Hardware

[EarlF82 0]

Hi Guys 

What type of hardware would i have to look at to have 100 - 200 concurrent  direct streams , on a local WAN. 

CPU -  Intel Core i9-10850KA or AMD 3950X

GPU - NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 8GB GDDR6 or RTX ASUS TUF RTX 3080 10GB Gaming

RAM - KLEVV CRAS XR RGB 16GB 4000MHz DDR4 Memory Kit X 2

NETWORK 10GB SFP the wireless via nano beams to the sector antennas

   

[Sammy 475]

100 concurrent streams?

I figure this is no home installation. 

Edited September 27 by Sammy

[EarlF82 0]

Hi Sammy no its not a home installation

We have a WAN setup in our community where we game against each other and do file sharing all offline. I was wondering can i setup a dedicated emby server/pc that will stream to 100 - 200 concurrent streams without buffering instead of having just files constantly being copied from my pc . Emby has a much more clean look and its easy to use which means everyone will be able to use it and i can prevent the copying and enjoy my content everywhere in our community

[EarlF82 0]

The files will all be mp4 1080p max 

 

[sooty234 171]

If you disallow transcoding and only have direct playing, the only real issue you have would be bandwidth, both network and drive reads. Network being the biggest issue. That's a lot of upstream. If you allow transcoding, then you have much bigger issues.

[rbjtech 374]

5 hours ago, EarlF82 said:

The files will all be mp4 1080p max 

 

 

Take some very crude numbers - from a network perspective - you have 9000 Mbit/s to play with - dived by 200 streams = 45 Mbit/sec per stream = Achievable.

Disk I/O is probably your greatest problem, followed by CPU.

Not much of a benchmark, but I had 10 streams running using 400 Mbit/s worth of LAN traffic (so average of 40 Mbit/sec per user) and while the disk I/O was ok (it was across multiple platters), the CPU was @ 90% - but then again this was on an original 4 core i5 750 (10 year old CPU) ... 

I think they only way you are going to know for sure is to benchmark what you have and then extrapolate it out to see where your bottlenecks are (in theory) and then do a proof of concept.

 

[EarlF82 0]

24 minutes ago, rbjtech said:

 

Take some very crude numbers - from a network perspective - you have 9000 Mbit/s to play with - dived by 200 streams = 45 Mbit/sec per stream = Achievable.

Disk I/O is probably your greatest problem, followed by CPU.

Not much of a benchmark, but I had 10 streams running using 400 Mbit/s worth of LAN traffic (so average of 40 Mbit/sec per user) and while the disk I/O was ok (it was across multiple platters), the CPU was @ 90% - but then again this was on an original 4 core i5 750 (10 year old CPU) ... 

I think they only way you are going to know for sure is to benchmark what you have and then extrapolate it out to see where your bottlenecks are (in theory) and then do a proof of concept.

 

I was thinking of 4 * 14tb hdds (WD RED),

1 * 14TB all movies, doccies, music and reality shows (then duplicate everything on a second 14tb) 

1 * 14tb all tv shows (then duplicate everything on a second 14tb) 

Or 

 

8 * 8Tb and split everything across the drives with duplicates so users can access the same file but from a different drive 

That should atleast easr the strain on tgr drives. 

For cpu and gpu i am still tirn between the amd and the intel, same with the gpu. 

Rtx4000 or Rtx 3080

3950x or i9 10900k

 

[rbjtech 374]

You need to stripe the data across as many physical disks as possible to get the I/O numbers you are talking about.  

You need to be direct playing only so the GPU is irrelevant - you don't need one.  If you need to transcode, then forget it without a large server farm.

[EarlF82 0]

I understand that the gpu would be irrelevant, does that apply to the cpu aswell. And would raid 10 not work as a load balancer also

[OlishaDoon 0]

GPU - 3080 10gb, or better wait for 20gb version in December

[EarlF82 0]

Do we still need a gpu if we do direct streaming, there will be no transcoding etc.. All files will be converted to mp4.. So as posted earlier I think the biggest issue will be bandwidth and hdd load balancing

[BAlGaInTl 253]

1 hour ago, EarlF82 said:

Do we still need a gpu if we do direct streaming, there will be no transcoding etc.. All files will be converted to mp4.. So as posted earlier I think the biggest issue will be bandwidth and hdd load balancing

If there is no transcoding, you won't need a GPU.

I would definitely take the AMD 3950X over the Intel for the extra cores/threads (16/32 vs 10/20).

That number of concurrent streams is not an easy ask though.  You'll probably also have to get with Emby support to get a custom license.  I'm pretty sure you will blow through the normal limits pretty quickly.