DivX Encoding

arynn

Senior member
Feb 16, 2001
234
0
0
I have a friend who wants to do some DivX ecoding with his computer. He currently has the following system:

Athlon XP 1600+
Asus A7V266E
Samsung ATA100 80 GB RAID 0 (I think he has two 40 GB drives in the array)
ATI Radeon LE 32 MB

He wants to upgrade his computer to get better encoding performance. What would give him the biggest performance boost?

A new video card - he is considering the GeForce4 TI 200 and the Radeon 9500 or a new CPU?

I thought that video encoding was most dependent on CPU speed and the video card did not help at all. However, this link on ATI's website trumpets some relationship with DivX ATI-DivX partnership link discusses the advantages of using ATI's newest cards for DivX decoding - would the cards help with encoding as well?

Thanks.
 

DimZiE

Golden Member
Jun 26, 2001
1,093
0
0
i think more memory and a higher clocked CPU would give a better performance in encoding....
but a better videocard would not hurt... :)
 

RSMemphis

Golden Member
Oct 6, 2001
1,521
0
0
CPU, CPU, CPU...

Memory is not even THAT important, although bandwidth can be.
The new DivX codec on the ATI webpage - well, it's not out yet, and the graphics cards will mainly help with the decoding, not the encoding.
 

DanFungus

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2001
5,857
0
0
Originally posted by: RSMemphis
CPU, CPU, CPU...

Memory is not even THAT important, although bandwidth can be.
The new DivX codec on the ATI webpage - well, it's not out yet, and the graphics cards will mainly help with the decoding, not the encoding.

yup. Graphics card will get you no performance gain for encoding movies.
 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
really? I read on vcdhelp that the 9500pro/9700pro were going to have codecs to partially speed up the encoding process...

That is what me excited over one...the possibility of a card that would help speed up encoding (even something like a 10% gain would be extremely welcome)


Up the FSB...ya


Getting a different vid card won't matter...

or get a p4 3.06 ghz pc :)

533 mhz FSB :D

but I must admit I'm a AMD whore
 

vegetation

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2001
4,270
2
0
It has to be decoding, not encoding. Video cards rarely do any type of hardware assist encoding. Even MPEG cards are separate units, or built into a tv-tuner/capture card.

Originally posted by: magomago
really? I read on vcdhelp that the 9500pro/9700pro were going to have codecs to partially speed up the encoding process...

That is what me excited over one...the possibility of a card that would help speed up encoding (even something like a 10% gain would be extremely welcome)
 

Duvie

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
16,215
0
71
I recommend for him as maybe an amd fan...


get a lower speed tbred rev b....oc it to 200fsb (400system bus) get a nice nforce2 mobo and some corsair pc3200 cas 2 stuff.....

order of importance...

1)cpu raw mhz
2)fsb bandwidth
3)memory speed

I have done encoding on 3 diff vid cards with current system ranging from gf4 mx 440 to 8500le to 8500DV...vid card made no diff....

I also tested quite thoroughly and the divx encoding is not the bandwidth whore as mentioned above....

My system at

1.6a@2.74ghz (684fsb) 333mhz ddr cas 2,2,2,6 = 1.6@2.64ghz (660fsb) 440mhz ddr cas 2.5,3,3,7

100more mhz made up for the 100+mhz deficit in memory bandwidth...This was with gknot 0.26 version with divx 3.11...I hadn't used divx 5.02pro yet...
 

charlie21

Senior member
Oct 10, 1999
491
0
76
The video card is not used at all in the encoding process. But if you're talking about video capture, that's a different story.

I have an XP 1800+ and it takes about 5-6 hours per movie to do 2 pass XviD encoding. I just let it run overnight.

Encoding is one application where the P4 architecture really rocks. Having dual processors will cut your encoding time in half. And if you want to get really fancy, you can set some programs (Vidomi is one) up to do distributed encoding on your home network.


Charlie
 

arynn

Senior member
Feb 16, 2001
234
0
0
Thanks a lot for the confirmation. I didn't think the video card played any role in encoding.

I told him he'd be better off upgrading the processor. He may try to get a thoroughbred and overclock it but isn't sure how far his motherboard could push it. I didn't want to see him spend ~$170 on a video card for no reason.
 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
Originally posted by: charlie21
The video card is not used at all in the encoding process. But if you're talking about video capture, that's a different story.

I have an XP 1800+ and it takes about 5-6 hours per movie to do 2 pass XviD encoding. I just let it run overnight.

Encoding is one application where the P4 architecture really rocks. Having dual processors will cut your encoding time in half. And if you want to get really fancy, you can set some programs (Vidomi is one) up to do distributed encoding on your home network.


Charlie



Assuming you spend 600-700 dollars for 3.06Ghz P4 :D

But it still seems that multiprocessors actually show more benefit that HT.
 

Duvie

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
16,215
0
71
The p4 architecture can rock if the programs take advantage of the sse2 code....

Here are some systems and speeds I have tested....

Gknot version .23-.26...2 pass...2 cd rip (1400mb est. filesize),704res,1400-1800 avg.bitrate used in VBR, 192-224kbit mp3, sharp bicubic, divx 3.11....2 hour and 2min Gone in 60 seconds....

(only includes video encoding portion (credits are done separately at 600bitrate))

amd 1400mhz (266mnz ddr) = 4hr 10min
p4 1.6a/1600+xp = 3hr 40min
p4 1.8a@2.4 (333mhz ddr)= 2 hr 39min
p4 1.6a@2.66 (333mhz ddr)= 2hr 21min
p4 1.6a@2.66 (442mhz ddr)= 2hr 13min
p4 1.6a@2.74 (342mhz ddr) = 2hr 15min

I think 3ghz processor may make it realtime video encoding but through in about 12min rip, 16min audio, about 4 min dvd2avi, and finally ~1min audio/video overlay....

I run divx 5.02pro codec now with gknot 0.27. Divx 5.02 seems to run a bit quicker but I have not re ran all these benches...