Originally posted by: Hacp
As always your results may vary, but 2.4GHZ is not out of the question.
Originally posted by: Hacp
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: mechBgon
He must've meant PCI-Express, this unusual trinket here that has PCI-E x16, AGP 8x, and a Frankenstein Slot that you can drop a CPU-upgrade board into so you can use Socket M2 later. So strange it's almost coolOriginally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Chopstick217
I have the same mobo. I purchased it mainly for the AGP/PCIX. Overall a good value board.
I couldn't find an ASRock with PCI-X, link?![]()
Bah! I want PCI-X.![]()
Draw an X on teh PCI slot. Then you'll have a speedy pci-X slot.
Originally posted by: mechBgon
In my case, it's MiniDV tape captured from a Sony HandyCam via Firewire, and the captured video starts off as full-bore .AVI files in Adobe's interface. Adobe then uses them at full quality as the basis for whatever I want done next, which is usually just to filter out motor noise and hiss from the audio, boost the overall volume of whatever is left, and squash the ~93 minutes of a MiniDV tape onto a single-layer DVD+R disc so we can mail them off to our Child Welfare program's funder as per our contractual obligation (the CW people used to convert these to VHS cassette, ewww ewww!).
Notch filter, centered on something like 12000Hz if I remember correctly. :beer: I'll update you with a PM on Monday when I'm down there and can check the settings I'm using, but they probably vary from camera to camera anyway. Fiddle with the two dials in the Notch Filter panel while one of your clips is playing back (if using Premiere Elements) and you'll find the sweet spot pretty quickly by ear, anywayOriginally posted by: Phil
Originally posted by: mechBgon
In my case, it's MiniDV tape captured from a Sony HandyCam via Firewire, and the captured video starts off as full-bore .AVI files in Adobe's interface. Adobe then uses them at full quality as the basis for whatever I want done next, which is usually just to filter out motor noise and hiss from the audio, boost the overall volume of whatever is left, and squash the ~93 minutes of a MiniDV tape onto a single-layer DVD+R disc so we can mail them off to our Child Welfare program's funder as per our contractual obligation (the CW people used to convert these to VHS cassette, ewww ewww!).
Mech, I'd be very grateful to know what you do to remove the motor noise from DV tapes- I have 40GB+ of raw DV files to process, and each one has the trademark "(wheeeee)" noise in the background.
Cheers! :beer:
Originally posted by: Markbnj
First, I have no idea what most of that message means, but I applaud you, because I can barely type in one language.
Second, the only thing that X2 proponents on this forum have maintained is that _for people who have the choice_, i.e. those that post saying something like "I can get either the X2 or single core, what should I do," the X2 is obviously better. Others keep talking about how many apps people run, and whether they multitask. So the attempt is to justify the X2 or not based on technical considerations, not price and affordability. Windows is massively multithreaded, and everything you do in it benefits from dual cores. If you can afford it, it is always better. But if the price differential is too much to absorb, then obviously single core is the better choice.
But some people want to run several single-threaded apps at the same time. A game + a video-encoding job, this is a common example. And many of the video-encoding apps are multithreaded, too.Lesson for x2 desire:
do you think that diference ration is better in case x2 and usual processor,
for the difference in price ?
For single thread apps - if frequnce of single core CPU is more - this CPU will perform better.
For every person thinking about x2- it need not only "to dream" but think about their main application,
and consider- does they using multy-threaded approach to win at x2 ?
it is not so often.
Originally posted by: KDOG
Well I just added the Thermalright XP-90 heatsink (retail) to my order, I've heard alot of good comments about that one. I'm gonna use my Zalman FB123 92mm fan setup with it. Wish me luck!
Originally posted by: bladephoenix
I'm not really an expert when it comes to multi processor computing, but I remember when I was considering getting a Dual P3 back when I was in college, I remember learning somewhere that while mutli-proc computing does add distinct advantages when multi-tasking, it is not always more effective as single CPU computing, simply because the 2 CPUs need to rely on each other. ie
CPU 1 (to CPU 2): "We need to boot the system..."
CPU 2 (to CPU 1): "OK, I will start loading some stuff"
CPU 1 (to CPU 2): "I can't seem to find the system.ini file, did you take it?"
CPU 2 (to CPU 1): "Yes, I did .. I need it now"
CPU 1 (to CPU 2): "OK, I'll wait"
...0.01 ms later...
CPU 1 (to CPU 2): "I can't seem to find the system.ini file, did you take it?"
CPU 2 (to CPU 1): "Yes, I did ... I put it in memory"
CPU 1 (to CPU 2): "OK, I'll check memory"
etc.
This, to a large degree, nullifies the advantage of multiple CPU's doesn't it?
Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
if it was anywhere near that stupid, then yes it would be a waste of money, but the implementation isnt that stupid so your point is null.
Originally posted by: firewolfsm
don't campare dual and single core processors of the same speed, compare the prices. the extra money that would have went into dual-core could be used to buy a faster single core processor.
a 2.2GHz X2 with only 1MB of cache can cost more than $475
for that price, you can get an A64 4000 at 2.4GHz w(370) ith 1MB cache and still have $100 left over to get a much better video card. this will give you much better performance.
Originally posted by: KDOG
Really I'm thinking about getting a 3000+ Venice, and just OCing the snot out of it....thoughts?