Best bang for buck video decoding/blu-ray ripping CPU?

[50]

So it's been a while since I bought a CPU (C2D E4400 was last purchase), but ripping a BD then encoding to MKV takes way too long with my current CPU. Ideally I would like to get a CPU + Mobo + HSF for under $200 with no plans on OCing and must support DDR3. I won't be playing games, my most intensive CPU task will probably be encoding. Any suggestions? Thanks

 

[Vette73]

For under $200 a Phenom is your best bet.

You live near a microcenter?

If so for $209 you get 6core and a new 870 board
http://www.microcenter.com/specials/...ndlePROMO.html

If not then at newegg.com for $195 AR you can get...

870board and quad core Phenom
http://secure.newegg.com/Shopping/AddToCart.aspx?Submit=ADD&ItemList=Combo.614536

 

[50]

For under $200 a Phenom is your best bet.

You live near a microcenter?

If so for $209 you get 6core and a new 870 board
http://www.microcenter.com/specials/...ndlePROMO.html

If not then at newegg.com for $195 AR you can get...

870board and quad core Phenom
http://secure.newegg.com/Shopping/AddToCart.aspx?Submit=ADD&ItemList=Combo.614536

Yes, I was looking at the microcenter deals. Will I see a noticeable difference (for $20 more) going from the 965 to the 1055? I was thinking about the 965 with the 870.

 

[blckgrffn]

Yes, I was looking at the microcenter deals. Will I see a noticeable difference (for $20 more) going from the 965 to the 1055? I was thinking about the 965 with the 870.

It's all about core count, man. That $20 is going to net you two cores + 50%! The clock speed difference probably brings real world gains to more like 30% but that is still a pretty big difference considering the paltry price difference.

If they have the 1090T available get that and laugh maniacally about how much faster your encodes will run...

 

[nwo]

Wow those Micro Center deals are very hot indeed. I would definitely recommend a 1090T combo for you. Can't beat that price/performance at only $200! If you are really skimpy and don't want to go over your budget (with tax) then get the 1055T combo. You probably won't notice your times go down too much, but the difference will definitely be there.

 

[Vette73]

Yes, I was looking at the microcenter deals. Will I see a noticeable difference (for $20 more) going from the 965 to the 1055? I was thinking about the 965 with the 870.

If the programs you use can use all 6 cores then get the 6core. If not then get the 4core.

Seems like most better encoding programs can put AMDs 6core CPU to work but I am sure there may be some that don't.

 

[podspi]

As someone who bought the 1055T instead of the 1090T (although this was back when they were first introduced, so the deals weren't as good as this) I would say go with the 1090T hands down. I've been able to get 3.4ghz with mine easy, and I'm reasonably sure I could hit 4ghz on all cores if I could move the multiplier.

Thubans clock well enough at this point that if you're going AMD, there is no reason not to get a Thuban. If ST performance is that important you can just overclock.

 

[50]

Ok you guys have convinced me. Can anyone comment on what the major differences in the 870A vs 880G?

 

[blckgrffn]

Ok you guys have convinced me. Can anyone comment on what the major differences in the 870A vs 880G?

Update of the chipset that had no built in graphics (770 -> 870) versus the one that has the IGP (780/785G -> 880G), as far as I can tell. I've used the 770 extensively in builds that I knew were getting graphics cards, but at the same time having that IGP does get you some flexibility.

In any event, I vastly prefer Gigabyte so that would be my suggestion Or an ATX board if you have an ATX case...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_AMD_chipsets

 

[50]

Update of the chipset that had no built in graphics (770 -> 870) versus the one that has the IGP (780/785G -> 880G), as far as I can tell. I've used the 770 extensively in builds that I knew were getting graphics cards, but at the same time having that IGP does get you some flexibility.

In any event, I vastly prefer Gigabyte so that would be my suggestion Or an ATX board if you have an ATX case...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_AMD_chipsets

So I'm confused why is the 870 more expensive than the 880, if the 880 has IGP andthe 870 doesn't? FYI I'm comparing
http://www.microcenter.com/single_pr...uct_id=0335706
http://www.microcenter.com/single_pr...uct_id=0358103

I too would prefer gigabyte or asus...but microcenter doesn't seem to provide too many mobo choices.

 

[Vette73]

So I'm confused why is the 870 more expensive than the 880, if the 880 has IGP andthe 870 doesn't? FYI I'm comparing
http://www.microcenter.com/single_pr...uct_id=0335706
http://www.microcenter.com/single_pr...uct_id=0358103

I too would prefer gigabyte or asus...but microcenter doesn't seem to provide too many mobo choices.

The 870 has the newwer southbridge (Sata 6gb + Raid) SB850
The 880g has the older southbridge (Sata 3gb) SB710

 

[Seegs108]

Not to be a stickler, but I think you mean re-encode to x264. Matroska is just a container.

 

[pjkenned]

So it's been a while since I bought a CPU (C2D E4400 was last purchase), but ripping a BD then encoding to MKV takes way too long with my current CPU. Ideally I would like to get a CPU + Mobo + HSF for under $200 with no plans on OCing and must support DDR3. I won't be playing games, my most intensive CPU task will probably be encoding. Any suggestions? Thanks

You should think about the cheapest <$100 motherboard + a cheap Sandy Bridge w/ Quick Sync if that is the encoding you are doing. You can run a hard drive, mobo, cpu, and optical drive with a PicoPSU and have a single fan cool the entire thing.

 

[SickBeast]

Yeah there have been some good deals on X6 Thubans lately to the point that they are a better value compared to Sandy Bridge when it comes to video encoding.

I'm hoping that they'll eventually drop to $100 or so.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

a cheap Sandy Bridge w/ Quick Sync.

Are you serious? You do realize that the image quality of quick sync encoded video is a complete and total joke compared to x264, right?

 

[blckgrffn]

Are you serious? You do realize that the image quality of quick sync encoded video is a complete and total joke compared to x264, right?

Beat me to it.

 

[rothnic]

Are you serious? You do realize that the image quality of quick sync encoded video is a complete and total joke compared to x264, right?

Can you explain further, what you said doesn't make much sense to me. Quick sync is a transcoding capability built into sandy bridge, not a format. Using quick sync, video can be transcoded into h.264. And looking at this article, it appears to have similar quality to x86 transcoded video.

They do state some software limitations at the time of writing though. That only main profile and 2 channel audio is supported at the time, but that is only a software limitation, not hardware.

 

[blckgrffn]

Check the Anandtech review of QuickSync for further information.

 

[Cerb]

Can you explain further, what you said doesn't make much sense to me. Quick sync is a transcoding capability built into sandy bridge, not a format.

x264 is a software h.264 encoder.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

Can you explain further, what you said doesn't make much sense to me. Quick sync is a transcoding capability built into sandy bridge, not a format. Using quick sync, video can be transcoded into h.264. And looking at this article, it appears to have similar quality to x86 transcoded video.

It is only comparable to x86 encoded video using Media Converter 7. Which is complete and utter trash.

What you need to understand is that h.264 is not a format where all encoders will end up with the same results -- h.264 is more like a language that allows encoders some ways of doing things, but it's up to the encoder to figure out how to use them. So different h.264 encoders have vastly different results, both because they optimize for different things, and because some of them are simply better than others.

Right now, the best by far is x264, both because it has been optimized to hell and back for image quality, and because the devs don't like synthetic metrics like psnr and instead use psychovisual optimizations that often make the image quality worse when measured in psnr, but make the artifacts more pleasing to the eye and less noticeable.

For just a quick example, here's x264 vs Apple h264

 

[50]

Sorry to dig up an old thread but I went to microcenter a while back and they were all sold out of the 1090t. A few weeks later after doing some research I've changed my mind about overclocking. Now I'm debating between 2500k and 1090t with overclocking in mind. The only CPU intensive task I'll be doing is video encoding. What would you guys recommend for a $300 budget?

 

[tweakboy]

If you got cash get the sandy 2500 , non K version for a good 200 bucks maybe.

 

[Vette73]

Sorry to dig up an old thread but I went to microcenter a while back and they were all sold out of the 1090t. A few weeks later after doing some research I've changed my mind about overclocking. Now I'm debating between 2500k and 1090t with overclocking in mind. The only CPU intensive task I'll be doing is video encoding. What would you guys recommend for a $300 budget?

If overclocking then go for the 2500k and a good aftermarket heatsink.

Just try to hold out a little longer for the Z68 chipset if going intel. The AM3+ boards are starting to come out for AMD and I ahve seen pics on intel Z68 boards.