Hi Leslie, a while ago I sent an Excel file to Carl with a range of benchmarks I did on various single machines and network configurations. You can look up most of that data at the benchmark pages Carl set up here: http://dcpomatic.com/benchmarks/ Currently, DCP-o-matic works with a 'master' process distributing jobs to local or remote encode processes. Both master and encode processes need to be balanced in order not to starve each other. Carl already did a great job to improve master/client balancing in recent versions of dcp-o-matic. It seems that currently any machine configuration, be it local multicore or multiple remote nodes will max out around 18-20fps. I don't know if Carl has more insight into limits of this whole process, wether they are memory, disc, network, etc. As you can see from these benchmarks, a common, not even optimized 1GigE will be able to sustain around 17-20fps, and it is more or less independent of how many encoding clients you use, that is, this limit will come up with either two very fast networked encoding servers or 6 slow machines. 15 fps will need something like 100MByte/s to sustain 2k/8Bit encoding, as far as I understand the process. If you want to go 4k, or Carl enables 12Bit processing, then this will probably drop to 5-10fps. So, if you want to go towards 4k and future 12Bit, a faster multicore machine with a faster local transfer bandwidth is preferable against multiple networked encode servers. Going 10GigE will probably not pay out currently. The benchmarks will also show you that, for some reason, single high performance CPUs like a 4930k will give you more bang for the buck than multicore-Xeons. E.g. two networked 4930k will outperform a very expensive Dual E5-2690 machine. The reason is probably that some major pre-processing tasks in DCP-o-matic can not be parallelized to keep track with a multi-multi-core encoding pipeline. Also, DCP-o-matic uses some libraries, and parallelization of these modules is beyond what Carl can or will do, I guess. Simply said - DCP-o-matic is not just a j2k converter, and the pre- or postprocessing tasks will not scale with any number of j2k encode threads. As you can see from these benchmarks, the results of multiple 8-12core Xeons are rather disappointing if you compare them to single i4770 or i4930k. The new Haswell CPUs may be worth looking at, although it seems that even there two Haswell single CPU i7 6 or 8 core machines will outperform all Xeon configs. DCP-o-matic encoding speed tracks very good with the Passmark benchmark - you can look up this list https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html and will find the Passmark vs. price comparison very helpful. It is not surprising to find the 4930 and the new 5820 and 5930 among the most cost-effective CPUs, with the 5820 at the sweetspot. The only little drawback is the more expensive mainboard and memory needed to accompany this CPU. As Carl says - if you want to throw money at the problem, you may want to try e.g. Magna Manas 'FinalDCP'. They use the commercial Kakadu encoder, with an optional turbo module. The benchmarks are impressive, and there is a free watermark only version that you can test on your hardware before buying it. - Carsten

Hi Leslie, Music to my ears :) Do let us know how you get on. I am hoping to do some tests myself, soon, with a 25-node i7 cluster on Gbit ethernet. Maybe then I'll be able to weigh in with some more authoritative input ;) Best regards Carl On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, LESLIE HARTMIER wrote: