• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is a P4 that much better at video ripping/encoding then an AMD?

C

Civic2oo1x

Senior member
Here is the setup of both.

Rig 1
P4 3.0ghz w/800 fsb HT
1 GB Kingston HyperX PC4000
Intel 865 chipset

Rig 2
AMD 2500 XP+
512MB Corsair XMS PC2700
Nforce 2 chipset

Now I know that the P4 has a better overall rig, but is a P4 that much better overall in video work then an AMD?

Here's what I'm doing. I'm using DVDShrink to backup the DVDs that I purchase (I buy 4-5 DVDs a week and have a small niece and nephew to worry about).

Analysis Speed
P4 - 6,500 KB/s and 290 frames/sec
AMD- 2,500 KB/s and 110 frames/sec

For encoding I get
P4 - 7,800 KB/s and 53MB buffered
AMD- 2,600 KB/s and 49MB buffered

So basically I can analyze, encode, and burn a entire DVD with the P4 in the time it takes the AMD to just analyze. Does this seem right?

 
Originally posted by: Civic2oo1x
Here is the setup of both.

So basically I can analyze, encode, and burn a entire DVD with the P4 in the time it takes the AMD to just analyze. Does this seem right?
Click to expand...

So how much takes entire process of ripping exactly same dvd on both rigs?

 
We all already knew this, Civic. Ripping and encoding video is the P4's specialty, just like gaming is the Athlon's specialty. Even an Athlon64 can't keep up with a P4C at encoding video.
 
The diff . between a P4 and a AthlonXP is large enough to get the P4. BUT the diff. between a P4 and a Athlon64 is not large enouhg to sway me one way or the other.

With that said I got rid of my P4 system and got a Athlon64 system and i can't tell a diff. when backing up DVD's etc... BUT I can tell a diff. in games and set of the pants type feal.
 
And you didn't even attempt to make them equivalent systems... The AMD is suffering from a DDR333 FSB amd half the memory. If you were to run the AMD at DDR400 and give it a gig of RAM it'd do a lot better. Not as well as the P4 of course but it would do a lot better.
 
I should have said that I'm not doing this for testing, but the AMD system was purely made of parts that I already had at home (with the exception of the case). If I were building a rig to do this primarily then I would have purchased all new parts for it.

The total time for the P4 system ranges from 45-55 minutes from start to finish burning (Plextor 8x) while the AMD system (I only did two discs) ranges from 2 to 2 1/2 hours.

This was a question, not a testing of two systems. Previously I had no idea that the P4 was superior in video ripping and encoding. I was purely asking if it was normal for the AMD rig to take so long. I guess in a few months if/when I build a rig primarily for this kind of work I'll go the P4 route. I'll have to hand this AMD rig down to my sister or someone.
 
Something looks wrong. It depends on the encoding but I never had any DVD that took 2 to 2 1/2 hours to burn start to finish. Most is done under an hour easily.
 
the amd will work fine, it just wont be faster then the p4. if you're a patient person, then it wouldnt really matter.
 
DVDShrink isn't very dependant on cpu horsepower. It's mostly limited by the harddrive speed, at least from my experiences.

If you step up to a more sophisticated encoding method for better quality, you'll want the P4.
 
Originally posted by: Civic2oo1x
I should have said that I'm not doing this for testing, but the AMD system was purely made of parts that I already had at home (with the exception of the case). If I were building a rig to do this primarily then I would have purchased all new parts for it.

The total time for the P4 system ranges from 45-55 minutes from start to finish burning (Plextor 8x) while the AMD system (I only did two discs) ranges from 2 to 2 1/2 hours.

This was a question, not a testing of two systems. Previously I had no idea that the P4 was superior in video ripping and encoding. I was purely asking if it was normal for the AMD rig to take so long. I guess in a few months if/when I build a rig primarily for this kind of work I'll go the P4 route. I'll have to hand this AMD rig down to my sister or someone.
Click to expand...


In dvd encoding hard drive speed and dvd drive playe a huge role too. So while AMD XP objectively does encoding worse by 20%-30% than similar rated p4 it very well may not be deciding factor. AMD 64 does encoding very well , and as recent 64 bit test showed on Win XP 64 it may very well trump P4.
 
Originally posted by: Naustica
Something looks wrong. It depends on the encoding but I never had any DVD that took 2 to 2 1/2 hours to burn start to finish. Most is done under an hour easily.
Click to expand...
Yep, something is majorly FUBARed on your AMD setup Civic.
 
Well I do run it through the deep analysis if maybe that's another step. Both my rigs are running 8x burners on 7200 RPM HDD's.

I'll probably step up to another P4 rig or maybe give the A64 a shot in a few months as my main video rig.
 
I backed up Gladiator on my A64 rig with deep analysis and it took 19min 40sec and about the same time to burn it on my 4x burner, HTH 🙂
 
There's a difference of 500mhz! plus its not barton w/512k which would match up to your p4 if clocked to 400FSB DDR3200. This also depends on type of motherboard, chipset, the harddrive your using.
http://www.smksuperstore.com/catalog/viewitem.asp?ID=10893
This is like comparing 5400 hd vs 7200, so your test is pretty much a moot point
rolleye.gif
 
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Originally posted by: Naustica
Something looks wrong. It depends on the encoding but I never had any DVD that took 2 to 2 1/2 hours to burn start to finish. Most is done under an hour easily.
Click to expand...
Yep, something is majorly FUBARed on your AMD setup Civic.
Click to expand...

Agree. I use DVDxcopy and it takes about 40 min on a xp1700+ oc to about 204x11.5 ~2350. Have a 4x toshiba drive.
 
It depends on the application....... I can show you several results for video where my barton 2500 nforce 2 will spank a 3.2C. The P4 is unbeatable is the application is extremely optimized for SSE2/HT. Anything else is a wash or a victory for the AMD camp.

What does your application like? In this case, your hard drive/burner are not configured properly.
 
What arcaic progra,ms are you using ALEX!!! I have ran encoding using TMPGenc which is dual processor enabled so therefore it works as HT enabled and my 2.4c at stock 2.4 was faster then my 2500+ oc'd to 3200 Barton....

Using DVDshrink as mentioned above is HDD limited and DVD-rom limited if you rip/ analyse and transcode from disk. If you rip using a different ripping program and then run the dvdshrink off the file on the hDD the performance will be faster. Cpu utilization for me with DVDshrink is often only 30-35%....Not cpu intensive...Also you can notice reading from one drive and writing to a different drive on a different channel will gain some speed as well....Lastly DVDshrink is HT enabled in the deep analysis portion so it slightly favors the P4 even against a similar pr rated A64. Bartons are not much of a comparision.


I have used Divx 5.10 testing and it is p4 optimized for hT with about a 10% gain I saw.
I have used windows media encode codec 9.0
I have used Pinnacle Studio 8.8 and it appears to be optimized for hT (very minute)....

(pretty much the industry standard here ppl!!!!)

Sorry these are the prgrams I have used and they all benefited and are optimized for P4's. I think the AMD bunch needs to quit saying "The P4 is unbeatable is the application is extremely optimized for SSE2/HT"...The fact is SSE2 has been out for 2 plus years now and HT for almost a year...Most application are now enabled for these and therefore they shouldn't be so easily dismissed.
 
The total time for the P4 system ranges from 45-55 minutes from start to finish burning (Plextor 8x) while the AMD system (I only did two discs) ranges from 2 to 2 1/2 hours.
Click to expand...

I didn't see the DVD drive type that was used on the AMD.. wouldn't this matter? If he is using an 8x on the P4 machine and 2.4x on the AMD machine.......
 
What about a compare between a P4-B 2.4 533 fsb with 1 gig of pc2700 and a P4-C 2.6 800 fsb with 512 pc3200 Both with XP pro.
The reason that I ask is I have both of these systems and what to know which would be best to put a DVD burner in?

Thanks
Ken
 
beatle - hit it right on the head Vern! - but yes the P4 is the better of two and this is where you're extra money went to.... That's right Hyperthreading baby - personally I can take it or leave it... You also paid for the intel commercials that had HT technology - that's the whole point of their marketing to do excactly what you are doing video editing, recoding and so forth....

I'm done😀
 
To Ken Sr - the choice would be the P4 with HT - encoding will greatly benefit from HT technology - Intel says you can even do this and surf the internet, watch a movie and pick your nose - all at the same time - Hyperthreading is cool but not useful as it can be in the year/s to come -

boy I am chatty today - ok the pick your nose thing could take a little more time

😎
 
Originally posted by: Echo3
To Ken Sr - the choice would be the P4 with HT - encoding will greatly benefit from HT technology - Intel says you can even do this and surf the internet, watch a movie and pick your nose - all at the same time - Hyperthreading is cool but not useful as it can be in the year/s to come -

boy I am chatty today - ok the pick your nose thing could take a little more time

😎
Click to expand...

don't forget to eat it too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top