Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is 1600 DDR3 able to save uncompressed 1080p video?

Last response: in Memory
Share
February 11, 2013 9:06:46 AM

So far I have like 2GB left on my main drive which is a 120GB SSD and so I plan on fixing it soon but for now that's what I have. I was trying to think of ways I can record gameplay using FRAPS with such little memory considering I normally get like 10GB videos. I know a HDD would be a cheaper option but they might be to slow. Then I remembered I have 16GB of RAM. I was thinking about using the RAM to save videos to as I'm recording. Do you think 1600 DDR3 would be able to play things like BF3 and save a few minutes of 1080p uncompressed video? It's Kingston HyperX Blu.
a c 80 } Memory
February 11, 2013 1:30:05 PM

Only if you create a RAM drive, but then you'll have to save the file somewhere else; otherwise you'll lose it as soon as the system is powered off or rebooted. Memory speed or type is not important for a RAM drive; it can be created on any system that has enough memory.
m
0
l
a b } Memory
February 11, 2013 1:37:03 PM

melikepie said:
I was thinking about using the RAM to save videos to as I'm recording. Do you think 1600 DDR3 would be able to play things like BF3 and save a few minutes of 1080p uncompressed video? It's Kingston HyperX Blu.

Depends on what you're trying to do. If you just want a temporary storage space to store no more than a few gigabytes of data in the very short term, until you have a chance to compress it, then sure, this will work fine.

If you're expecting this to be an extension of your hard drive, or a good way to store things for more than a few minutes, or need to store more than a few gigabytes of data, then no. This won't work.

Also, using a RAM drive won't impact your gaming. Memory bandwidth has very little to do with your framerate, and your memory has far more bandwidth than needed to handle both tasks.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b } Memory
February 11, 2013 4:11:04 PM

You will not be saving uncompressed video.

1920 x 1080 x 60 x 3 = 355MB/s

With only 2GB free, you can record six seconds of uncompressed video. If you had a blank 128GB SSD, you would be able to record only 5m30 on it.

You do not want to record uncompressed video. Apart from movie studios and few other exceptions, just about everything else uses at least some degree of compression to keep bandwidth and file sizes within manageable range.
m
0
l
February 12, 2013 1:37:14 AM

It only takes like 10GB of room for 10m of uncompressed 1080p video. I don't get your math.
m
0
l
a b } Memory
February 12, 2013 11:12:25 AM

melikepie said:
It only takes like 10GB of room for 10m of uncompressed 1080p video. I don't get your math.

One image at 1920x1080 is ~2MP x 3 colors so 6MB per image. At 60 images per second, that's 360MB/s. The math does not get any simpler than that.

If you can fit 10 minutes of 1080p60 video in 10GB (16MB/s) then your "uncompressed" video is already compressed at 22:1.

m
0
l
a b } Memory
February 12, 2013 1:24:42 PM

InvalidError said:
One image at 1920x1080 is ~2MP x 3 colors so 6MB per image. At 60 images per second, that's 360MB/s. The math does not get any simpler than that.

No, it doesn't get any simpler. The problem is the math is wrong.

1. You don't record video at 60 FPS, but 24. Very few sources will play video at higher framerates, even on a computer.
2. 1080p is not typically typically recorded with 24 bit color. Fraps uses YV12 (12 bits), and others will use 4:4:4 (10 bits).

This gives us a raw bitrate of around 62-74 MB/s, depending on how color was encoded. You were off by a factor of six.

Quote:
If you can fit 10 minutes of 1080p60 video in 10GB (16MB/s) then your "uncompressed" video is already compressed at 22:1.

While 10 minutes won't fit in 10GB, this is more like a 4:1 ratio, which a good lossless codec can do. Totally reasonable, but not uncompressed, just lossless.
m
0
l
a b } Memory
February 12, 2013 5:09:36 PM

Lossless? You threw away more than half the frames and half the bits per pixel. Sounds pretty lossy to me.
m
0
l
February 12, 2013 8:44:38 PM

I would be recording at 30FPS because youtube doesn't support 60FPS playback. Although assuming it was 60FPS would it be enough bandwidth?
m
0
l
February 13, 2013 2:57:01 AM

On my as-rock board my 16gb of ram can be used the make a 8gb ram disk. It will work as temporary storage. I would recommend getting a storage drive. If you want it to be fast. Western digital black drives are great.
m
0
l
a b } Memory
February 13, 2013 4:06:48 AM

InvalidError said:
Lossless? You threw away more than half the frames and half the bits per pixel. Sounds pretty lossy to me.

I'm not claiming it's lossless, I'm just telling you what's used. The statement about lossless codecs is tangential.
m
0
l
February 22, 2013 11:02:53 PM

knuckleonAMD said:
On my as-rock board my 16gb of ram can be used the make a 8gb ram disk. It will work as temporary storage. I would recommend getting a storage drive. If you want it to be fast. Western digital black drives are great.

Fast? It's RAM! How much faster can it get?
m
0
l
!