DVDShrink Speed Question vs Computer Processor

Clock per clock the AMD walks all over the P4, but Intel seems to be able to maintain a decent lead in clock speed. Here is a not to well written article that still does a good job of describing the differences between them.

http://www.tech-forums.net/computer/topic/13146.html

 

You are absolutely correct, the internal architecture and the amount that is being processed for each clock cycle is key. What most people don't understand is the floating point and what it has to do with games and other types of calculations as in spreadsheets,etc. - - I am an engineer, but not a computer engineer, that being said I have built all my computers for the last 10 years or so,probably well over 20 I just use in the house. I never really wanted to go past the P3 1 ghz for a long time because a 1 ghz computer is still a powerful machine. Mostly, it never seems to amaze me how many people concentrate on just the cpu and don't really care about upgrading to better hardware, which is absolutely pivotal. A machine that has faster 7200 rpm hard drives or higher,ATA 133, CL2 ram over CL3, better video, etc. It doesn't really help much to have a faster cpu if it is sitting around waiting for the hard drive and video board or a older ATA 66 interface sitting around being wasted on faster ATA 100 and ATA 133 drives. Also, anyone who does diagnostics would see the improvement in the accelerated FSB. I have always looked at my motherboard upgrades to make sure I can get max from my peripherals. Even very good brand name motherboards are darn cheap for what you get. The reason when you look at the real world comparison of computers is why there is always so much difference in results of the same processor, is the other peripherals used. I never understood why so many people just think upgrading processor only means maximum performance. I once did a very detailed test where I doubled the processor speed from original and also started at a 66 mhz FSB and went all the way to a 133 FSB. Some very large graphics based programs went from loading and executing up to 70% faster. However,overall,the average increase in system performance overall with doubling processor speed and going from FSB of 66 to 133 was only an average of 18%. Why, easy enough to figure out, all of a sudden you have to drop PCI ratio down to 1/3 and even 1/4. You have to drop AGP ratio down. - - The reason I started this thread was because I wanted to get some system results from a real life average P4 system. From the small sampling I can already tell some are running fast processors but not taking advantage of other hardware in their system.

 

cuminstd

Do you by any chance know Vurbal?

I've also been building for about 10 years. I use corsair xtreme PC 3200 CAS2 memory and two 120 gig 7200 rpm hard disks (now being replaced) in a raidO. Once your hardware is about as good as it gets all that's left is your CPU. Whether or not CPU speed is important depends on what your doing. If your doing video re encoding or playing some serious 3D games then your CPU can't be fast enough and in this case faster is better. Yes when it comes to gaming a fast graphics card is also important but a slower CPU can also affect the number of frames it can reproduce.

 

cuminstd

Your comments are most interesting. I have been building systems for about 10 years now...but not with state-of-the-art components. I always waited for prices to come down. I recently ran against a P 2.2 w/ 512 SDRAM & 400 FSB Intel mobo which outperformed my P 2.66 / 512 DDR w/533 FSB Matsonic mobo. This was a real eye opener for me, as the Matsonic mobo is a dog with fleas. I am now on the hunt for an ASUS board where I can also overclock my 2.66. BTW, it takes me 2-1/2 hours to do a 6.5 GB DVD in Shrink 3.2 w/deep analysis and enhancements.

 

No, I don't know Vurbal. I agree that you can get to the point that the motherboard is peaked out, but a lot of people still don't max out at the component level. I don't play games at all anymore but when my son was into it I always had video boards that could really deliver the FPS needed. I actually have an older ASUS T2P4 board still running a Pentium 233 mmx at 299. Asus was the first motherboard to have an undocumented 83 mhz FSB. One gaming computer I built for my son way back was the original Celeron 300A overclocked to 450 mhz and it worked quite well on games. Also, it played many DVD movies without a glitch. I keep the 233mmx computer around with the Asus board just to fire it up once in a while to remind me how much fun I had with that board and overclocking in general. I still play Quake on it when I fire it up for fun. I am a huge fan of the Abit BX133RAID mb and still have four of them. Anyone who is always upgrading and buiding their own computers has room for the older hard drives for something. The fact this could have four ATA100 and four others was a real plus. One of my Abit BX133 mb's has a Siig Controller on it because I have a 160 gig drive and put the controller in for the ATA133 and to get past the 137 Gig barrier. Everyone knows how good the 440BX chipset was for games and this board was the end of an era. They put defective filter caps in them though and I already had to replace the caps in one of them. They have Pentium lll's in them with the exception of one Celeron 950 runnng at 1.3 ghz. I'm still going to put a 1.4 ghz Celeron in one of them for my daughter since they overclock very high and I already have placed Tualatin adapters in the cpu socket. Most all of my mb's have been either Asus or Abit, but I am sure I will like the MSI Neo2 board because I research heavily before getting a mb and everybody that has one loves it.

 

Well, I haven't got 10 years of experience building my own just yet, but Im really thorough and open-minded, and research everything. And I agree about the components. Here's what I have:

AMD 2700+ with 1.5GB of Kingston value ram
Geforce FX5200 AGP8x Graphics card
Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe motherboard (stock clocking)
2 ATA100 hard drives (WD 120 + 160GB)
Plextor PX712A burner and Liteon 167T DVD-rom
Promise IDE ATA133 controller

Recently, I've really gotten into burning DVD's, and have been trying to find all missing links in reference to speed. I made some interesting discoveries along the way:

1. Going from 1GB to 1.5GB of ram didn't seem to make any appreciable difference, but going from 512 to 1GB really did.

2. It's a myth about the secondary IDE ports second channel being slower. It's just as fast as the primary channel, unless you run both drives at the same time in which case both drives run around half speed.

3. I keep learning 'the obvious'.

My asus motherboard is a real cadillac. If I knew what all this stuff meant when I bought it, I would have bought SATA hard drives for the speeed instead of 100's. I thought they were the fastest. Also, I could have bought SATA dvd drives (at least 1 of them) and save the money on needing to buy a IDE controller.

4. My Plextor drive rocks.

5. Newegg rocks.

6. I must be doing something right, because a lot of guys out there are having tons of problems with similar media and equipment.

7. I don't know a dang thing yet.

 

how much of a difference did increasing from 512 to 1GB make? i'm curious as i am debating a memory upgrade vs processor upgrade. current i have an athlon xp 2400 with 512 mem running at dual channel (which im pretty sure is worthless and is just another marketing scheme that i got suckered into). so should i do memory or processor (basically one thats either 333 or 400 fsb?)

 

hnikkels, I can't really comment on a memory upgrade.
However, I have recently upgraded my system to a Pentium 4 3.0Ghz HT, from an Athlon XP1700+, and the processing speed as more than doubled (same amount of memory on both system: 512MB).

 

The increase from 512MB to 1GB ram made a huge difference in my opinion! It was worth it. There's a couple things to remember though...

1. Increase in the same amount and speed memory as you have already, otherwise its my understanding that the faster memory slows down to the slower's speed, and I think the dual channel thing comes into play as well. Read up on dual channel, its better Im sure.

2. Figure out what you want longrun. I bought 3 sticks of 512K pc2700 (333mhz), and now that my AMD2700+ is maxed out everywhere else, Im considering the AMD3200+ so I can go to 400FSB. But here's the problem: I have 3 expensive sticks of 333mhz memory. If I upgrade just the chip, I don't think I will be doing much as the bottleneck just moved to the ram.

3. Check to see if your chip is 266 or 333mhz, I can't remember where the break is, but I think yours would be 266. If that's the case, consider upgrading in stages as money allows. 3200+ first, then 2 new sticks of 512 pc3200. That would jump you to 400FSB and 400mhz memory to match.

4. Make sure that your motherboard will even do 400FSB. A lot of them will only go to 333mhz. In which case, the chip would be a waste since you can't run it at full speed.

5. It all depends on how much cash you wanna dump in your computer over time, and whether or not you're happy with it overall. The simple 512MB ram upgrade is relatively cheap compared to a whole changeover, and will give you a pretty good bang for the buck.

Overall, I favor memory upgrades alot. I was really happy with my 2700+ when I went from 512K to 1GB. I thought it was worth it. Also, I am really really happy with the Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe m/b I put in when my cheapy Asrock fried. The new board is really a cadillac, with a lot of built-in controllers for whatever I ever wanted to do. And it's been problem free ever since. I would definitely check on whether or not your M/B can support 333 or 400 fsb first.

 

thanks for the quick replies guys. both of what was said follows my already existing logic.

dual channel is "good" but not necessarily good in video encoding/transcoding.

my 2400 is 266 fsb, which i suspect to be a bottleneck. i have tested a duron 1.8 which is also at 266 fsb and came with just barely worse results as my 2400 (2.0ghz), which i attributed to the extra 200mhz. and i mean BARELY (same movie, from rip to burn, time difference was mere seconds! 23 seconds, if anyone cares).

but now im torn between going with a whole new (p4 2.4A or 2.8C) system and overclock it to 3.2-3.8 "safely" or going with a 333 fsb athlon/sempron chip (400 is pretty much out of the question as the 400 fsb chips are way too pricy considering their clock speeds are well below the 2.4 mark, which is just the stock speed of the p4s). my only concern is that the max speed i can attain with 333 fsb is about 2.2 as in the case of the 2700... so the big question is "whats the best bang for the buck?"

i upgraded my burner from a 4x to an 8x which kept me content for a while. and now the need for speed bug bit again! by the way, i dont like dvdshrink 3.2 very much. it was really buggy when i tried it a few months ago so 3.1.7 is good enough for me. currently, i average 25-35 mins per movie (from rip to burn) without any kind of analysis. the 8x burner shaved an average of 10-12 mins per movie.

 

can u guys post ur system specs (processor speed/processor fsb/memory/burner/ripper) and "average" rip-encode-burn time using dvdshrink? i guess which version shrink ur using too. i'm trying to find out an omptium system for ripping/burning dvds. i've already posted mine, but here they are again.

athlonxp 2400 (2.0ghz) at 266 FSB
512 DDR333 (at dual channel)
16X samsung reader (dont know what the actual rip speed is)
8X nec 2500
average time: 25-35 mins per movie (obviously dependent on movie length/compression percentage) using ver. 3.1.7 and ver. 3.2 locks up on me for some reason, so i dont use it. (obviously dependent on movie length/compression percentage)

 

hnikkels...this is a reply to all three of your posts:

Your encode times with 3.1.7 sound about right given your CPU speed. Concerning a faster processor, I have a P2.66 (not overclocked yet), and my times are less than folks I know with a P2.8 (not overclocked). There are standard things to do to make sure you get as much speed out of your processor as possible ... [bold]but in the end if you want to encode faster, you will have to go with a faster processor with mobo and memory to match.[/bold] It comes down to the quetion of how much money you are willing to spend for the speed increase? Also, as a general rule, an Athlon processor that has the same clock speed as a Pentium will actually encode faster because it completes more calculations per clock cycle than the Pentium. When it comes to overclocking, there ae other threads that get into that, as well as some good resources that you can Google.

Go with dual channel memory. It's not a gimmick. I also think 512 MB is enough with Shrink 3.2. My reasoning comes from using the CPU and memory performance monitor in Task Manager. I never use over 360 MB of memory during encoding...and about 110 MB's of this is used for the OS.

Use a 7200 RMP HDD with 8 MB buffer. A 5400 RPM will slow things down considerably.

Shrink 3.2 is a fine program, and you shouldn't be locking up. This is probably related to your hard drive. This will happen if your drive needs defragging, or, if you are letting Windows manage your page file. Your page file should be set manually to 4000 MB min and max. You should also have a minimum of 20 GB of open space on your HDD for encoding.

 

I did a lot of research on rip/burn times, trying to maximize the speed. Check out a search on this website for ripping speeds, and you'll see some of my posts, especially involving rip speeds. Here's what I have:

AMD 2700+ not overclocked (333 FSB)
1.5GB PC2700 Kingston valueram
ASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe motherboard
WD 160 GB 8MB cache ATA100 Hard Drive (#2)
WD 120 GB 8MB cache ATA100 Hard Drive (#1)
Promise Ultra 133 PCI card IDE controller
Nvidia GeForce FX5200 graphics card
PC Chips TV Tuner PCI card
Plextor PX-712A 12X DVD burner
Lite-on SOHD-167T 16X DVD rom

Here's a few things I found:

1GB ram seems to speed things up nicely. Having two dvd drives running on the same IDE controller channel is just fine, but if you try to run them both at the same time, the performance goes to hell bad. Having two dvd drives ripping to two hard drives goes fine, but having two dvd drives ripping to the same hard drive causes the drive to max out the cache (on my 8MB cache drives), and it slows down one of the dvd rips until the drive becomes available. (Bear in mind, I have a ATA100 hard drive and with a SATA 150 drive, or maybe even an ATA133 hard drive this may not be an issue). The quality of motherboards seems to be quite different too, and I love my new Asus. It's a real cadillac.

What I tried to figure out was how to rip 2 (or more) movies at the same time, without slowing down and the solution I came up with was to get a PCI IDE controller and hook up the second (or more) DVD drive to it all by itself on a channel. This keeping each channel used (both on the M/B and on the IDE controller) for just one drive kept everything at full speed with no bottlenecks.

As for ram, it doesn't seem to take anything for the DVD decrypter to rip it. I use it two at a time (decrypter). But with shrinking, it uses 100% cpu. (not sure how much ram). I guess it will always use 100% until its done, no matter how fast it gets done... unless you run it in low-priority background mode.

As for speeds attained, I recorded around 150 movies rip times. Some burn times too. My Plextor takes the cake, ripping a single layer movie in just under 5 minutes. Its just a hair slower than my Lite-on for single layer rips. For dual layer rips, the Plextor walks the dog leaving the rest of them in the dust. Average rip times were about 8-10X lasting around 11 minutes. The Lite-on with dual layers was closer to 5-8X lasting around 20 minutes. I had an LG dvd-ram too, which was pretty slow on rips, averaging 3-5X. I also tried an Artec DVD-rom which was a hair slower than that. In short, my Lite-on is the fastest single-layer ripper with decent dual layer speeds. It will rip at OVER 16X sometimes on single layers (16.6x). The Plextor is much faster on dual-layer rips than all the rest. Even after adding hacked firmware to speed up the Lite-on, the Plextor with stock (up to date) firmware was the fastest.

I think the FSB speed is important, and having as much ram as you can afford seems like a good idea too. Perhaps 333 or 400 FSB with 512K - 1GB ram thats the same speed would put you in the ballpark. I have recorded the rip and burn speeds on lots and lots of movies, if you care to compare a specific movies time. As for burning, I use shrink. Compression obviously matters, but at 100% (no compression), I averaged 11 minutes. That's about 22 minutes total to rip and burn a dual-layer movie, using two separate programs and not counting re-author time I spent. Hope this helps.

 

doc409, pontistv... thanks for the replies/input. the way i "backup" movies is absolutely simple. 1st, i pop in the movie in the dvd reader (usually a dual layer movie, as most new releases are nowadays), then i just adjust all the settings to highest compression (lowest quality) for all the sub-sections EXCEPT for the main movie, which should be at lowest compression (highest quality possible) since dvd shrink auto-adjusts it to fit the dvd-r. once in a while i cut out foreign language sounds since i dont know spanish, french, etc. then i pop in my blank and hit the backup button. 20-30 mins later, done. i dont use deep analysis since i dont care much to get the best quality possible since these dvd backups are a HUGE step up from the old days of divx and screeners! besides, i dont have an hdtv or anything like that. so basically, im not particularly picky about the quality.

to round out the info in my system for completeness sake:

-biostar m7ncg 400 MB (i know its not the best but i wanted a micro atx amd system at the time, now im considering a micro atx p4 system)
-512MB DDR333 (2 sticks of cheapy 333 256MB kingston valueram--which i never got my rebateS for, so if u have a chance to NOT buy kingston, i'm #1 in anti-endorsing them and their rip-off rebates. and yes, i used 2 different names and addresses and got NEITHER ONE)
-NEC 2500A (8X burner with dual layer hacked firmware)
-samsung 16X dvdrom (just ordered a lite-on 52Xcdrw 16Xdvdrom combo to replace the samsung for reading)
-80GB and 200GB ata100 seagate HDs
-and of course the athlon 2400 @266fsb

both the HDs are running on the same ata133 channel thats built-in the motherboard and the optical drives are also on the same channel (not sure if its another 133 channel or just a 33 channel)

i am also considering getting one of these bad boys to replace my system... http://www.soltek.com.tw/soltek/product/qbic.php?isbn_st=SL-B8E-FGR&qisbn_st=EQ3401-Pro
beautiful eh? everything i need. 2 bay drives for the optical drives, 2 3.5" bays for a pair of 36GB raptors at raid-0 (who needs floppies right?), and room for one kick-ass video card!