Serato Video General Discussion

Forum
 Serato Video General Discussion
Poor Video Performance with NVIDIA GeForce 320M (Mac Mini 2010)
Talk about Serato Video and Video-SL.

Poor Video Performance with NVIDIA GeForce 320M (Mac Mini 2010)

djmophiya 7:45 AM - 28 April, 2014
Attention to Serato Video clients users ... Please pay attention to the size of your video cards when purchasing or repurposing a computer/laptop. I just found out that my Mac Mini does not need a faster processor, but a better video card (which cannot be updated on a Mac Mini FYI). If you have one of the following Mac Computer Models and considering using Serato Video please reconsider your device as it does not meet specs!

Issue with Mac Mini 2010 video card requires 384MB - 1GB and only delivers 256MB.


Serato Video
Processor i3, i5 or i7* 32 & 64 bit: 1.07GHz+ 5
Core 2 Duo 32 & 64 bit: 2.5 GHz+ 6
Screen Resolution 1280 x 800
RAM 32 & 64 bit: 4 GB
Video Memory 384 MB (1 GB+ recommended for best performance)

NVIDIA GeForce 320M

The NVIDIA GeForce 320M allocates a base amount of 256 MB for video and boot processes at startup.

Products with the NVIDIA 320M include:

MacBook Air (11-inch, Late 2010)
MacBook Air (13-inch, Late 2010)
MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2010)
MacBook (13-inch, Mid 2010)
Mac Mini (Mid 2010)

Saving up for up-to-date Mac Mini ... i7, 256GB SSD + 1TB SSD w/ 8-16GB RAM and proper Video Card Memory.

Current Set Up:
Mac Mini (2010) 8GB Ram, 1TB HDD, 500 GB HDD, 256MD V-RAM, Serato DJ, Numark NS72.

... Adding V-RAM or Video RAM to my stats now because no one wants to go out and get embarrassed with equipment freezing up at a gig. Trust me it sucks.
Code:E 7:55 PM - 29 April, 2014
Quote:
Saving up for up-to-date Mac Mini ... i7, 256GB SSD + 1TB SSD w/ 8-16GB RAM and proper Video Card Memory.

There is no such thing. All mac Mini's only have IntelHD4000 (or 5000) video chips. These not suitable video cards for use with Serato Video (or Mix Emergency).

If you are to buy a New Mac, your options are as follows.

Mac Pro (any and all) store.apple.com
MacBook Pro 15" with 2GB Dedicated video card. store.apple.com
This 21.5 inch iMac store.apple.com
or any 27 Inch iMac store.apple.com

That is it. You will get poor performance with everything else.
Asu 10:56 PM - 29 April, 2014
Quote:
There is no such thing. All mac Mini's only have IntelHD4000 (or 5000) video chips. These not suitable video cards for use with Serato Video (or Mix Emergency).


Actually the new 4000 & 5000 cards will do video fine if you know how to encode your videos properly...you also lose some effects.

you'd have to run your videos from your subscription thru handbrake and encode them down to 1000-1500kbps 640x360 resolution.

with the newer versions of H264 codec in handbrake, i personally can't tell a difference between a 1500kbps compressed video and 2500kbps.

but ofcourse with dedicated,you get more options and a much more longterm solution where u can just run the videos from your subscription as u get em.
Code:E 11:09 PM - 29 April, 2014
Quote:
Actually the new 4000 & 5000 cards will do video fine if you know how to encode your videos properly...you also lose some effects.

I dont want to get into another dedicated vs shared memory chip argument.

We can all agree that Serato runs worse on Intel Chips in most situation (which means not re encoding your videos, because thats an advanced user thing and not something that is a reasonable expectation on the average user). We can all agree Serato suggests you use a dedicated card. It is even in there recommended hardware page. We can also all agree that the vast majority of computers with dedicated cards are more powerful than the ones without. And we can also all agree to qualify as "good" or "pro" performance, there should be no limitation on effects (as you may loose some with intel chips) and you should be able to mix in HD. Both of which intel chips wont do yet.
6:14 PM, 4 May 2014
Discussion moved to Serato Video and Video-SL General Discussion
Culprit 8:35 PM - 11 May, 2014
Code:E is correct that optimal performance is found using macbook pro's 2009 and above with the right specs.

I found between 2009 and 2010 that if you encode your videos, either 1k or 5k birate, you must have CABAC off for it to run on a windows machine, all other settings did not make a difference to me and there was no noticeable visual defects when using cabac off.

The newer version of Serato Video works great on my windows laptop, not as smooth as my macbook pro, but I would trust it as a backup laptop at a gig for sure, plus it has USB3 and with a network cable I was able to mount my hard drive from my macbook pro and use the same database and video files on my windows laptop at the same time and it ran really well (using the Rane 62).

Watchwww.youtube.com is my test video, Intel HD 4000 card
djnak 9:24 AM - 13 May, 2014
Quote:

you'd have to run your videos from your subscription thru handbrake and encode them down to 1000-1500kbps 640x360 resolution.



1. you lost quality when you re-encoded ....

2. You lost quality by using a low bit rate..you might as wellcomress the shit out oof the audio also...

please do not give advise like this....
Asu 3:06 AM - 14 May, 2014
Quote:
please do not give advise like this....


I know what i'm talking about...you leave the audio alone,compress the video with the right settings...it comes out right...the HD videos you see on youtube are 1000-1500 compression but quality settings...you gotta know what you're doing
djnak 7:37 PM - 14 May, 2014
what you think looks fine....IS NOT .....you don't know what your doing....

If having your vids at that low of a bit rate was acceptable don't you think the pools would be servicing at that bit rate...saving server space, downloading space, and ultimately making the d/l faster?? THERE IS MINIMUM SPECS FOR A REASON.....


Quote:

1. you lost quality when you re-encoded ....

2. You lost quality by using a low bit rate...
DJMark 7:41 PM - 14 May, 2014
Quote:
Quote:
please do not give advise like this....


I know what i'm talking about...you leave the audio alone,compress the video with the right settings...it comes out right...the HD videos you see on youtube are 1000-1500 compression but quality settings...you gotta know what you're doing


Unless you're remuxing the "original" audio with your re-encoded video, it sounds like you're subjecting the audio to an additional generation of lossy encoding. It doesn't matter if you're re-encoding the audio at the same bit-rate, you're still degrading it.

Also your 1000-1500kbps file *might* look okay in a window on your computer screen (?), but I'm betting that full-screen results on a large screen or projector are a different story.
Culprit 9:35 PM - 14 May, 2014
Quote:
Quote:
please do not give advise like this....


I know what i'm talking about...you leave the audio alone,compress the video with the right settings...it comes out right...the HD videos you see on youtube are 1000-1500 compression but quality settings...you gotta know what you're doing


don't recommend this at all though, but to each is own