulous work!

I believe that @bp2008 is responsible this? This is a terrific method to analyze CPU vs. load and subsequent performance. A+++ IMO!

Nut now I want an i7-8700! smiley6.gif

Blue Iris Update Helper

Cheers.gif @bp2008!​
 
  • Like
Reactions: SouthernYankee, bp2008, anijet and 2 others
  • Like
Reactions: aesterling, anijet, awsum140 and 1 other person
  • Like
Reactions: DLONG2, SouthernYankee, fenderman and 2 others
The old wine taste on a beer budget we all seem to be stuck with.
 
It would be very helpful to the forum as a group if everyone participated in the automatic data collections.
The more data points the better decision on the correct system to use.
The data collection has nearly zero impact on your system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: awsum140
Q™ said:
In Brian's " Blue Iris Performance Statistics," what is the formula by which "MP/s" (column) are measured?
Click to expand...
Based on my personal system in the database, it appears to be:

SUM_TOTAL( (Horizontal_Res_PX * Vertical_Res_PX)*FPS ) / 1 million

but since I don't see the actual resolution values in the database, you could approximate it using:
SUM_TOTAL( database_cameras_resolution_MPX * FPS ) to get in the ballpark.
 
crw030

If you click on the cpu in the report a detail report pops up. This shows the pixel per camera and the frame rate for the camera. Not hard to calculate MP/s
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q™
SouthernYankee said:
If you click on the cpu in the report a detail report pops up
Click to expand...

Well that is brilliant. Thank you @SouthernYankee, and THANK YOU @bp2008. It took about 2-minutes to paste the popup matrix into Excel, add a column for total MPs, add a sum, and format it to look nice.

Brian, this is incredible work. It would be most helpful if a column showing each camera's IP address was added.

Outstanding work bro!

mp-chart.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: awsum140
SouthernYankee said:
Not hard to calculate MP/s
Click to expand...
I knew about that I just thought if someone was trying to match the MP/s exactly that is shown for the system.

For Example: Q’s example calculates as 340.7 but I suspect 341.3 is the value shown for the system. I was just trying to show how you get the actual value shown, but your way would be 1) simpler and 2) probably “close enough”

I work in reporting, so if the correct answer is actually 341.3 - I cant help myself, I have to figure out how they got that number!
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns
crw030 said:
if the correct answer is actually 341.3 - I cant help myself, I have to figure out how they got that number
Click to expand...

I believe that your formula is correct @crw030...but I didn't have all the data and believed that I would have had to log into each camera to obtain each camera's horizontal and vertical resolution. That's a lot of work (and I am very lazy), so I settled for "good enough!"

vacation.gif
 
Makes sense Q, if there was a faster way than checking camera by camera then you could get the same exact number.

But the way SouthernYankee is describing is “close enough” to be useful, after all if people are using the database to determine what system requirements are for a “10 camera system” and compute their MP*FPS as 340.7 MP/s pretty sure any system running about that many MP/s is a “close enough” to a good fit.

It’s at least a starting point to open the discussion about what is required to run that MP/s rate with motion detection, direct to disk, with or without Quicksync. Significantly easier than SWAGging it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom