Slow, buggy and unresponsive QHY294M with APT

[8472]

Hi,

Just got a new QHY294M camera and I'm having a few issues.

I updated my ASCOM platform from 6.4 to 6.5 and the thing wouldn't connect or work at all. 

Reverted back to 6.4 and while it just about works, it is extremely slow at downloading images in APT and displaying live view.

Live view takes over 15s to refresh and images take between 10 to 30 seconds to download depending on if they are 11 or 47mp in size. As you can imagine, this is extremely frustrating for generating calibration files.

My laptop is a Samsung RV515 (AMD E-450), 8GB RAM 500GB SSD. Running APT V3.87.

Any ideas?

Thanks

[noah4x4]

An AMD E-450 processor has a CPU benchmark of merely 417. That is incredibly slow by current standards. 

I have a 16Mp and a 11Mp camera and they both stuttered with an Intel i5 and 8Gb RAM. I didn't enjoy 'near live' performance until I upgraded to an 8th generation i7 with 16Gb RAM having CPU benchmark near 6,000. More recent processors are 10,000+.

Much depends on what you want to do. If prepared to download and post process high resolution frames over many hours you can succeed with minimal computing power. However, I think you are too underpowered for anything  close to 'near live' processing activities, given that even 11Mp exceeds 4K UHD resolution.

 

Edited November 23, 2020 by noah4x4

[8472]

1 hour ago, noah4x4 said:

An AMD E-450 processor has a CPU benchmark of merely 417. That is incredibly slow by current standards. 

I have a 16Mp and a 11Mp camera and they both stuttered with an Intel i5 and 8Gb RAM. I didn't enjoy 'near live' performance until I upgraded to an 8th generation i7 with 16Gb RAM having CPU benchmark near 6,000. More recent processors are 10,000+.

Much depends on what you want to do. If prepared to download and post process high resolution frames over many hours you can succeed with minimal computing power. However, I think you are too underpowered for anything  close to 'near live' processing activities, given that even 11Mp exceeds 4K UHD resolution.

 

Hi

Thanks, but I have a 48gb Ryzen desktop for all my post processing duties. My only use for a laptop is for image acquisition.

As luck would have it, I've just gone and bought an 8gb i5, just like what you mentioned. I hope I don't regret it, as I was under the assumption you don't need much horsepower for imaging control?

Guess I'll find out soon enough.🤔

Out if interest, what CPU benchmark are you referring to?

[noah4x4]

Sorry about the delayed reply. I tend to use Passmark benchmarks.

I too was under the assumption from reading historic posts in SGL and CN that you don't need much horsepower for "imaging".  But that myth developed because it is not that long ago folk were using low resolution, large pixel CCDs. 

Today, most new astro cameras are CMOS and available sensor producion is being driven by sensor demand in the far larger terrestrial camera market where we are now seeing larger sensor high resolution entry level cameras (even in mobile phones). The ZWO ASI1600 and Atik Horizon OSCs recently ceased producton as sensor production dried up. Quite modest astro workhorses like the ASI294mc are 10+ Megapixel.  Much then depends on frame rate or rate of capture. Double digit megapixel cameras churn out 48Mb + individual frames. Consider how long it takes to send a A4 page of coloured text to your printer (as that is a circa a 48Mb file). OK, that's more processing than mere saving image data, but you get the idea.

I happen to use Hyperstar, so I might be generating one 48Mb frame every two seconds at f/2.  If doing Lunar or Planetary frames rate soar. Of course, if you merely capture images on a lesser machine and then post-process later on a faster machine you will have a bit of headroom.  However, a recent i5 and 8Gb should be good for your purpose. But try live stacking (EAA style) and you might discover the computing power required is more significant. My 8th generation i5 crawled when attempting live stacking from my 16 Megapixel Atik Horizon.  I had to leap to 8i7 and 16Gb RAM to enjoy (near) real time live stacking.

 

[8472]

I have an i7 laptop now and so, far it breezes through everything a throw at it - including my camera's 47mp mode.

Thanks for your help.

[ZS1RA]

On 14/12/2020 at 16:25, 8472 said:

I have an i7 laptop now and so, far it breezes through everything a throw at it - including my camera's 47mp mode.

Thanks for your help.

I’m about to buy this camera so doing some research. Are you happy with the QHY294M and were your initial problems due to lack of computer power?
 

Thanks Shaun

[8472]

On the whole, I would say yes.

There are some driver issues (most have been, or will be solved with new updates) if you take a look on a couple of CN threads, but I wouldn't necessarily let that put you off.

[wimvb]

As a reference, images from my ASI294MM at 4.63 um pixel size, take about 1.5 s to download from camera to the Rock64 (raspberry pi alternative) that I use for imaging. For gear control and imaging (no processing of course), you shouldn't need much more. Download times of more than a few seconds with these cameras seems excessive.

Otoh, I wouldn't be surprised if you have driver issues. QHY may be good cameras, but I have avoided them in the past, because of software/driver issues. And so far I'm not convinced they've solved those.

Just my € 0.02