koobifora

Q: Optimal dedicated RAID-0/SSD drive workflow for working in FCPX?

(TLDR: Need help determining which aspects of read/write operations in FCPX editing and media storage will benefit from dedicated RAID-0 or SSD volumes.)

 

I want to create a new hardware workflow (e.g., dedicated external drives/volumes) to improve editing performance while working in FCPX.  My understanding of operational demands or workload patterns when editing video is incomplete, therefore I am not sure what hardware setup is best-suited for video editing. I'll put my 1st question as a practical question and its corresponding technical questions, so feel free to address either/all:


1a. (practical) Will storing source media (copies of media files, linked to FCPX Events) and FCPX Projects on separate drives improve performance?

(I already edit from media files stored on external drives, but currently FCPX Events and Projects are on the same external drive.)

1b. (technical) When running FCPX, what is the workload pattern and where is it directed (as it relates to volumes)? i.e. does it involve sequential or random reads and writes? Are these operations large-block or small?

Are the editing and rendering operations placing the most performance demand on the system/volume running the FCPX application, on the storage volume where the project/edit decisions are saved/written to, or on the volume that is reading the media source files?

 

2. Need advice to reject or confirm whether any below options (in full or part) are suited to improved performance speed while editing in FCPX: (assume Thunderbolt/USB 3 connections, and each bullet item represents a discrete drive/volume in the workflow setup)

  • external HDD RAID-0 for the media files (HD video, multi-GB files, ProRes 422 and mpeg-4 codecs)
  • external HDD RAID-0 for running the FCPX application (with OS remaining on system HD)
  • external HDD RAID-0 for writing video edits/FCPX Projects

or:

  • external SSD to read media files
  • external SSD to run FCPX (with OS remaining on system HD)
  • external HDD RAID-0 to edit/write FCPX Projects

also:

  • Would an SSD RAID-0 noticeably improve performance over any/some of these options, or be overkill

and:

Is there a noticeable difference, and which then is better in terms of performance (not cost):

  • RAID-0 set up with 2 HDDs using OSX (Lion) Disk Utility
  • RAID-0 set up with a 2-bay HDD hardware RAID (e.g. G-Tech G-RAID)

 

Some background info:

-My questions are exclusive to optimizing my drive and volume setup, I am aware that performance also depends largely on CPU and GPU factors.

-I am running FCPX original v10.0.0 on the HD of a 2011 iMac with 8GB RAM. I am working on a major system upgrade since this has become inadequate for video, but in the meantime my goal is to organize my external storage to improve performance with my current system.  I currently run FCPX off the system HD and house the Projects/Events together on separate undedicated external 3-4TB HDDs which contains other types of files. In some cases, source media files are also on this same external, or on separate external HDDs.


Thanks for taking the time to read and answer.

Posted on Jun 15, 2016 10:43 AM

Close

Q: Optimal dedicated RAID-0/SSD drive workflow for working in FCPX?

  • All replies
  • Helpful answers

  • by Luis Sequeira1,

    Luis Sequeira1 Luis Sequeira1 Jun 15, 2016 11:22 AM in response to koobifora
    Level 6 (11,849 points)
    Jun 15, 2016 11:22 AM in response to koobifora

    I can't go over all the details, but some things I think I must say:

     

    1) Do consider a new system. In every aspect you are set to gain a lot.

      1a) FCP X is now at version 10.2.3 and it is immensely superior to 10.0.0, which is now 5 years old!

      1b) You must be running a very old OS (10.7 Lion?) We are currently on 10.11 El Capitan, and 10.12 will be here in the Fall [aside: IMHO, Lion was the worst version of OS X]

      1c) You should be using at least 16GB of RAM.

     

    2) Don't overthink, or overbuy. Start smallish, and grow as you need. If you don't use multicam (and in 10.0.0 you certainly don't), even a usb3 single external HD will work fine for your material. Using an SSD of course will be faster, but space may be constrained; if your projects are relatively small you could have an SSD for current work and archive on large HD.

  • by koobifora,

    koobifora koobifora Jun 15, 2016 1:12 PM in response to Luis Sequeira1
    Level 1 (4 points)
    Video
    Jun 15, 2016 1:12 PM in response to Luis Sequeira1

    Thank you Luis for your reply.  Maybe I should clarify a couple things:

    I did not mean to give the impression that my use of an older system and older application version means that I am trying to get a Ferrari hard drive setup when a Toyota will do. OSX 10.7.5 and FCPX 1.0.0 work fine for my current needs, I like to stick with what is working if it works.  In the near future I will bring my system up to speed.  But in the meantime!--

    --my current external storage setup is pretty crude, and not organized for dedicated video work. So I want to improve this and optimize it for better system/application performance.  I am not doing multi-cam work but my current video projects involve hundreds of multi-GB files (coming from black magic pocket cam), and somewhat complicated timelines of layered media and color work.  I need to be able to work directly in FCPX with these many media files (e.g., I want the hundreds of files available in my Events), and I want to set up dedicated drives for the media and edits. A couple of the drives I use now are USB 2 so setting up new Thunderbolt drives is going to help with the bottlenecks that are keeping me from working. But even with my Thunderbolt g-tech drive (which is not dedicated to video work) I often see slow performance.

     

    So my main questions are to do with 1) whether it is helpful or irrelevant to edit to one drive and pull source media from another, 2) whether running FCPX off an SSD or RAID-0 will also improve anything or be irrelevant, and 3) whether a software RAID-0 with external HDDs using Disk Utility is superior or comparable to a hardware RAID.

    These questions come down to whether I'll want to purchase 1 drive/array or 3:

    A: 1 volume dedicated to FCPX work and copies of source media together; or

    B: 1 volume dedicated to FCPX editing and 1 volume dedicated to copies of source media; or

    C: 1 volume dedicated to running FCPX application, along with (B) as outlined above;

    where the volumes are probably HDDs in RAID-0 or possibly in combination with SSD as in scenario (C).

     

    I've been trying to research what type of operations are involved in editing work in FCPX so as to determine which aspects will benefit from a dedicated drive, and from what type (stripe set or SSD). Does running FCPX involve random reads/writes that will benefit from SSD? Does making the edits involve large sequential writes that would benefit from striped HDDs?  Does working with numerous 20-30GB source media files involve large sequential reads that would benefit from striped HDDs? These are the points about which I remain confused.

  • by RoDiSVK,

    RoDiSVK RoDiSVK Jun 16, 2016 12:29 AM in response to koobifora
    Level 1 (4 points)
    Jun 16, 2016 12:29 AM in response to koobifora

    For data we recommend using RAID 1, smart RAID 1 reading data simultaneously from both drives so fast as RAID 0.

  • by GeeD,

    GeeD GeeD Jun 16, 2016 3:12 AM in response to koobifora
    Level 5 (7,676 points)
    Video
    Jun 16, 2016 3:12 AM in response to koobifora

    The application code is loaded to RAM when you launch so where the application is stored only affects time to launch and not speed of operation.  RAM is key because FCP X loads as much as possible of your project and contained media into RAM as it can to reduce the need for disk operations.  (I have 32 GB RAM and FCP X soon uses all of this even though my projects are quite small (10-15 min HD)).   RAID versions which split data between drives, such as 0, help when reading and writing to disks connected with USB3 or Thunderbolt since these interfaces allow date transfer many times faster than a single 7200 rpm disk can handle.  With the slower and older USB 2 and Firewire 800 there will be little advantage to using RAID.

     

    Geoff