Metropolis DMX Multiplexer or Higher End Router

hello to all,
i want to understand which one is best Metropolis DMX Access Multiplexer or Higher End Cisco Router?
some where i read that DMX mulitplexer is used to fill up the bandwidth gap... it means it will divide DS3 to multiple T1 or can combine multile T1 to DS3... right... now we can do it with router also if we are usind 10000 cisco router with DS3 modules and T1 card then also we can have same workout... so which one is best? and Why?
regards
Devang

Hello Devang,
the first question in a design study is: what are the requirements?
Based on that one could then look for the required features and finally hardware/software can be picked.
In other words, to define "best" one needs some explanation about the "rating system".
Based on the requirements the answer also might be: "Neither DMX nor High End Router will be best".
Regards, Martin

Similar Messages

Slow Render with High-End System?

Im currently working on a (in my opinion) high-end Windows system for video editing. The system is about 2 years old and has cost a fortune in that time. So Im expecting significantly better speed. So heres my problem:
Im working primarly in Premiere Pro and After Effects. All the media I work with are as a video imported Jpeg Sequences. Often I have multiple Sequences (up to 7 or 8) overlayed and tweaked with Dissolves and plugins like Twixtor. I also use the Adobe Dynamic Link from After Effects to Premiere and vice versa. All the footage is currently in 1080p but in future I will want to render 4K. Im aware that a 4K workflow is probably a pain in the *** so Im surely going to edit offline with 1080p. However I cant get any real-time playback with all my sequences. I ALWAYS have to render a preview to watch my edits. I dont know if Im just having too high expectations for my system, but Im kinda sure there has to be an issue for this lack of performance. Maybe the Dynamic Link is slowing my system down?
System Specs:
Model : HP Z400 Workstation 103C_53335X
Mainboard : HP 0B4Ch
System BIOS : HP 786G3 v03.15 10/29/2010
RAM : 12GB ECC DIMM DDR3
Processor : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           W3530 @ 2.80GHz (4C 3GHz/3GHz, 2.13GHz IMC, 4x 256kB L2, 8MB L3)
Chipset:
     HP X58 I/O Hub 2x 2.4GHz (4.79GHz)
     HP Core Desktop (Bloomfield) UnCore 2x 2.4GHz (4.79GHz), 3x 4GB ECC DIMM DDR3 1GHz 192-bit
Graphic card : NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (8CU 256SP SM5.0 950MHz, 512kB L2, 2GB 2.81GHz 256-bit, PCIe 2.00 x16)
Harddisks:
      4x WDC WD2002FAEX-007BA0 (1TB, RAID10/SATA600, SCSI-4, 3.5", 7200rpm) : 932GB (C:)
     Intel Raid 1 Volume (4TB, RAID, SCSI-4) : 4TB (D:)
     HL-DT-ST BD-RE BH10LS30 (SATA150, BD-RE, DVD+-RW, CD-RW, 4MB Cache) : k.A. (E:)
Thank you very much in advance for your help and I apologize for any grammatical mistakes since english is not my main language.

Valentin,
I have always called a raid10 a solution for the paranoid in a hurry. It takes 4 drives to give you the capacity and performance of two disks, but gives you security by the mirroring.
Before going into your specific situation, allow me to tell something about volumes and drives, because they can be confusing and at the same time they are very important for optimal performance of a system.
Single disk, not partitioned is 1 disk = 1 volume to the OS
Single disk, partitioned is 1 disk = multiple volumes (not a good idea BTW)
Multiple disks in one raid array is Many disks = 1 volume
Multiple disks in one raid array with partitions is Many disks = multiple volumes (not a good idea either)
Each volume has a distinct drive letter for access.
Partitioning is a thing of the past and should not be used at all on modern systems.
You have to think about volumes more than about number of disks. In my current system I have 27 different physical disks but only 4 volumes. In the old one I have 17 disks and 5 volumes.
Now that we are clear what we are talking about, volumes with distinct drive letters, we can address your situation.
You have TWO volumes, C: (single disk) and D: (4 disks in raid10). Spreading the load across two volumes is more demanding and gives slower performance than using more volume, unless one or more volumes are very fast, as I tried to explain in a previous reply (remember Isenfluh/Sulwald?). If you add a SSD as you intend, you have increased the number of volumes to 3, which will definitely help performance, because SSD's are faster than conventional disks, the pagefile can be stored on the SSD, so all your performance will go up.
Compare your setup with mine with rough estimated figures:
Volume
Valentin
Harm
Transfer rate Valentin
Tranfer rate Harm
C:
1 HDD
1 SSD
125 MB/s
450 MB/s
D:
4x Raid10
1 SSD
250 MB/s
450 MB/s
E:
NA
21x Raid30
NA
2,700 MB/s
F:
NA
1 HDD
NA
150 MB/s
These figures are indicative, but do show where the major differences are. In my experience disk setup is overlooked quite often, but has a huge impact on a system's responsiveness. It is the weakest (slowest) link in the chain, afterall and with your workflow, doubly so.
But in your specific case there is something else, and that is your disappointing hardware MPE score. 100 seconds is extremely slow, even for a Quadro 4000. I would be quite normal to see a score around 8 - 9 seconds on such a system, well maybe around 12 - 13 seconds with your ECC memory, but 100 is way too slow. Some background services or processes are interfering with the hand-over from memory-GPU-VRAM-GPU-memory. This can be caused by a myriad of things, but a good starting point would be the BlackViper list of services to set to manual or disabled and taking a closer look at the processes running with Process Explorer. There should normally be less than 50 processes running.
Hope this helps.

Time to upgrade hsdpa to 21mbps on high ends

htc and samsung now produces high end phones with 21mbps hsdpa capability so i think nokia should upgrade next symbian^3 phone with hsdpa 21mbps downlink and 5mbps hsupa uplink capability rather than usual 10mbps hsdpa and 2mbps hsupa

I currently have a Droid Global 2 and while I enjoy the expanded features of a smartphone, I miss my Env2 terribly for one main reason : The keyboard was the best!. The Droid Global 2's slide-out keyboard lacks dedicated number keys and is a bit cramped compared to the Env, but much faster/accurate than an iPhone.
I will be upgrading to the DROID 3 as it now has dedicated number keys and a larger screen.
While I really wanted an iPhone, the lack of a physical keyboard was the dealbreaker. I test drove a friends phone and made so many errors in email, texting, dialing #s that I knew it wasn't going to be acceptable for me. It took forever to do basic texting...and I have very small hands/fingers! Can't imagine how big 'man hands' would handle the iPhone.
If keyboard accuracy/'speed is not a big deal the and iPhone will work for you. The iPhone is much lighter as it doesn't have a physical keyboard....some people just have to have Apple regardless.
Good luck on the Apple
Tony1790 wrote:
Hello,
It's time to upgrade to a new phone for both me and the wife, she needs a new phone now as her LG env3 is acting up. I'm a looong time Apple user, and of course the Apple iphone is a natural to pick, however It'll cost $350 for 2 when we use the last $50 credit for new/every 2. The new Droid 3 looks very interesting and we can get 2 for $149 for both with the credit and the BOGO sale going on.
So which should we get, mainly use the phone for talk, texting and will of course check emails, etc once we get a smart phone. The Env3's we have now are good at texting with the keyboard and of course good for talking.
If we go for the Apple, I could get her the iphone 4 for her and I can wait for the iphone 5 if it's actually coming out this year.
Tony

My iPod Touch is damaging my high-end earphones. What should I do

3 weeks ago, my Sennheiser CX-300 started to acting weirdly on the right channel. With each listening period passing by, the volume was going lower and lower, till to the point that this channel was barely audible. I tested them with different sources and I faced the fact that this problem couldn't be undone. Even if I threated them carefully during a whole year, I could just say now that they are completely dead, due to some sort of driver failure.
So, I rushed out to buy a new set on earphone and I decided to pick a higher end one, a brand new pair of Shure E4C. God I was happy, having finally sound in both of my ears. I listened to them during a 2 hours period. When I was over, I folded them back in the carrying case.
The day after, after plugging them back in my ipod, I just wanted to cry : the left channel was inaudible to a point that I needed to boost the sound to the maximum in order to ear something in the left channel. I tested them back in different sources and the same thing happened. After 3 hours of testing on different sources, I thought they were completely damaged.
So , this morning, I tested them back in my macbook and, to my suprise, they are working 100% like the first time I tried them.
Now, I'm thinking, could my ipod have some sort of voltage problem that could do such irreversible damage to an high-end earphone ? I just can't find another explanation.
Should I go to the genius bar or ask for a repair online ? I just don't know how to prove this awkward problem to a genius at the bar.
I won't be plugging my shures in this cursed ipod , that's for sure !!!! I don't want to lose $200 + over this.
Please, help me.

I don't think it is damaging your headphones (including the CX-300), I think the headphone jack on your Touch is damaged. Headphones don't heal so if the Shure E4Cs are working on your macbook they are in working order.
Take your Touch and headphones to the Apple Store and make a Genius Bar appointment.

Sound Blaster card 'digital out' into my high-end stereo receiver?

BSound Blaster card 'digital out' into my high-end stereo receiver?A I want?to interface my iTunes music library?(all tunes in Apple Lossless file format) to my high-end sound system, using an optical (TOSLink)?cable and a "mini TOSLink adapter" that will plug into the 'digital out' jack on the Sound Blaster card in my Windows XP PC. This configuration will take advantage of the high-end DAC's in my Denon receiver.
I don't care about getting surround sound out of my PC, and I'm not a gamer. I just want hi-fi stereo music from my iTunes library.
Will this work?Can I expect CD-quality sound?
Also, would it be worthwhile to upgrade my model SB394 sound card to a hi-fi SB card like X-Fi Xtreme Audio, or is any sound card as good as any other for simply deli'vering the digital data stream to my Denon receiver?

Jebus wrote:
well, I have two devices that a combo CD player/Tape decks/radio tuner/amp; one has misc input, the other doesn't. Both are analog devices, both are old things I bought at a yard sale. I got 6 bookshelf speakers that use pairs of stripped wire as the input hooked up in 2 parallel wired sets of 3 to the CD/Tape/Tuner/Amp thing that has a misc input. Anyway, the one without misc input has a 3 disk CD changer, plus it would give me a way to input tape and radio sounds sources into my computer if I just connected it's audio outputs to the internally located Aux In on my soundblaster card in my computer. But I wonder, what considerations do I have to have?
Firstly, is the Aux In on my board analog or digital? I'm assuming if it doesn't say "digital", it's analog; correct?......
secondly, and more importantly; the CD/Tape/Tuner/Amp thing is supposed to be used with 8 ohm speakers and do I have to worry about sending too much current to the soundcard?
specific model of SB card; I'm not sure. It has 2 analog outs, analog in, mic in, digital out and a joystick port; and it came installed on a 200 Dell w/ Win ME
and please, don't try selling me something; I use old crappy hardware and really do not mind doing so.
any help will be appreciated, thanks.
Aux-In is an analog port (4-pin connector/stereo).
Don't connect powered output (= speaker outputs) into soundcard but, if possible, use some low-power connection like Headphones-Out (or if possible then some line-out port).
jutapa

Question on workflow for high end inkjet prints from InDesign CS4

Photographs are imaged in Photoshop using Adobe 1998 as a profile. These files are linked in InDesign. My question is how should I output the files from InDesign. I've tried "High Quality Print" saving the files as a PDF then parsing those files with Photoshop as high res files. But the files lack the quality in the original photoshop files.
My system in completely calibrated and I'm quite used to creating output for both offset printing (generally as per vendors instructions) as well us highend digital printing.
Thanks ahead for your comments.

You need an ICC profile that defines the destination color space. In this case the high end ink jet.
This will be an RGB profile. You can use a factory profile corresponding to the printer model and paper (this would be part of the printer software install), or you can have a custom profile generated by reading a color target printed on the device. There are online services that can actually create the profile if you send them a print out. Follow their specific instructions if you choose to do this.
Once you have the print device ICC, check the Color Settings in ID. Make sure the RGB policy is "Preserve Embedded". As long as this was the setting at document creation, the image Adobe RGB profiles were honored.
To double check, look in the Links panel. Under ICC you should see Adobe RGB, not Document RGB.
You can also right or control click on an individual image. Go to Graphics: Image Color Settings. By profile it should say Adobe RGB, not Document RGB.
In the print dialog, Color Management, select Document radio button. Color Handling, Let InDesign Handle Colors. Printer Profile, select the Printer ICC. Do a small test print, then check the result to see if it's satisfactory.

Cannot open relatively large PDF on a high end workstation-

My client is having issues opening 15MB PDF on a hig end workstation but can open it on a lower end computer. Here is my client's question…
We have an issue when opening some map file.
The file is 15MB PDF that open successfully with adobe reader 10 and acrobat 10 in normal workstation but it hang when open that file in high-end Workstation.
Workstation Type
Configuration
OS
Normal workstation
HP COMPAQ 8100 3.0GHZ 4GB RAM 320GB HD 1GB ATI DVD
Windows 7 X64
High-End Workstation
HP Z820 DUAL E5-2660 8C 2.20 64GB DDR3 256GB 500GB 2TB HDS 6GB QUADRO 6000 DVDRW
Windows 7 X64
The file open successfully in the high-end Workstation HP Z820 when installing Adobe reader 9 and 8. We also try adobe reader 10 & 11 but it did not work.
We change the graphics card but same issue.
We need to be able to open that PDF file in HP Z820 workstation using either adobe reader 10 or 11. Would you please assist.
I wonder if there are conflict issue with this particular Graphic Card of theirs!

Here is our client's answer to the suggestions made earlier.
We tried following two cards with latest driver from NVIDIA website but still same issue the adobe reader open half the document then it disappear.
NVIDIA cards QUADRO 6000
NVIDIA cards K5000
Adobe Reader still running but consume more than 368,860 K !!

High-End headphones and iPod cases don't match

I just received 4 cases for both my Nano and iPod Video. They were ordered sight unseen long ago. There's a terrifying trend here. iPod Lounge will only give high marks to cases that cover everything with little holes for access. And so 3 of my 4 high end headphones will not fit in the holes cut out for them in these new cases. The plastic molding is just slightly wider than the standard Apple phones.
Etymotic ETY 4p, Shure E5c and Westone UM2 are all super-fi headphones endlessly discussed on Head-Fi.com. Read about them and you will buy. None of them fit and they all share the same connector molding.
Does anyone know of a kind of adapter that would have a female end to receive these and a male end that would fit the standard opening? Of course they all work without a case just fine. It's only that the trend now is to restrict the size of the opening to just the Apple size.

that is what happens when you don't look at what your product (by the way, "sight unseen" usually prefers to a home or other property)
iPod Nano 2GB | Accessories: Belkin Carabiner Case for iPod Nano (black)

What high end A/V Receivers use iTunes to stream Music, Pictures and Videos to a TV ?

I'm going to be purchasing a high end a/v receiver and need one that uses iTunes to stream music, piuctures and videos to my TV. Any recommendations?

I don't believe there is a receiver that supports AirPlay of video and photos. Many will AirPlay audio however you'll probably have to use an Apple TV for photos and video.

Xserve and high end graphic cards?!

anybody tried to put a new graphic card (like ati 850xt or similar with 256 memory) into a xserve??
could it work? i want to use xserve as desktop machine with gb ram on photoshop... so i need as well a high end graphic card ...
any suggestions?

No, you can't do this. The Xserve will only take PCI video cards; high-end graphics cards all use the very high speed AGP interface. The best graphics card you can put in it is probably going to be an ATI Radeon 7000 or thereabouts.
The Xserve is not designed as a desktop machine. My suggestion is you buy a PowerMac G5 instead

Will anybody kindly recommend a high end wav to MP3 converter software

There are so many WAV to MP3 converter software on the market. I tried some of them and was not very happy with them. Will anybody kindly recommend a high end wav to MP3 converter software that they have had a good experience with. I need this software to convert WAV speech recording into MP3 in batch processing. Thank you

[email protected] wrote:
> There are so many WAV to MP3 converter software on the market. I
> tried some of them and was not very happy with them. Will anybody
> kindly recommend a high end wav to MP3 converter software that they
> have had a good experience with. I need this software to convert WAV
> speech recording into MP3 in batch processing. Thank you
Audition comes to mind .... O;-)
Kind regards
Peter Larsen

Test program running taking much more time on high end server T5440 than low end server T5220

Hi all,
I have written the following program and run on both T5440 [1.4 GHz, 95 GB RAM, 32 cores(s), 256 logical (virtual) processor(s),] and T5220 [(UltraSPARC-T2 (chipid 0, clock 1165 MH) , 8GB RAM, 1 core, 8 virtual processors )] on same OS version. I found that T5540 server takes more time than T5220. Please find below the details.
test1.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include <pthread.h>
using namespace std;
#define NUM_OF_THREADS 20
struct ABCDEF {
char A[1024];
char B[1024];
void *start_func(void *)
    long long i = 6000;
    while(i--)
                ABCDEF*             sdf = new ABCDEF;
                delete sdf;
                sdf = NULL;
    return NULL;
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
    pthread_t tid[50];
    for(int i=0; i<NUM_OF_THREADS; i++)
                pthread_create(&tid[i], NULL, start_func, NULL);
                cout<<"Creating thread " << i <<endl;
    for(int i=0; i<NUM_OF_THREADS; i++)
                pthread_join(tid[i], NULL);
                cout<<"Waiting for thread " << i <<endl;
After executing the above program on T5440 takes :
real 0.78
user 3.94s
sys 0.05
After executing the above program on T5220 takes :
real 0.23
user 1.43s
sys 0.03
It seems that T5440 which is high end server takes almost 3 times more time than T5220 which is low end server.
However, I have one more observation. I tried the following program :
test2.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include <pthread.h>
using namespace std;
#define NUM_OF_THREADS 20
struct ABCDEF {
char A[1024];
char B[1024];
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
    long long i = 6000000;
    while(i--)
        ABCDEF* sdf = new ABCDEF;
        delete sdf;
        sdf = NULL;
    return 0;
It seems that T5440 server is fast in this case as compaired to T5220 server.
Could anyone please help me out the exact reason for this behaviour as my application is slow as well on this T5440 server. I have posted earlier as well for the same issue.
Thanks in advance !!!
regards,
Sanjay

You already asked this question...
48 hours earlier, and in the same Solaris forum space
Repeating the post isn't going to get you a response any faster, and actually now have people NOT respond because you are not showing any patience.
These are end-user community forums, not a place to expect Oracle Technical Support.   There is no obligation that there be a response.
If you have a business-critical issue and hope to get accurate and timely response, then use your service contract credentials to open a Support request.
This new redundant post is locked.
Edit:
It appears that at the same time the O.P. posted this redundant thread, they also posted the same question to at least one other forum web site:
http://www.unix.com/solaris/229269-test-program-running-taking-much-more-time-high-end-server-t5440-than-low-end-server-t5220.html

No High-End Recording into SB Live Val

I am recording from radio into SB Li've Value by connecting a cable from the headphone jack of stereo into the mic input of the SB Li've (going into "line in" results in too low volume). The recording works great. The resulting playback of the recorded file sounds "pretty good", but is somewhat heavy on the bass end and has absolutely no high-end (the righmost 4-5 columns on the mixer display are at zero). MP3 music that I have downloaded from other sources (like emusic.com) when played show all columns of the mixer display at good levels and sounds more "crisp" than my recordings. Note: Tried "line-in". Has lower volume (I know I could cure this with a pre-amp), but still have high-end missing.
Is this lack of high-end a function of the SB Li've Value (i.e. it just will not go this high)? If so, the only way is to use a better sound board (one that will record the higher frequencies)? Which one is recommended? (note: Don't need/want to get too fancy/expensi've here. Just recording at home for myself, but would like to do a bit better than I have).
Or should SB Li've Value be able to record the high-end frequencies and the problem is with my stereo? or program used to record (Audacity)?
Thanks Much,

Just a guess, but when you're coming out of a headphone output this is a very low impedance output. When you tie this into a mic input, which is a high impedance input, you're really loading down this high impedance input (almost like you're putting a short across it...the higher the frequency the great the short), and it may be disturbing the frequency characteristics of the input.
Ideally you'd go into the line input. I know you say that the level is not high enough. Can you not turn up the volume of the headphone output enough to give you adequate level?
More ideally, the radio would have a line output, and line levels would be just right. Good luck.

Can OSX 10.4.6 be made to boot on a high end standard intel PC?

Can OSX 10.4.6 be made to boot on a high end standard intel PC? I am satisfied with the reliability and price of intel hardware, but would like to run OSX instead of WinXP. Is Apple listening...?

Mac OS X 10.4.6 will not run on any PC hardware other than a Macintosh. Apple has not licensed it otherwise and has taken steps (both hardware and software) to prevent this from happening.
Q. Has someone hacked OS X so it will run on a PC?
A. Yes but OS X contains none of the myriad of drivers required that would allow it to function properly on a standard PC. It's all but unusable. There has been no substantiated evidence of anyone actually being able to DO something with OS X running on a standard PC. It boots and that's about it if you can believe the screenshots.
Q. What has been Apple's response to running OS X on standard PC's?
A. They have already threatened legal action against a website that discussed the process. They would probably sue anyone attempting to offer a product that would circumvent their license and protections.
Q. Will running OS X on standard PC hardware ever see the light of day officially?
A. Only Apple knows the answer to that question but I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

URGENT - Dual Xeon or high-end i7 & GTX or Quadro?

Hello,
I'm planing to build soon a new configuration for AE and i really need answers.
My usage of after effects is very cpu intensive (motion graphics, lots of 3d, light effects, and so on) + using a lot of scripts.
I was wondering... which option will give me the best results in those conditions?
One I7 980x with 24 go of ram
or
Two Xeon 5520 with 24 go of ram (or maybe 36go for this case)
I can't find a real answer on the web. I was first planning to get the dual xeon. Then I've realized that IF after effects use the cpu as extra amount of core, it won't be so usefull to me (especially regarding the fact that i'm using a lot of object relative expression - meaning failing with MP rendering enabled). Otherwise, IF AE use both cpu in a additive way, it will worth it (I mean, IF I don't need to enable MP Rendering to take benefits of both cpu)
I have also another question regarding the Quadro FX 4800... Since the Quadro CX is discontinued, and since it was an improvement of the FX 4800, does the FX 4800 will perform as well in AE CS5 than the CX was in AE CS4?
I'm not really carring about encoding in H.264... My care is about beeing productive and gain strong reactivity in the viewport, as fast uncompressed renders.
Please do not deviate with HDD importance, or stuff like that... I got all my answers on that. I really need more info on the Dual Cpu vs Single and the Quadro vs a simple GTX card.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Phil

Okay I found a starting of answer...
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/aftereffects/cs/using/WS3878526689cb91655866c1103a4f2dff7-79e8 a.html
OpenGL in After Effects can render the following features:
Shadows, except point light shadows (Colored shadows appear gray.)
Lights (eight maximum)
Masks
Alpha channels
Track mattes
Intersecting layers
Transformations for 2D and 3D layers
GPU-accelerated effects, including Bevel Alpha, Bilateral Blur, Box Blur, Brightness & Contrast, Channel Blur, Color Balance, Color Balance (HLS), Curves, Directional Blur, Drop Shadow, Fast Blur, Find Edges, Fractal Noise, Gaussian Blur, Hue/Saturation, Invert, Noise, Radial Blur, Ramp, Sharpen, Tint, and Turbulent Noise
All blending modes except Dissolve and Dancing Dissolve
Layer styles
Metal property settings for 3D layers
Cone feather settings for light layers
2D motion blur
Adjustment layers
Anti-aliasing
Depth-of-field blur
Nested compositions
That's still a lot of frequently used things. So it may worth it. I guess that using quadro instead of geforce will improve stability.
And i guess that using High End quadro instead of geforce will provide faster answer....
Anyway, if anybody have experienced the FX4800 into AE and compare it to the video posted on the nvidia website... that would be great....
Because the real question now, is to know if a Quadro could challenge a bi high end cpu computing... if no, or not so much, quadro are definitly not interresting for AE in this case.

Metropolis DMX Multiplexer or Higher End Router

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for