Quad Core

Even if you get an E3200 for like R400, it will run 2x to 4x faster than your Pentium 4.
A Q9550 will be like 10x faster for video encoding.

I'd actually recommend a dual core. I had a quad core, got it to encode video faster, then I realised it's easier and faster to just download the movies. That said a quad core is more future proof.
 
Pada said:
Just buy a CUDA capable graphics card like the GTX 460 or better and use that to rip the DVD's :D

It'll transcode way faster than any quad/six core CPU can!
Click to expand...
Talk about stunning understatement... :cool: A couple of years ago when it was HUGE (being new on the scene and all), I got Badaboom (which is now replaced by Mediacoder (not least because of cost-of-entry)) and, on a 2nd/3rd gen 8800GT/512MB RAM saw ripping run at an easy 40fps on a C2D box back then. So, with the rightGPU you should get some rocking ripping on.
 
bdt said:
Talk about stunning understatement... :cool: A couple of years ago when it was HUGE (being new on the scene and all), I got Badaboom (which is now replaced by Mediacoder (not least because of cost-of-entry)) and, on a 2nd/3rd gen 8800GT/512MB RAM saw ripping run at an easy 40fps on a C2D box back then. So, with the rightGPU you should get some rocking ripping on.
Click to expand...

So, my GTX285 should perform better than my Q9300 when decoding DVD's?
 
Yes, however the encoding options are limited, it's not the most advanced coder. It's very fast indeed.
 
Downloaded it last night, will definately give it a bash this evening.

Also going to check on Quad Core prices :) see what the xmas budget says.
 
IRG said:
I have a Q6600 with a gtx280 and I can rip & recode (I use DVDFab) in 30 - 45min easily. But done with that ... I gots uncapped!
Click to expand...

Hahaha the best thing about uncapped is 1080 and 720 p files. Also those BRrips are good.
 
OK, I've now quickly tested MediaCoder with my 69mins DVD @ 720x480, 29.97fps, and I upscaled it to 1280x720, 4Mbps, 29.97fps & H.264 codec.
Using the CUDA version, my GTX 460 managed about 70fps and the GPU usage was 25% and my i7 940 CPU usage was at 12% -> Took about 30 minutes to rip the DVD.
Using the non-CUDA version, my i7 940 @ 3.4 GHz only managed 50fps and it used all 8 CPU threads!

Then I switched to 720x480 resolution and the picture changed completely:
My GTX 460 only managed to do 90fps @ 10% GPU usage, where as the i7 940 managed 130fps @ 100% CPU usage

Lastly, I've installed DVDFab and it detected the CUDA support.
Using the same profile as the last one in MediaCoder, DVDFab managed to get a whopping 380fps ! It ripped the DVD in under 6 minutes!
The GPU usage was at 40% and the CPU usage at like 65%. I've uploaded a screenshot with the results (CPU + GPU usage) here: http://www.zoopy.com/photo/5dwt/dvd-fab-results

Unfortunately none of those applications can make use of SLI, but then again, there is no point in that if the DVD drive can read fast enough...

MediaEncoder non-CUDA x64 version has the most encoding settings that you can change, which is awesome. But then again, you might as well just use Handbrake for that.
MediaEncoder CUDA has only a few bitrate/quality profiles, and unfortunately it uses very little of the GPU when encoding at low bitrates/framerates.
DVD Fab (DVD Ripper in particular) has even less options than MediaEncoder CUDA version, which really sux, but then again, it's lightening fast.

I haven't had much time to play with the video encoding, but CUDA seems really awesome, but it could be pretty useless in a Pentium 4 too.
 
Pada said:
OK, I've now quickly tested MediaCoder with my 69mins DVD @ 720x480, 29.97fps, and I upscaled it to 1280x720, 4Mbps, 29.97fps & H.264 codec.
Using the CUDA version, my GTX 460 managed about 70fps and the GPU usage was 25% and my i7 940 CPU usage was at 12% -> Took about 30 minutes to rip the DVD.
Using the non-CUDA version, my i7 940 @ 3.4 GHz only managed 50fps and it used all 8 CPU threads!

Then I switched to 720x480 resolution and the picture changed completely:
My GTX 460 only managed to do 90fps @ 10% GPU usage, where as the i7 940 managed 130fps @ 100% CPU usage

Lastly, I've installed DVDFab and it detected the CUDA support.
Using the same profile as the last one in MediaCoder, DVDFab managed to get a whopping 380fps ! It ripped the DVD in under 6 minutes!
The GPU usage was at 40% and the CPU usage at like 65%. I've uploaded a screenshot with the results (CPU + GPU usage) here: http://www.zoopy.com/photo/5dwt/dvd-fab-results

Unfortunately none of those applications can make use of SLI, but then again, there is no point in that if the DVD drive can read fast enough...

MediaEncoder non-CUDA x64 version has the most encoding settings that you can change, which is awesome. But then again, you might as well just use Handbrake for that.
MediaEncoder CUDA has only a few bitrate/quality profiles, and unfortunately it uses very little of the GPU when encoding at low bitrates/framerates.
DVD Fab (DVD Ripper in particular) has even less options than MediaEncoder CUDA version, which really sux, but then again, it's lightening fast.

I haven't had much time to play with the video encoding, but CUDA seems really awesome, but it could be pretty useless in a Pentium 4 too.
Click to expand...

Oh my word..... 6 minutes??? Good grief.

The 940 is a Quad Core. The GTX 460 is also a good GPU.

I will try DVDFab on my silly little P4, because MediaEncoder has ripping to iPhone/PSP/MobilePhone/iPad only? What happens if i want to convert a avi file to DVD?
ConvertXtoDVD takes forever. About as much time as the actual movie length.
 
I still reckon OpenCL is the future. It's a cross platform open standard that will give you access CPUs, GPUs and other processors. So everybody uses the same API which makes things a lot easier. All the big players like Intel, AMD & nVidia are onboard as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCL
http://li5.ziti.uni-heidelberg.de/x264gpu/
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=691296

From the Wikipedia link:
OpenCL (Open Computing Language) is a framework for writing programs that execute across heterogeneous platforms consisting of CPUs, GPUs, and other processors. OpenCL includes a language (based on C99) for writing kernels (functions that execute on OpenCL devices), plus APIs that are used to define and then control the platforms. OpenCL provides parallel computing using task-based and data-based parallelism. Its architecture shares a range of computational interfaces with two competitors, NVidia's Compute Unified Device Architecture and Microsoft's DirectCompute.

OpenCL gives any application access to the Graphics Processing Unit for non-graphical computing. Thus, OpenCL extends the power of the Graphics Processing Unit beyond graphics (General-purpose computing on graphics processing units). OpenCL is analogous to the open industry standards OpenGL and OpenAL, for 3D graphics and computer audio, respectively. OpenCL is managed by the non-profit technology consortium Khronos Group.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X