Hardware vs Software Compression - Most reliable DVR has?

[LP 0]

First: This really is a brilliant forum, with so much amazing information, I've been reading now for weeks, have learnt a lot, and I just registered today, so here's my first question:

 

In the context of building an affordable and ultra reliable DVR, what's better for performance, longevity, cost, expandability (4,8,16ch) and future "upgradeabilty":

Hardware compression (HW) boards or software compression (SW)?

 

I need to build a DVR which will be headless (no screen/keyboard/mouse) and use the remote software to operate it by LAN or remotely. So I need software that's easy to use, with good features, and timeline/diskmap (so I ruled out Geovision even though it's so popular and has great features). Assume a new PC, DVR duty only, specified as board maker recommends.

 

It would seem that SW is by far the more common of the two, HW boards certainly cost more, but are they any more reliable? What are the real-world pros and cons of either method? What do people prefer and why?

 

Can HW boards be updated if new MPEG-4 codecs like H.264 come out, is H.265 next?? I've looked at AverMedia cards and they just released new software (5.7) for their NV-5000 (SW) with H.264, yet their NV-7000 (HW) uses MPEG-4 and not H.264, and uses an earlier version of their software.

 

I'm sure that with the collective varied expertise in this forum you can shed some light on this??

 

Hey, I thought I might get more responses!!

 

I'm curious what people have found to be more reliable, a faster CPU working harder with software compression, or a slower CPU with the workload shared by the hardware boards?? Which one is (proven) more reliable? Which combination generates more total heat? And which is likely to be more cost effective to upgrade in the future 2 or 3 years??

 

Sorry for all the questions!! I'm still reading lots on this great forum!!

 

Thanks,

LP

Edited May 26, 2006 by Guest

[Micro Jordan 0]

I believe H.264 or MPEG-4 should be not the main point, take a look at the real machine and playback quality should be the key for evaluation for quality.

 

There are many H.264 cards from China, but stability is an issue and I don't see good image quality on H.264.

 

reliable machine should consider heat problem, hardware compression should consider very good cooling system.

 

Mostly I use UltraVNC for remote desktop control, full function and very useful.

It also support Linux version, and Free of charge.

[LP 0]

Thanks for the reply Micro! Are you saying you think that DVRs built with hardware compression card(s) will generate more heat and so need a better (overall) case cooling system, or maybe extra PCI fans etc??

 

My concern is to buy reliable cards that will last, doesn't matter if it costs (a little) more, and I'm thinking about AverMedia amongst others, for the great features (including recordings timeline) but when I look at what AverMedia recommends for their software compression cards they seem like pretty hefty CPU specs!

 

The one card they currently do that has hardware compression (NV7000) needs less CPU but it doesn't support H.264 and AverMedia's website says it's going to be replaced by another card (also called NV7000) that will be 8 channels instead of the current 4, but will have H.264..

 

Should I not be worried about H.264 (as disk is getting cheaper all the time) except that I'd also like to have the best remote pictures possibe for those times when using a 56K modem to dial-up, and I know that H.264 is supposed to help with that because of the smaller file sizes..

 

Sorry about all the questions!!

LP

[Thomas 0]

You have some variables in there. I can try to speak to some of the questions.

 

1. Futureproofing.

 

Software based systems will have the advantage. DSPs aren't like CPUs. DSPs can do certain things much faster then CPUs but all they can do is that one thing. Reprogramable FPGA exsist but aren't practical for something like this. The MPEG variant that the card uses is the only one it will ever use.

 

2. Reliability

 

This one is a push. It all comes down to the software rather then heat produced. Assuming you don't do anything truely foolish, it will be software that is 90% of your issues.

[LP 0]

Thanks Tom! I've read many of your detailed posts on here, appreciate your advice, sorry about my questions, I'm lacking in focus right now since I feel like l have so very much to learn..

 

I took a quick look at Video Insight's website, and it looks great, but do you have a simple client application that is not browser based? I would need that for low-tech users (simple and goof-proof) based on the last couple of years that I've been training small business owners on a (now outdated) DVR that is very easy to use, with basically 2 screens, but it doesn't have any great features.. Hence my searching now..

 

So, regarding futureproofing:

 

1) Go with software compression, so future codecs can be used, CPU performance is (rapidly) getting better/cheaper anyway?

 

2) What about PCI-E slots and new DVR cards that will take advantage of that speed - They'll be the standard soon enough?

 

3) Hyperthreading seems a DVR no (says AverMedia) Why is that? What about using Dual Core CPUs to improve performance?

 

4) Should use SATA disks for reliability, and they're getting bigger/faster?

 

5) A solution that does analogue and IP together, for best flexibility. Eg: A business with a main location (several analogue cams) and smaller ones (maybe one/two IP cams).

 

Forgive my newbie questions, I have been involved with DVRs for a couple of years, but only helping small business owners decide their camera placements, justifying the investment, and then coming back after the install to train them how to use that oh-so-basic system..

 

So I've seen many business owner struggle with new stuff, and feel I know what is needed for ease of use for them, as only when clients use their DVR will they get results for their business and boost profits etc..

 

My full (humble) respect to you guys in here who know all this stuff backwards, and I'll apologize in advance for all my dumb questions!!

LP

[cctv_down_under 0]

1) Go with software compression, so future codecs can be used, CPU performance is (rapidly) getting better/cheaper anyway?

I would try to estimate how long you want to keep the system, if for only a short time...3yrs perhaps, then hardware compression will be advantagous

 

2) What about PCI-E slots and new DVR cards that will take advantage of that speed - They'll be the standard soon enough?

This is a good point, but the PCI bus is needed only if using software compression...now do not flame me..I know that is not exact, but with hardware compression you already have the BUS needed if you go standalone

3) Hyperthreading seems a DVR no (says AverMedia) Why is that? What about using Dual Core CPUs to improve performance?

It depends how th software is written if it can use the technology or not.

4) Should use SATA disks for reliability, and they're getting bigger/faster?

Sata are also good for cooling and airflow, it is pretty much standard these days anyhow.

 

5) A solution that does analogue and IP together, for best flexibility. Eg: A business with a main location (several analogue cams) and smaller ones (maybe one/two IP cams).

I agree, this is the best idea

[Micro Jordan 0]

Say.

 

No matter for Hardware or software compression cards, build the DVR system should always notice the heat airflow. Especially the hardware compression cards.

 

As I know, the specifications of A2D video decoders, most of them can work up to 70C degrees. But those DSP(Codecs) or PCI bridge is only 60C degree.... So, before the Video Decoder such as BT878 out of work, PCI bridge or DSP will out of work first.

 

PCI express interface seems a very important issue for the coming year. Most DVR system builder use consumer motherboards, such as ASUS, Gigabyte, or MSI... There will be not much PCI slots left on the motherboards.

 

For CPU usage, Most H/W compression DVR have no good Software compression technology. Either the De-Compression. So, playback seems to be very limit and use more CPU usage then Software Compression products.

 

Some HW Cards also need to de-compress playback thru the card. I think most of them can only do 1 CH playback, or 4CH playback at the same time, not 16CH.... So here comes your choice again.

 

Live Display quality is also concerned. I don't see any H/W compression DVRs have good Live Display quality especially when they use Quad IC for realtime display. But really, 1CH live full screen display is great because a signel CH Full D1 display is also Quad IC's main feature.

But, 4CH composed realtime display is always not good.

You can see GeoVision's 1480 card and compare the 1CH full screen and all 16 CH realtime display....

 

Dual Core CPU, HyperThreading CPU, I would highly suggest Dual Core CPU. Hyper Threading CPU have very serious Heat problem... Dual Core CPU is developed by INTEL's P-3 or Centrino development team. Not very high frequency but, Power consumption is a lot better.

 

But, Both, Software, Driver, Codec(Software), Motion detection modules..etc., should be optimized carefully for Dual Core/HyperThreading to utilized the CPU usage. If a DVR software been well optimized, Then INTEL's Dual Core Pentium-D 2.66GHz will be a very cost effective choice for DVR system builder.

 

Anyway, before you choose a software or hardware compression product. Hear the reputation of the system and get some know-how of system builder is quite important to make a reliable system.

 

Ooops... If you also need good remote surveillance, IP surveillance features, Software compression system is highly recommanded. Most of them can extra adjust the remote video streams compression engine. No need to use Hardware compression chips to compress again.

[WendyWei 0]

Thanks Tom! I've read many of your detailed posts on here, appreciate your advice, sorry about my questions, I'm lacking in focus right now since I feel like l have so very much to learn..

 

I took a quick look at Video Insight's website, and it looks great, but do you have a simple client application that is not browser based? I would need that for low-tech users (simple and goof-proof) based on the last couple of years that I've been training small business owners on a (now outdated) DVR that is very easy to use, with basically 2 screens, but it doesn't have any great features.. Hence my searching now..

 

So, regarding futureproofing:

 

1) Go with software compression, so future codecs can be used, CPU performance is (rapidly) getting better/cheaper anyway?

 

2) What about PCI-E slots and new DVR cards that will take advantage of that speed - They'll be the standard soon enough?

 

3) Hyperthreading seems a DVR no (says AverMedia) Why is that? What about using Dual Core CPUs to improve performance?

 

Dear Customer:

I would like to make a little comment on the hyperthreading topic.

 

For hyper threading technology we are suggesting that if customer is not using Windows XP please disable it this is based on intel's suggestion.

 

And for customer using Windows XP as intel suggestion it is better to enable this technology.

 

Also on our latest NV6000 system we highly suggest customer enabling hyperthreading for better performance.

 

As for dual core CPU we have tested on NV series and our NV series could fully support it.

 

Therefore it is not a problem for using hyper threading technology nor using a dual Core CPU on our products .

 

Sorry if there is any misleading information we have brought to you previously.