• 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.

Xeon vs. Opteron Question

G

goobee

Platinum Member
How does performance stack up between a quad core Xeon e5320 vs. a dual core Opteron 285?

I will be using it mostly for video editing and rendering. I use mainly TMPGENC 4.0 and Adobe Premier.

I currently am using Opteron 270 but am looking to upgrade. I'll have to buy everything from scratch if I go Xeon. Opteron just requires swapping cpus.

 
Video editing and rendering is typically faster, not insignificantly, on Conroe/Woodcrest, so the Xeon would be the obvious choice. It all depends whether the increased cost due to having to build from scratch is worth the faster performance to you or not.
 
zsdersw said it rightly. I tried encoding a same clip on Opteron 165 @2.80GHz and Core 2 Duo E6400 @3.20GHz, and C2D finished it in 51 mins and Opteron took about 67 mins. C2D is definitely faster but then again most of the times when I encode something, I just leave the machine running and do something else, so the difference isn't that big of a deal to me. But if you're sitting on your desk and encode many clips non-stop, then the time saving can be significant so I guess it all depends on individual usage patterns.
 
Wow. ~14% difference in clock, but ~23% increase in encoding speed. I didn't realize it was this big a difference, but I might just use a Core2Duo if/when I upgrade my HTPC from a Barton 3200. Right now I use my Opteron 165 main PC to do any transcoding, so that might be convenient to put it all on one machine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top