PC based DVR or Stand alone DVR

[edhando 0]

Designing a Retail System

 

I am trying to decide if PC based DVR (capture card, HD, software) is a good idea or stand Alone DVR is a good idea. Looking for 4 cameras

 

Please Help.

 

Thank you in advance.

[securitymonster 0]

PC based usually gives you the following:

 

Better Remote Access

Higher Record Rates

Higher Record Resolution

Easier Upgrading

Easier Search Functions

 

A standalone will do the work for you though. Especially with just 4 cameras. You should probably look at your budget number. If you have no budget, I would say go for the PC based as it will give you the creature comforts you will learn to enjoy down the road. If your looking to save some money, go with a good standalone and it will still give you the good video evidence your looking for.

 

Camera placement and camera quality will be just as equally as important to a good DVR!

[eyespye.security 0]

I agree with securitymonster on most points as we install quite a few in retail locations with both the stand-alone and pc-based units. It all depends on who the manufacturer is and how much you're willing to spend.

 

We've done comparisons of both our PC-based units (typically use Avemedia and Geovision) and stand-alones (the units we use are HIGH end) and they're comparible in functionality:

 

--120FPS total (or 30FPS each channel)

--Full Frame recording @ 30FPS each

--Record resolutions of basic, find, superfine, ultra

--Easy firmware upgrade via USB/Serial

--Search functionality is quite similar to PC-based

 

Additionally, you don't have to worry about PC upgrades, OS corruption, reboots due to updates, viruses. Plus the only moving parts are the hard drive and the fan - no other components are needed.

 

Space savings are also an advantage. Nowadays, you can get integrated DVR/LCD as well where a 4-channel unit can include an LCD. We sell these like hot cakes.

 

Caveats are that you can't use the stand-alone machine as a PC and surf the Web or do business software like MS Office or others.

 

Private-message me if you need more specific information.

 

PS, We also do PC-based systems, but typically when the business requires it. We have a lot of satisfied customers with the stand-alones.

 

Just remember, garbage DVRs come in all sizes and shapes - both PC-based and stand-alone.

[securitymonster 0]

Also, when I say higher record rates, I mean that you can record at better frame rates and also get decent video storage on your hard drive. There are alot of standalones on the market right now that offer JPEG2000 compression but with 4 cameras and 250gb hard drive with motion activated recording, your lucky to get 4-5 days worth of video. With a pc based system, that same size hard drive with motion activated recording will give you closer to 3-4 weeks.

 

I guess you just need to find out your budget and do some comparisons. Get in touch with your local dealer and have him run some demo's for you showing you the difference. This way you'll get hands on with the machines and you can decide for yourself what works best for you.

[rory 0]

One thing that PC based does have over Stand Alones is Higher Quality Evidence Sharing (even comparing to the best standalones in the world) and Faster Recording Speeds at Higher Quality (640x480 @ 30fps per camera). Ofcourse this is dependent on the Card and Software used. The PC based version you use will vary in features depending on the model purchased ..

 

Another tip, you can tweak the Windows XP PC so you will never get a virus or malware, and the users cant do anything besides use the DVR software.

 

I switched to PC based primarily due to the Higher Quality Recorded Video, Faster Speeds, and the top of the list -> Computers are Duty Free through Customs here while stand alones are taxed as video which is 30-45% dependent on the Customs Officer on duty (or how much kickback he gets!).

 

Like someone else mentioned, you get garbage versions of PC Based and Standalones, but a good way to generalize is you get what you pay for; sometimes that can vary.

 

Basically if you are confidently PC literate and can do some work with Computer hardware, that maybe the way you want to go, if not, stick to a standalone or you may get lost if it ever needs service. There are budget versions of each, mid versions, high end, etc .. see what your budget is first and what is available in your area, or wherever it is you are searching for one.

[surf1div1 0]

Thanks Rory for your feedback- while reviewing some of the posts here on the PC based, is there a combo (intel board/processor/ram/PS) you would recommend with the current variations out there? Since I already have a computer for use at home, in consideration of using a PC based footprint, I would love to know the specs you would current suggest- ok, in the context of a home application, currently set for 5 to 8 cameras, and which DVR card you would recommend. My current option is going with a four camera Dedicated Micro ECH 4 with a price of $675 (will check out the higher channel one depending on cost), and while putting together a PC system is obviously more costly, possibly a PC based unit might make better sense. Optimally I would like to do this as well on my home LAN so that I can view from work what is happening at home (I currently have a dynamic DSL line and am aware that the DM unit is only Static) but have talked to one person on the board who suggested the Nuvico DV3 (Howard, still haven't received your feedback )

 

While I'm confident about adding a card (I've added drives, and cards, etc with computers as far as adding things short of changing out the motherboard/processor) I think that it would help for the end users if anyone can recommend for those of us doing this what to get. I've read the threads on hardware vs software based issues on the processor, and also have considered the Geovision cards, but am wondering if I'm going for the stability (and avoiding the Via chips-which the AMD's tend to go with) and do prefer AMD. I know that as it's been posted that the budget cards are compatable with them, but wonder why none of the AMD computers have been used when you get more bang for the buck with AMD. Also, is the Dual Core processors and hyperthreading still the way to go? Whew....

 

One thing that PC based does have over Stand Alones is Higher Quality Evidence Sharing (even comparing to the best standalones in the world) and Faster Recording Speeds at Higher Quality (640x480 @ 30fps per camera). Ofcourse this is dependent on the Card and Software used. The PC based version you use will vary in features depending on the model purchased ..

 

Basically if you are confidently PC literate and can do some work with Computer hardware, that maybe the way you want to go, if not, stick to a standalone or you may get lost if it ever needs service. There are budget versions of each, mid versions, high end, etc .. see what your budget is first and what is available in your area, or wherever it is you are searching for one.

[securitymonster 0]

Each card will have different recommended computer specs but in general you'll want:

 

Intel Processor (2ghz or higher)

512mb Ram (1gb is nice)

Windows XP Pro for alot of cards

64mb video card or better

 

As for hard drive, I would run two. One for the application & OS, while using the other for video storage. Obviously the larger the hard drive, the more storage you will get.

 

A good PC based card will set you back more than $675. Do some research and find something your happy with. The PC card will outperform that DM unit by a long shot!

 

As for AMD chipsets, sometimes they will work but manufacturers test and build on the Intel platform, so AMD is always up in the air. Is AMD better? Its really based on opinion and application. If the Intel chipset works great for the PC based surveillance capture cards and there seems to be no problem, what will you really ultimately gain by using an AMD chip if the AMD does indeed work?

 

Its kind of like trying to re-invent the wheel......