Android/AndroidTV Placeshifter client (Discussion)

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by MattHelm

It's also a waste of power, as it runs most CPUs all cores at 100%., were as streaming only uses about 2% of 1 core, with the clock turned way down.

Don't confuse real-time transcoding (which is limited by playback rate) with offline transcoding (which will maximize cores to get the job done as fast as possible). The actual load on the system will depend on the server's hardware, the bitrate and format of the source file being decoded from, and the streaming format being encoded to. Currently, placeshifter only ends up using about 15% of my total cpu usage per stream I'm watching (this is far lower quality than I'd like to see in any placeshifters going forward though).

[Taddeusz]

Originally Posted by MattHelm

It's also a waste of power, as it runs most CPUs all cores at 100%., were as streaming only uses about 2% of 1 core, with the clock turned way down.

Do you have your Placeshifter quality set to normal or high? I was playing around with mine from work today and it was peaking at 25% on high. That's on a quad core so it's only using one thread.

[Fuzzy]

That's High, forced to the 'max' of 2000kbps, sourced from BluRay material. The issue is it is limited to D1 resolution right now in the code, so it's never really all that taxing.

MPEG4 encoding is just not all that taxing compared to if we move to h.264. That will certainly require more cpu power, and espescially so if we allow HD resolutions.

[Fuzzy]

5Mbps 720p h.264 will likely provide very good quality on any 'secondary' viewing location (usually dealing with tv's that are 720p anyway), and should be able to be done well enough on any moderate processor.

[Taddeusz]

The one thing Plex doesn't do is any kind of dynamic bandwidth adjustment. Not sure if they have it planned but it is rather annoying when I'm watching something at 2Mb 720p and all of a sudden there's not enough bandwidth and it starts cutting out. For whatever reason we've been having daytime bandwidth issues from Cox and all of a sudden Plex just starts cutting out and eventually gives up.

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

Don't confuse real-time transcoding (which is limited by playback rate) with offline transcoding (which will maximize cores to get the job done as fast as possible). The actual load on the system will depend on the server's hardware, the bitrate and format of the source file being decoded from, and the streaming format being encoded to. Currently, placeshifter only ends up using about 15% of my total cpu usage per stream I'm watching (this is far lower quality than I'd like to see in any placeshifters going forward though).

To get usable (for me) quality real-time transcoding it takes 100% of any CPU currently sold, which I guess is why everythime I see or hear about it, I cringe.

[Fuzzy]

Yeah, I really like placeshifter's dynamic bandwidth system, it works VERY well, and it really is quite simple. It just needs to be upgraded to work with newer codecs, which should not be difficult (I have already seen another project that added on-the-fly bandwidth adjustment to ffmpeg's h.264 encoder with just a couple lines of code, so I'm sure it's possible - just a matter of implementing the other STDIN controls to ffmpeg that sage depends on to be able to replace it completely with a more 'modern' version, and then of course modifying placeshifting (on both ends) to allow higher resolutions, and higher formats.

[Taddeusz]

Originally Posted by MattHelm

To get usable (for me) quality real-time transcoding it takes 100% of any CPU currently sold, which I guess is why everythime I see or hear about it, I cringe.

Currently playing a 2Mb 720p SageTV recording from home through Plex. It's maxing out at 75% on my C2Q Q8400.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by MattHelm

To get usable (for me) quality real-time transcoding it takes 100% of any CPU currently sold, which I guess is why everythime I see or hear about it, I cringe.

Plex is able to maximize out my internet upstream before it maximizes my server's rather old CPU.

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

Do you have your Placeshifter quality set to normal or high? I was playing around with mine from work today and it was peaking at 25% on high. That's on a quad core so it's only using one thread.

I've only used it one time when I was away from home, and after about 1 month, switched to transcoding it offline, zipping it into small files, and ftping the files to the local machine. (note, this was more due to the internet connection at the hotel, than placeshifter)

My only real reason for placeshifter now, is to change the settings and look for show on a remote machine.

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

5Mbps 720p h.264 will likely provide very good quality on any 'secondary' viewing location (usually dealing with tv's that are 720p anyway), and should be able to be done well enough on any moderate processor.

You mean H.265, don't you?

[Taddeusz]

I would switch back to using Placeshifter over Plex on the desktop if it offered higher quality. The limited resolution options are quite dated.

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

Currently playing a 2Mb 720p SageTV recording from home through Plex. It's maxing out at 75% on my C2Q Q8400.

I consider 10Mb to be minimum I "want" to view, I'll use less, but it's not what I want. (yes, that's H.264, not MPEG2, but also a big screen)

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by MattHelm

You mean H.265, don't you?

That comment was about 'secondary locations' in the home, and in that case, no, there'd really be no reason to transcode to H.265 for local playback, where bandwidth isn't at a premium. THAT would tax the processor quite a bit more. H.265 is a LOT more cpu intensive, and less supported on end devices, for a slight gain in bandwidth efficiency. really, the only reason to transcode to h.264 from the MPEG-2 source with local playback is because some end devices simply don't support MPEG-2, or do so very poorly.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by MattHelm

I consider 10Mb to be minimum I "want" to view, I'll use less, but it's not what I want. (yes, that's H.264, not MPEG2, but also a big screen)

For comparison, Dish Network broadcasts nearly all it's HD channels at 5Mbps CBR h.264, 1440x1080i. Granted, this is with commercial encoders, that are likely a bit better quality than ffmpeg, but that's an example of what can be done with rather modest bandwidth demands.

[Taddeusz]

Originally Posted by MattHelm

I consider 10Mb to be minimum I "want" to view, I'll use less, but it's not what I want. (yes, that's H.264, not MPEG2, but also a big screen)

This is also remotely, not locally. My internet connection is only good to up to 7Mb on a good day. Plus I don't want to be too demanding on my employer's internet.

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

That comment was about 'secondary locations' in the home, and in that case, no, there'd really be no reason to transcode to H.265 for local playback, where bandwidth isn't at a premium. THAT would tax the processor quite a bit more. H.265 is a LOT more cpu intensive, and less supported on end devices, for a slight gain in bandwidth efficiency. really, the only reason to transcode to h.264 from the MPEG-2 source with local playback is because some end devices simply don't support MPEG-2, or do so very poorly.

Oops, being sleepy.

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

MPEG4 encoding is just not all that taxing compared to if we move to h.264. That will certainly require more cpu power, and espescially so if we allow HD resolutions.

That's the one I was asking about. Or did you mean mpeg2?

BTW, I understand the MPEG2 issue, but in my case, I just won't get the device that doesn't support MPEG2. QED!

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

For comparison, Dish Network broadcasts nearly all it's HD channels at 5Mbps CBR h.264, 1440x1080i. Granted, this is with commercial encoders, that are likely a bit better quality than ffmpeg, but that's an example of what can be done with rather modest bandwidth demands.

Yes, and one of the reason I don't have Dish Network. While as good a "normal" HD, I much prefer Blu-Ray disk.

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

This is also remotely, not locally. My internet connection is only good to up to 7Mb on a good day. Plus I don't want to be too demanding on my employer's internet.

Oh, I don't equate Android with remote access. Of my 4 devices, only 1 is ever remote, my phone.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by MattHelm

Oops, being sleepy.



That's the one I was asking about. Or did you mean mpeg2?

BTW, I understand the MPEG2 issue, but in my case, I just won't get the device that doesn't support MPEG2. QED!

No, I meant MPEG4. Placeshifter uses MPEG4 compression currently. It's just the much simpler MPEG4 part 2, as opposed to MPEG4 Part 10/AVC/h.264 that is essentially standard worldwide now.