Sighthound Video 7 BETA 1 is released

[visionik]

warthog9 - thank you. We have yet more performance improvements coming, too.

So far we are finding even older Nvidia cards offer pretty significant performance improvements.

Sighthound Video storage will continue to be only local. Local web access will continue to work. The new feature is a kind of "reverse tunnel" that lets the embedded web server / web api in Sighthound Video be accessed remotely. It doesn't push video to the cloud, it just makes it easier to remotely access your video.


You will be able to turn it off. So yes, local / firewall hole / VPN etc will still work fine.

[mayop]

The main stream (1920x1080)of my Ubiquiti G3 Bullet won't connect if I enable hardware acceleration but the 640x480 sub stream will. I also have two trendnet cameras that work fine with or without hardware acceleration.

My cpu is i5-3470S

[warthog9]

Followup to my last comment, as I just upgraded the machine I'm running sighthound on. I have about 17 cameras, varying resolutions.

Old machine: i7-6700T, 4 core, 8 thread 2.8GHz base, Intel 530 GPU.
Sighthound 6: 80-100% cpu, negligible GPU usage
Sighthound 7 beta: ~50% cpu, ~73% Intel 530 GPU usage

That was a solid move forward.

New machine: i7-9700T, 8 core, 8 thread, 2.0GHz base, Intel 630 graphics. I've also added a Quadro P1000 to the system, because I needed a low-profile pci-e card to fit in the 2U box I was shoving this all in.
Sighthound 7 beta: 55-70% cpu usage (I'm actually somewhat surprised here), and ~53% GPU on the NVIDIA only.

the lower base clock may be the result in the higher cpu usage, though I would have expected twice as many real cores to have mitigated that a bit (and honestly ultimately been a lower overall cpu usage). While I was shutting down the old box and getting the new one up, I did run a single camera, full 1080p. It ran about 5-6% cpu and ~4% gpu, so adding in the 16 additional cameras of various resolutions and such means this has scaled somewhat predictably (and noting that visionik suggested more improvements are in the works).

I note that Sighthound doesn't seem to want to make any use of the iGPU with the P1000 present, as my usage is currently at a negligible 0%, even when viewing video. I don't know if this is a case of, the P1000 is so much faster it makes no sense to use any of the iGPU, or if this is just an issue of trying to manage two cards and stacks to do things, but I wanted to note it. I suspect the last of the cameras I need to add will likely fill up this box, but this also sets the stage for what an i7-9700T, 32G of DDR4 dual channel memory, an nvme boot drive and two skyhawk drives, and a Quadro P1000 seem to be able to process.

[fjonker]

Is there any information on recommended specifications for supported NVidia video cards?

[ZrC]

Followup to my last comment, as I just upgraded the machine I'm running sighthound on. I have about 17 cameras, varying resolutions.

Old machine: i7-6700T, 4 core, 8 thread 2.8GHz base, Intel 530 GPU.
Sighthound 6: 80-100% cpu, negligible GPU usage
Sighthound 7 beta: ~50% cpu, ~73% Intel 530 GPU usage

That was a solid move forward.

New machine: i7-9700T, 8 core, 8 thread, 2.0GHz base, Intel 630 graphics. I've also added a Quadro P1000 to the system, because I needed a low-profile pci-e card to fit in the 2U box I was shoving this all in.
Sighthound 7 beta: 55-70% cpu usage (I'm actually somewhat surprised here), and ~53% GPU on the NVIDIA only.

the lower base clock may be the result in the higher cpu usage, though I would have expected twice as many real cores to have mitigated that a bit (and honestly ultimately been a lower overall cpu usage). While I was shutting down the old box and getting the new one up, I did run a single camera, full 1080p. It ran about 5-6% cpu and ~4% gpu, so adding in the 16 additional cameras of various resolutions and such means this has scaled somewhat predictably (and noting that visionik suggested more improvements are in the works).

I note that Sighthound doesn't seem to want to make any use of the iGPU with the P1000 present, as my usage is currently at a negligible 0%, even when viewing video. I don't know if this is a case of, the P1000 is so much faster it makes no sense to use any of the iGPU, or if this is just an issue of trying to manage two cards and stacks to do things, but I wanted to note it. I suspect the last of the cameras I need to add will likely fill up this box, but this also sets the stage for what an i7-9700T, 32G of DDR4 dual channel memory, an nvme boot drive and two skyhawk drives, and a Quadro P1000 seem to be able to process.

Most GPU accelerated software can only make use of one GPU at a time. That said the P1000 should have way more horsepower than the 630 iGPU.

Have you measured the system power usage with the iGPU and P1000? I'm curious how much it's pulling with each under load.

[HansS]

Good day. I'm on the Beta on MacOS. I have just purchased an EZVIZ C3X. It supports rtsp, however, I can only get H.265 out of it. In the CameraTest.log I can see that Sighthound does not support H.265. I have tried routing the RTSP feed through Synology Surveillance Station, but it passes on the H.265. I tried rtsp over http via Synology, but get error 500, so can't get that to work.

Any ideas? Is support for h.265 planned?

[gnommon]

yawn, will there ever be a beta 2 with substantial updates before Justice Barrett retires?
The UI is so bad it seriously needs enhancements.
Esp the search function to see what happened over a few days instead of one.
mass edits camera rules eg for emails in a list to see what's sending whatand edit a bunch of them at once.
I'm sure my fellow customers have more.


You guys really could rock the boat with a stellar solution.
Im really getting fed up with this lack of updates.

[dcmccall]

as a long time user, and trying to focus on the positives here this beta is a step forward for sure in terms of CPU - my old macbook pro running 9 cameras can actually run without the fan blasting full time!

[gnommon]

Running sh7 with 20 2k+ cams on 16 e5 cores and 1050 ti at 80% on all of them
Running axxonnext eval, same config at 15% on the xeons and 3% on the 1050. plus many less false positives and a ton of better features. About to buy axxonnext.

[BeanBagKing]

Just wanted to drop by own review in here.

First, I second (third? fourth?) the need for H.265. I obviously don't have access to the metrics that you do regarding user base, and I don't know very much about the licensing, but a lot of cameras are moving to this. If not as a default/only option, then definitely a recommended/optional one. I'm currently poking around at my camera setup, trying to decide the path upgrades will take me in the next 2-3 years. Not supporting H.265 isn't quite a deal breaker for me -yet-, but it is a major consideration, and one that it seems most of your competition supports.

Upgrade from 6.1 to 7 Beta 1 went fine. CPU dropped by a bit over 10%, which is nice, but I wasn't heavily CPU constrained to begin with. Since this was mostly a resource updated, there's not much else to report. It's been running like normal for the last week or so.

@gnommon - What's the cost and where are you purchasing from?