18 screens of different videos

[ace]

Hi, I need to create a video wall made out of 18 screens. I was considering to get 3x FirePro W600 graphic card and a high budget PC. We will create content, so we can use any wrapers and codecs we want, to make sure nice smooth playback.

Video on each screen would have resolution of a 1280x720.

1. Did anyone tried that number of screens to run from one machine?
2. Can Array Sync work with that?
3. Any recommendation for a PC components?

Thanks

[ace]

I did a typo in the title. It should be 18 screens. If admin or moderator could fix it I would really apreciate it, thanks

[Turboladdade]

From a software standpoint ArraySync could do it, however I doubt your PC would be able to handle it as spanning is not available on Windows in the current version of ArraySync - it would have to be 18 separate video files instead of one big one, and I don't think your storage would be fast enough to handle that coming from one single PC. Having ultra powerful video cards isn't going to help. You'd be much better off with several cheaper PCs all running ArraySync on a network. Also quality and performance always seem to be much better on Macs, if that's an option.

[ace]

Thanks for your post Turboladdade. I forgot to add this will be an artistic layout. This 18 screens will be scattered over a space of about 8tvx9tv if screens would be set as grid. So I am not sure would spanning help at all in that case. I also like flexibility of upgrading a PC, but If Macs would end up being the better solution I might go with it.

Would it help if I would have multiple SSD drives? Considering any current motherboard can handle minimum of 4 drives and I could get additional SATA ports by PCI extension card I could get another 4 ports. That could give 8 SSD in total, so it would be:
6x 1 SSD = 2 screens/videos
2x 1 SSD = 3 screens/videos

If that doesn't sound like a valid option I might just get 3x PC, each with one FirePro W600 (each can support 6 screens).
I wanted to do it in one PC for my own convinienc, but if multiple PCs will work better I will go with that.

[Turboladdade]

This is a tough situation, and no matter what route you go it’s going to be expensive. I’m really not convinced a single PC can drive 6 videos and I’m hesitant to tell you this will work, have you go buy all the hardware, and then have it not work. Is it possible for you to test this out without making any major purchases? Or purchase with the option to return?

If you could do three Mac Pros instead (each can drive 6 displays) you’ll have better results as then you can have one single huge video file spanning all 6 displays. But Mac Pros are obviously really really expensive.

On your other point about the displays being scattered around, you could setup a large project in Premiere and arrange each of your separate videos onto one “space” that will occupy all the displays. This would greatly reduce the amount of work your system would have to do.

I almost want to say you’re better of with 9 budget PCs driving 2 displays each rather than 1-3 expensive high-end PCs.

This project does sound pretty interesting and I definitely want to work with you to get a satisfactory result.

[ace]

Hmmmm... Thanks for letting me know your thoughts. I can't test the PC with final specs right now. However I will try to do 12 screen setup across 3x PCs before the end of a week.

What is the most important thing in PC's specs when it comes to capabilities of PC's playback using ArraySync? You mentioned read speed of storage, is there anything else that will be essential to be a greater quality, like RAM or CPU?

9x PC will not be an option due to the space they would take.

Also you mentioned in other topic that ArraySync will not be updated in current form and if you will create new version it will be Windows based, is that correct?
If you will create Windows version would you consider it a benefit to load (all or some) videos to RAM so media player would have quick access to them during playback?

[Turboladdade]

What is the most important thing in PC's specs when it comes to capabilities of PC's playback using ArraySync? You mentioned read speed of storage, is there anything else that will be essential to be a greater quality, like RAM or CPU?

I would say storage speed, GPU, CPU (in that order).

Also you mentioned in other topic that ArraySync will not be updated in current form and if you will create new version it will be Windows based, is that correct?
If you will create Windows version would you consider it a benefit to load (all or some) videos to RAM so media player would have quick access to them during playback?

For awhile there I intended to drop Windows support. Frankly Windows just does not handle video as easily or reliably as Macs do. From the development standpoint, making sure the Windows version is on par with the Mac version is a complete nightmare.

However, since then I think I’ve worked out a lot of the bigger hurdles and as of right now I expect the Windows version to be out right alongside the Mac version. There are going to be a lot of very significant changes and the app will be a complete from-scratch rewrite along with a name change and a switch to subscription pricing (gotta pay my bills too). However I think the vast majority of ArraySync customers will find the improvements in the replacement app well worth it (and long awaited).

The only thing I can’t give is a timeframe on this… just hoping soon!