kakvey 0 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 If my sever use CPU core i3.4th 4t HHD ram 4GB so I want to ask that how many user that can access to that sever when streaming the video...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chef 3745 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBers 6766 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 If my sever use CPU core i3.4th 4t HHD ram 4GB so I want to ask that how many user that can access to that sever when streaming the video...... You need to get @@BAS, @@MrWebsmith, @@MSattler and/or @@pir8radio to chip in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAS 225 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 (edited) It all really depends on how much transcoding is needed for your users apps/client and also how much upload bandwidth you have for external users. My system specs are as followed Emby Server PC Processor - Intel Core I5-2500 3.3ghz Memory - 16GB DDR3 2133 Hard Drives - 1 - 256GB Crucial SSD 2 - 1TB Hitachi 6 - 2TB Seagate 3 - 4TB Seagate 1 - 5TB Toshiba Video Card - ATI Radeon 5670 HD 1GB GDDR3 PCIe 16x I personally have very limited upload bandwidth in my area, so I limit my users to 500k SD streams or 0.5 Mbps. I also tend to store my TV episodes in SD format by default locally and my movies tend to be more in the HD category. Because of bandwidth restrictions in area I pretty much force a transcode for every external user I have on my server. Locally here at my own house almost all content is stored in a direct play format to avoid additional transcoding. My setup can usually handle 2-3 HD transcodes or 3-4 SD transcodes at the same exact time. As far as users logged in and playing at the same time, by limiting my bandwidth in the way I have I can allow more users on at the same time. As long as they all don't happen to hit play at the exact same moment in time we usually never have issues and if anything it usually always revolves around someone getting greedy with hitting the play button multiple times instead of being patient for other users ffmpeg processes to end.. An example from last night of 8 users on at same time, 6 being external transcoding users. User names and pics removed for privacy reasons. Running absolutely fine. What would be a neat idea is somehow if we could tell our Emby server, hey my server can only handle 3 ffmpeg processes at the same exact time. Then if user 4 hits play and your server is at its ffmpeg process peak and it needs to transcode put them in a waiting in line ffmpeg Q with a countdown until their ffmpeg process can/will kick off. In terms of being user friendly I would imagine, Server is busy right now, your video will begin in 2 mins... something along those lines. Hope some of that helps, not real sure on your current hardware what to expect out of performance. Edited June 28, 2016 by BAS 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWebsmith 598 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 as BAS points out.. there are a ton of factors.. my server isnt as busy as his is, but there are times i have 3 external streams and 2 local/internal streams.. all in HD simultaneously... (local would be generally direct, ext. generally transcode for me as well) emby server: core i5 8gb ddr3 ssd main drive storage/media servers: 2x unraid on local lan (50tb total across moves and tv) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSattler 387 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 as BAS points out.. there are a ton of factors.. my server isnt as busy as his is, but there are times i have 3 external streams and 2 local/internal streams.. all in HD simultaneously... (local would be generally direct, ext. generally transcode for me as well) emby server: core i5 8gb ddr3 ssd main drive storage/media servers: 2x unraid on local lan (50tb total across moves and tv) These guys already nailed all of it. i7-6700 Gpu Transcoding Enabled, Max Cores, Throttling disabled 150Mbps Upload Speed So, typically I limit max throughput per user at 30Mbps. What that means is for all TV Series, remote users can direct play if they have the download speeds to make it work. The more people are direct playing, the more users you can deal with. I can have 5-6 folks on without any issues. The one thing to remember though, is even with direct play, unless the user is local and the app can get to SMB paths directly, all media is still flowing through your Emby server if storage is remote. So let's say 4 users are all direct playing a movie remotely, and the movie's are all 30Mbps, that means that I have 120Mbps going through the Emby Servers interface each way. At some point with enough users you would want to go with bonded interfaces or 10GB interfaces. This is something I'm starting to consider now. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyFr79 228 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 There are so many factors that play into how many users you can host to. The biggest factor if you're dealing with external users will be the upload speed of your ISP connection. All other factors are moot if you have crappy upload. After that you then deal with the following. Direct Play vs Transcoding needed Encoding (x.264, x.265. mpeg2, etc for video, AC3, DTS, AAC, FLAC, etc for audio) Bitrate of the source media vs the transcoded bitrate Resolution of the video And that's just scratching the surface and not even getting into hardware after that which in most cases won't matter until you start dealing with a large user base. All these things factor in to how many people you'll be able to host to. There's no magic formula that says CPU X + Memory Y = how many users. It's not and never will be that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pir8radio 1292 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 (edited) Yea what they said..... I did an internal test with 16 streams trans-coding at the same time from my server to my desktop pc.. Shown in this POST. All streams were being transcoded at the same time. The client was using all of its CPU, server was doing fine, still responsive, transcodes were keeping up fine... One thing you might want to look at is possibly downloading PROCESS LASSO and set FFMPEG to use all but one core. I know you can kind of do this in the dashboard of emby, but it doesn't matter when you have multiple instances of ffmpeg running, they randomly use different cores... I have a 10 core CPU with hyper-threading so it shows up in windows as 20 cores, i limit ffmpeg specific cores 1-16 leaving 17-20 open for the OS and EMBY application, this allows ffmpeg to run hard but not freeze up emby's browser interface or the server PC. Works for me, others might have different setups... I know you were more asking what your setup could handle, but unless someone out there has the same setup, you are going to have to just give it a try... My server: Processor: Xeon E5-2470 v2 RAM: 48 Gb DDR3-1600 ECC NO GPU Trans-coding Other stuff.... Edited June 29, 2016 by pir8radio 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chef 3745 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyFr79 228 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Those are some big networks, and lots of sharing. Your i3 probably has dual core, showing as four cores (like mine), good for household stuff but might not be great for other households to log onto. You will probably experience lockups if you have a lot of transcoding happening. My i3 can handle transcoding to about four devices in my home, without pegging the CPU. Still very happy with my i3, it isn't fancy like these other guys... I wish I had that set up... You say that until you see some of our power bills lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest asrequested Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I'm running an i7 6700k with 32GB of DDR4, and you guys are really making me want to go bigger. Not because I have to, just because ... well, why the hell not! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyFr79 228 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I'm running an i7 6700k with 32GB of DDR4, and you guys are really making me want to go bigger. Not because I have to, just because ... well, why the hell not! lol DO IT! lol I'm running a Dell R810 with (4) 8 core Xeons for a total of 32 cores/64threads and 128GB of RAM, mind you it's my VM host so more than just Emby run's on it but you get the picture. The file server I'm running is only running dual quad core Xeons, and 48GB of RAM which is overkill for just file storage, 54.5TB of usable Storage on a 24x3TB RAID 50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWebsmith 598 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 One thing you might want to look at is possibly downloading PROCESS LASSO and set FFMPEG to use all but one core. I know you can kind of do this in the dashboard of emby, but it doesn't matter when you have multiple instances of ffmpeg running, they randomly use different cores... I have a 10 core CPU with hyper-threading so it shows up in windows as 20 cores, i limit ffmpeg specific cores 1-16 leaving 17-20 open for the OS and EMBY application, this allows ffmpeg to run hard but not freeze up emby's browser interface or the server PC. Works for me, others might have different setups... this piece i will have to look into... i find that sometimes ffmpeg sessions can really make the overall emby server heavy and slower... this sounds like what i need to try... thanks @@pir8radio ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSattler 387 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 this piece i will have to look into... i find that sometimes ffmpeg sessions can really make the overall emby server heavy and slower... this sounds like what i need to try... thanks @@pir8radio ! So the thing I am curious about here @@pir8radio and @@MrWebsmith is that a while back Mark had told me that running ffmpeg with the all cores option allowed ffmpeg to monitor itself for overconsumption. For instance, it would go ahead and sue 100% cpu, but if something else starting hitting the cpu hard, it would give back processor time as well. I'm curious what happens with this if you go the Process Lasso approach. Is ffmpeg simply told there are 4 less cores than it thinks there are? And will it still give back CPU utilization if needed? Changing my emby config to max core usage, got me much better ffmpeg performance and response for multiple users. Also FWIW, I went ahead and teamed up NIC's last night on my Emby server so bandwidth to it from the file servers and users won't be an issue. Just have to get teaming up on the unraid hosts now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pir8radio 1292 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 (edited) So the thing I am curious about here @@pir8radio and @@MrWebsmith is that a while back Mark had told me that running ffmpeg with the all cores option allowed ffmpeg to monitor itself for overconsumption. For instance, it would go ahead and sue 100% cpu, but if something else starting hitting the cpu hard, it would give back processor time as well. I'm curious what happens with this if you go the Process Lasso approach. All I can tell you, if that is true in windows, it was not allowing emby to work very well... Loading of pages were SLLLOOOW, and the mouse was sketchy on the server... All of my testing shows that FFMPEG will eat all you can give it.. Each stream will fire up a new FFMPEG so with 16 FFMPEG's running how do they all decide who gets priority? Maybe with one instance of FFMPEG running it will give up CPU time? I have no clue.. lol.. This was my personal fix, and it has been working great... Edited June 30, 2016 by pir8radio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest asrequested Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 DO IT! lol I'm running a Dell R810 with (4) 8 core Xeons for a total of 32 cores/64threads and 128GB of RAM, mind you it's my VM host so more than just Emby run's on it but you get the picture. The file server I'm running is only running dual quad core Xeons, and 48GB of RAM which is overkill for just file storage, 54.5TB of usable Storage on a 24x3TB RAID 50. If only I had enough money. One day. Something that really caught my attention in your setup, was the 24x3TB in RAID 50. I would love to try that. So you used RAID 50 to increase the RAID 5 bandwidth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyFr79 228 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 If only I had enough money. One day. Something that really caught my attention in your setup, was the 24x3TB in RAID 50. I would love to try that. So you used RAID 50 to increase the RAID 5 bandwidth? It's not so much bandwidth as having more redundancy, so in my setup it's (4) RAID5 arrays (6 drives each) and then raid 1 on top of that so theory I could lose up to 4 drives (as long as it's 1 per RAID5 array) and be ok. Now I am the first to tell anyone that RAID is not a backup or any form of real safety for your data and I don't rely on it as such.. In my scenario bandwidth is limited by my backplane so no matter what I top out around 600MBps read/write. I need to upgrade to a split backplane, right now all 24 drives are running through a single SAS connection back to the controller so that's a HUGE bottleneck for me. I run (6) bonded gigabit connections off of it, and since Server2012/Win8/Win10 support SMB 3.0 I see some pretty sweet transfer rates over the network when needed. As I stated Emby itself runs on a Dell R810 with 32 cores/64threads and 128GB of RAM, it's my VM host so it runs Emby, which get's all 64 threads and 32GB of RAM, but I also run my secondary domain controller/DNS, a print server, WSUS, WDS/MDT server, and my SNMP Server. As well as various testing/development machines I stand up/tear down from time to time. So 6 full time servers and various temporary machines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest asrequested Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 It's not so much bandwidth as having more redundancy, so in my setup it's (4) RAID5 arrays (6 drives each) and then raid 1 on top of that so theory I could lose up to 4 drives (as long as it's 1 per RAID5 array) and be ok. Now I am the first to tell anyone that RAID is not a backup or any form of real safety for your data and I don't rely on it as such.. In my scenario bandwidth is limited by my backplane so no matter what I top out around 600MBps read/write. I need to upgrade to a split backplane, right now all 24 drives are running through a single SAS connection back to the controller so that's a HUGE bottleneck for me. I run (6) bonded gigabit connections off of it, and since Server2012/Win8/Win10 support SMB 3.0 I see some pretty sweet transfer rates over the network when needed. As I stated Emby itself runs on a Dell R810 with 32 cores/64threads and 128GB of RAM, it's my VM host so it runs Emby, which get's all 64 threads and 32GB of RAM, but I also run my secondary domain controller/DNS, a print server, WSUS, WDS/MDT server, and my SNMP Server. As well as various testing/development machines I stand up/tear down from time to time. So 6 full time servers and various temporary machines. I won't pretend to understand all of that, but I get the basics. I'm assuming you provide a service? That's a lot of hardware simply for personal use. Having said that, if I had the money, I'd build one for personal use, lol. I love experimenting with the hardware configurations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSattler 387 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 It all really depends on how much transcoding is needed for your users apps/client and also how much upload bandwidth you have for external users. My system specs are as followed Emby Server PC Processor - Intel Core I5-2500 3.3ghz Memory - 16GB DDR3 2133 Hard Drives - 1 - 256GB Crucial SSD 2 - 1TB Hitachi 6 - 2TB Seagate 3 - 4TB Seagate 1 - 5TB Toshiba Video Card - ATI Radeon 5670 HD 1GB GDDR3 PCIe 16x I personally have very limited upload bandwidth in my area, so I limit my users to 500k SD streams or 0.5 Mbps. I also tend to store my TV episodes in SD format by default locally and my movies tend to be more in the HD category. Because of bandwidth restrictions in area I pretty much force a transcode for every external user I have on my server. Locally here at my own house almost all content is stored in a direct play format to avoid additional transcoding. My setup can usually handle 2-3 HD transcodes or 3-4 SD transcodes at the same exact time. As far as users logged in and playing at the same time, by limiting my bandwidth in the way I have I can allow more users on at the same time. As long as they all don't happen to hit play at the exact same moment in time we usually never have issues and if anything it usually always revolves around someone getting greedy with hitting the play button multiple times instead of being patient for other users ffmpeg processes to end.. An example from last night of 8 users on at same time, 6 being external transcoding users. User names and pics removed for privacy reasons. Running absolutely fine. What would be a neat idea is somehow if we could tell our Emby server, hey my server can only handle 3 ffmpeg processes at the same exact time. Then if user 4 hits play and your server is at its ffmpeg process peak and it needs to transcode put them in a waiting in line ffmpeg Q with a countdown until their ffmpeg process can/will kick off. In terms of being user friendly I would imagine, Server is busy right now, your video will begin in 2 mins... something along those lines. Hope some of that helps, not real sure on your current hardware what to expect out of performance. One thing I would add to this is, in some cases leaving the transcoding throttling off is better. As you can see in BAS's screenshot, once a transcoding is fully finished the only overheard is the server sending the client the actual video, which barring network issues isn't a huge deal. Having SD content also helps in this as it lowers transcoding time as well. The trick is to finish transcoding something as fast as you can. Transcoding set to max, turning off throttling, can really help with this. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSattler 387 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 I won't pretend to understand all of that, but I get the basics. I'm assuming you provide a service? That's a lot of hardware simply for personal use. Having said that, if I had the money, I'd build one for personal use, lol. I love experimenting with the hardware configurations. For some of us it starts as a hobby, for me it started with being tired of my kids breaking dvd's and purchasing them 3-4 times. So instead I started ripping them to a media server. Well as your collection get's bigger you grow from a 4TB NAS, to a 20-50TB storage server depending on how many movies you have. As for purchasing servers, etc most of us buy them second hand on ebay. In case of Emby Server, I purchased a Dell XPS 8900 with a i7-6700, 32GB of ram for $600 and added some SSD's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBers 6766 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 As for purchasing servers, etc most of us buy them second hand on ebay. In case of Emby Server, I purchased a Dell XPS 8900 with a i7-6700, 32GB of ram for $600 and added some SSD's. Where is your storage, on a separate NAS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSattler 387 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 All I can tell you, if that is true in windows, it was not allowing emby to work very well... Loading of pages were SLLLOOOW, and the mouse was sketchy on the server... All of my testing shows that FFMPEG will eat all you can give it.. Each stream will fire up a new FFMPEG so with 16 FFMPEG's running how do they all decide who gets priority? Maybe with one instance of FFMPEG running it will give up CPU time? I have no clue.. lol.. This was my personal fix, and it has been working great... Going to give it a try. Is this download limited to x amount of days? Looks like a license for Server 2012 R2 is around $80. Will see how it does. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makara 0 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 (edited) For This i have testing it .... i just post only 6 or 7 video in the emby sever that have the same hardware , and the user can access less than 15 people means less than 15 device . and one thing i had test is i used the hard that is better than this one it can handle around 30 people but for this testing i only post 3 video in the emby server . So, i have some question that the people that can access to that sever depend on hardware or what ? and another one is the people that can access to that sever depend of how many video that we streaming also or what ? Edited June 30, 2016 by Makara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyFr79 228 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 I won't pretend to understand all of that, but I get the basics. I'm assuming you provide a service? That's a lot of hardware simply for personal use. Having said that, if I had the money, I'd build one for personal use, lol. I love experimenting with the hardware configurations. All personal use, it doubles as a home lab for myself since I am a Systems Administrator by day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSattler 387 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 Where is your storage, on a separate NAS? I run 1 unRaid server with 38TB of storage, and 1 unRaid server with 12TB of storage. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now