I was wondering how the Vero 4K performs when streaming huge ( ~65GB for 2 hour hevc encoded movies) 4K movies.
My LAN is all Gigabyte, but i just realized, that the Vero 4K only has a fast ethernet port. However i do have decent 5Ghz signal. My NAS can be read from at arround 100 MB/s. I am using NFS share (since i read that it has less of a performance impact than SMB) Oh, i’m also using audio passthrough, which should take a little more load from the Vero.
I’m asking because my Sony Android TV running Kodi, has to buffer every now and then, when trying to stream those files, even though the tv is connected via gigabit LAN. The same file plays fine from an HDD connected via USB 3.0 to the TV. Since the network speed should not be the problem here, i suspect that my TVs SoC is struggling to do playback of the huge file while handling the network traffic.
So how is your experience, with streaming huge 4K files?
Well that would require 74 Mbit + overhead. So the 100 Mbit network would be at a stretch.
If you get stable 5Ghz Wifi without interference from your neighbour you might have a chance but I would believe it could still be at the edge
From my experience, Gigabit Network does not mean that the devices will deliver with gigabit speed.
Only after I have upgraded my NAS with decent hardware (https://stargate.solsys.org/index.php?news=285&expand=yes) and connected it through 2 1Gbps Bonded interface to a network Switch that is actually capable of sustaining real 1Gbps - am I able to stream without an issue. Also, I needed to make sure that my NAS was able to provide the data at the required speed (It actually provides up to 340Mbytes/s ~= 2720Gbps).
The connected USB Drive IMHO provides you a dedicated data-stream, hence the hassle-less playback.
On my setup, using a Vero 4K, I have no issues playing back 4K content (as complex and large) over ethernet. Even though my daughters (3 of them ) tend to watch some HD content in their rooms at the same time. But because I have dual Gigabit connected, it works.
WiFi is always bound to interruptions, hence I would not use it. Too much overhead and re-negociations happening all the time.
I’ve tested some high bitrate material, including some of the (ridiculous) 600Mbps Jellyfish samples. It took a few seconds for the video to start for sure!
That’s a good choice
You should be OK to stream those files. @f0o has a problematic clip, so I’m looking in to improving buffering further in the next update and we are making headway there.
If it buffers in the middle, it means that the network or source does not provide the data fast enough.
IMHO you should check your Network or your NAS…
When I still had an Atom CPU - I was not able to provide a steady data-stream for more than one device. Reason I changed my NAS to use a Xeon CPU and plenty of RAM for buffering on the NAS (Source) side.
While my Synology NAS is a very basic model, i can copy files from it to my PC at a steady 90 MB/s. Of course that is not exactly the same task as streaming a video, but it seems pretty solid performance wise. So when average speed isn’t the problem, maybe consistency is, but i wouldn’t know a good way to varify that.
As an aside, unfortunately Synology NAS devices with Atom Intel C2000 series have a defect in them that eventually causes them to stop working. Intel acknowledge the issue, but Synology don’t appear to have.
Has there been an update since this El Reg article?
I think you’re being a bit hard on Synology. Intel weren’t exactly being forthcoming:
We asked Intel to provide specific details about when it began and stopped shipping Intel Atom C2000 processors with faulty clock outputs. Intel declined to comment.
Synology’s response was a bit less of a stonewall, and at least admitted the possibility of there being an issue:
Synology has not currently seen any indication that this issue has caused an increase in failure rates…
Perhaps things have moved on since that (Feb '17) article.
There are several page long threads where people’s devices seem to give up the ghost after 18 months. I believe Intel did later acknowledge the problem. Cisco also confirmed that their devices using these chips were affected.
To be more clear:
Intel acknowledged the problem, and have a sillicon workaround
Synology are now producing units with the workaround. They seem to have replaced some units via RMA, but I believe they are still saying they don’t believe it impacts the product’s usable life.
I tested the 400Mbps Jellyfish sample (don’t think 600mbps actually exists) and it stuttered like crazy streaming from a Synology Diskstation connected to a gigabit switch that the Vero 4k is also wired to. Files served over NFS. Pretty disheartening.
400 Mbps is insane. I think arround 100 is the absolute most that i have seen on actual movie files and even that is ridiculously high (just checked, 100 mbps is actually the maximum bitrate supported by UHD Blu ray. Not sure if thats video only or video/audio combined)
Btw you are trying to squeeze a 400 Mbps bitrate file through a 100 mbps connection.
If you have content with that bitrate, you will need to adjust some advancedsettings to handle that. I have played the 600Mbps Jellyfish before. Copying the file to the eMMC will also help you.
There are some patches to improve buffering for very, very high bitrate content, but it regresses when playing lower bitrate content at this time, as it takes too long to buffer and the user will waste time unnecessarily waiting before the video starts. Obviously, there may be more high bitrate content in the future, and then I’d revisit things. But for now there’s not much of a need to optimise for this.
As @ErnieBall says though, you won’t find a lot of content at those kind of bitrates, because BDs (primary sources of UHD content) do not.
) tend to watch some HD content in their rooms at the same time. But because I have dual Gigabit connected, it works.