CPU horsepower etc. as it relates to video processing:

[Seeker47]

For Video Conversion, editing, etc.

I guess this is a question about the relative importance of the CPU (vs. other system factors), and the benefit that might be derived from further upgrades.
There was an immediately obvious difference, back when I went from my older P4 box to the dual-core system. I saw it on things like times for running a project through CX2D, to cite just one example. Now, I'm considering what similar improvements might be realized by moving from my current

Athlon 64X2 dual core 6400+ based system to a system based on one of the following:


Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550

Intel Core 2 Extreme (I'm not familiar at all with this "Extreme" line . . . how many cores, etc.)

Intel Core i5 or i7, the latter of which may be the current king of the hill (?)

Also willing to increase RAM as needed, &/or possibly move to Win 7 - 64 bit.

(My HDD and Video Card options are probably already plenty good enough.)

How much real world difference will any of this make ?

[edDV]

Issues

1. Display chipset acceleration - HD versions will play MPeg2/H.264/VC-1 with minimal CPU load.

2. CPU - Does the format conversion. Intel i7 is king of the hill.

3. GPU assist (e.g. NVidia Cuda) - Allows CPU to offload some conversion or encoding tasks to GPU.

Shoot for 4GB RAM, more if running several large environments or additional Virtual OS.

[TBoneit]

What edDV said.

As long as your software will support using more cores, then more cores will speed things up.

I went from a Q6600 to a i7 and speed improved.

A video card from nvidia that supports Cuda could improve encode times if the application supports it, few do I use a couple that do and with the i7 i do other things with no slow down when encoding. Other wise Raw CPU power is the biggest factor for encoding.

Example: with the i7 I can capture from a HD PVR and do other things with no problems. The HD PVR does the encoding internally but the capture app does tend to need CPU speed.

[edDV]

The HD PVR does the encoding internally but the capture app does tend to need CPU speed.

Probably for monitoring decode. If you turn monitoring off, CPU load should go to near zero.

[wulf109]

Just make sure the i7 is socket 1366.not 1156.

[Seeker47]

Just make sure the i7 is socket 1366.not 1156.

And the reason or difference is ________ ?

I've gone through a couple generations of Shuttle XPC, which I've favored because I like the form-factor, the quietness, the portability, the build quality and power in a compact package. These pages

http://global.shuttle.com/product_detail_spec.jsp?PI=1219
http://global.shuttle.com/support_list03.jsp?PI=1219

do not clearly i.d. the i7 socket type (as far as I can tell), but I have a feeling that this one -- which strikes me as the most appropriate "next model" candidate from Shuttle -- is going to fall on the wrong side of your socket divide. In that case, I may have to revise my plans.

[EDIT: This ad http://www.frys-electronics-ads.com/ads/2010/12/26/51496/Intel-Core-i7-Processor-950 doesn't seem to spell out the socket type either.]

[DarrellS]

Just make sure the i7 is socket 1366.not 1156.

And the reason or difference is ________ ?

I've gone through a couple generations of Shuttle XPC, which I've favored because I like the form-factor, the quietness, the portability, the build quality and power in a compact package. These pages

http://global.shuttle.com/product_detail_spec.jsp?PI=1219
http://global.shuttle.com/support_list03.jsp?PI=1219

do not clearly i.d. the i7 socket type (as far as I can tell), but I have a feeling that this one -- which strikes me as the most appropriate "next model" candidate from Shuttle -- is going to fall on the wrong side of your socket divide. In that case, I may have to revise my plans.

[EDIT: This ad http://www.frys-electronics-ads.com/ads/2010/12/26/51496/Intel-Core-i7-Processor-950 doesn't seem to spell out the socket type either.]

Wow! That price is incredible. Wish I had the money to build a new machine. The 900 series I7 are socket 1365 and the 800 series are socket 1156.

[Seeker47]

What edDV said.

As long as your software will support using more cores, then more cores will speed things up.

I went from a Q6600 to a i7 and speed improved.

A video card from nvidia that supports Cuda could improve encode times if the application supports it, few do I use a couple that do and with the i7 i do other things with no slow down when encoding. Other wise Raw CPU power is the biggest factor for encoding.

Example: with the i7 I can capture from a HD PVR and do other things with no problems. The HD PVR does the encoding internally but the capture app does tend to need CPU speed.

I have some reasons to revisit this thread for some further clarifications. As you noted, much may depend on which particular software supports multiple cores. At present, I'm probably using AVStoDVD more than any other video app I can think of (although that may change), and while I know that it supports two cores, I'm not sure if it supports any more than that.

It has become clear to me that if I want to continue to use the small form factor Shuttle systems I have favored, I will have to give up on the idea of going to i7, because all of those models jettisoned certain legacy features that I much prefer to have. This has left me wondering about certain somewhat older models between what I'm currently using, and the current ones that feature i3/i5/i7. Perhaps you or another member here can help me place this cpu horsepower comparison in better relative perspective.

For any sort of video encoding or processing that I have done, I noticed a rather substantial time benefit when I went from a P4-based system to the x2 6400 dual-core based system I've been using for the past year and a half. Where (approx.) on this "scale" would, say, a Core2 Extreme QX9650 3GHz or a Core2 Quad Q8400S 2.66GHz rank, in relation to my x2 6400 and the i7 ? If one of these is as big a step up over the x2 6400 as it was over the P4, maybe I could do without the current state of the art ?

Your HD PVR example was helpful, but what common video software programs are known to support the multi-cores ?

This current system has a Geforce 9600GT in it, which apparently has some level of Cuda. I would need to see some very good reasons before concluding I needed a video card any more powerful than this, even in a newer system. (I'm not a gamer -- at all.)

[redwudz]

I just went with more cores. I'm using a six core AMD CPU at present, OC'd to 3.5Ghz. I really don't do much MPEG encoding, but for H.264 encodes, I've seen a big encoding speed increase over quad core CPUs. The six core Intel is likely faster, but I could build a whole PC for the price of one of those CPUs.

A lot depends on the codec you are using, the final format for your video. Some codecs like H.264 can make good use of multiple cores. MPEG seems to be lagging here. DivX and Xvid can usually use more cores.

A faster CPU always helps, but 4Ghz is the limit for most CPUs, so more cores is one way to improve performance.

RAM has a minor role to play with encoding. A 32bit OS can use a bit less than 4GB RAM. A 64bit OS can use more, but very little affect on encode speed. It's almost all CPU speed related. There is also some speed benefit from using a 64bit OS, but make sure the programs you want to run will work on a 64bit OS. I've stuck with 32bit OSs and they work great for my video software.

Same with hard drive speed. Most software encoders are much slower than hard drives, so not really a factor most times. Lots of hard drive space may help for storage, though.

With a few video cards and the proper software, you may get some encoding speed improvements, but you may end up with less encoding adjustments and settings. I prefer CPU encodes for better control of the output quality.

Bottom line, IMO, fast CPUs, lots of cores, lots of HDD space, works best for me.

[Seeker47]

A faster CPU always helps, but 4Ghz is the limit for most CPUs, so more cores is one way to improve performance.
. . .
Bottom line, IMO, fast CPUs, lots of cores, lots of HDD space, works best for me.

Thanks for your thoughts on this. From those two CPUs that I mentioned, I'm assuming that the Core2 Extreme must be just a faster dual-core, with the Core2 Quad (4 cores ?) being the more powerful of the two ?

I wasn't aware of the encoding differences between MPEG2 and H.264. Haven't really gotten into the latter yet. My assumption had been that the next round would go to higher RAM and a 64-bit OS, but you've just cast some doubts on that.

Must one have a different type of CPU to run 64-bit ? Just for a quick looksee, I burned a couple different ISOs of what were supposed to be Win 7 Live CDs, and they completely fail to load on my current hardware. (They die early at a black screen.) I've sampled at least 8 varied distros of Linux Live CDs (Knoppix, Dayna Mint, eLive, etc.), burned from ISOs in the same exact way, and never had that problem with any of them.

[redwudz]

Here's a quick comparison of MPEG and H.264 encodes. The information here probably isn't really accurate and it's not meant to be a particularly valid comparison, but note the amount of RAM and CPU used with these encodes vs idle. Not much RAM in use compared to idle, even at 100% CPU.

I'm really not that familiar with Intel CPUs to give a good comparison between those two. But others here probably can.

All modern CPUs, AFAIK, are 64bit, so a 64bit OS wouldn't be a problem. No idea about 'Win 7 Live CDs'.

IDLE: CPU usage=2%, Memory=32%, RAM usage=1.04GB




MPEG: CPU usage=18%, Memory=32%, RAM usage=1.06GB




H.264: CPU usage=100%, Memory=37%, RAM usage=1.20GB

[deadmeow]

In general, the more cores you have, the more power you will have in video encoding. I have a 6 core Phenom II x6 1090T, and it flies through H264 encoding.

You can see this benchmark here, that the AMD 6 core cpu's can hang with the Intel core i7's :
http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/amd_phenom_ii_x6_1090t_be_1055t,5.html

Most gamers prefer the 4 core phenom II's, and Intel processors, but when it comes down to encoding, the AMD 6 core cpu's are powerful, and nicely priced.

I was about to buy an i5 750 system last year, but at the last second I saw the release of the AMD 6 core cpu's and I knew the amd hexacores would be my choice after seeing similar video encoding benchmarks.

[DarrellS]

In the benchmark you posted, the I5 is equal to the 6 core in the H264 Benchmark and smokes both the 6 cores in the TMPGEnc benchmark.

Overclocking is another option if money is a problem. My Q6600 overclocked to 3.2GHz is almost as fast as an I7 920 running at stock speed. I would like to build a new PC but it will be a long while before I'm able to build another one and my H264 encode speeds are fast enough where it isn't a huge concern right now. Who knows what will be available when I'm finally able to build a new PC.

This is from the X264 benchmark forum...

http://forums.techarp.com/reviews-articles/26363-x264-hd-benchmark-4-0-a.html

Showing these results...

x264 HD BENCHMARK 4.0 RESULTS

Please do NOT compare it with older versions of the benchmark!
Please copy/paste everything below the line to to report your data
to ...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Results for x264.exe r1913
==========================

Pass 1
------
encoded 1442 frames, 108.62 fps, 3913.31 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 108.88 fps, 3913.31 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 108.75 fps, 3913.31 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 108.75 fps, 3913.31 kb/s

Pass 2
------
encoded 1442 frames, 27.93 fps, 3960.45 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 27.33 fps, 3959.92 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 27.99 fps, 3959.56 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 27.93 fps, 3960.39 kb/s

System Details
--------------
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T at stock speed of 2800MHz (Turbo Core Disabled)
Gigabyte MA785GT-UD3H
Corsair XMS3 2x 2GB DDR3 1666 @ 9-9-9-24
Asus ENGTX260 Matrix 896MB
OCZ Stealth X Stream 600W
Samsung 500GB SATA2 - HD502HJ
Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1

__________________________________________________ ________________________________________________


Originally Posted by Leaps-from-Shadows View Post
Heya!

Got a result for ya!

Intel® Second Generation Core™ i5 2500K processor, stock speed, Turbo disabled
ASRock P67 Pro3 mainboard
G.Skill Ripjaws X 12GB DDR3-1600 CL9 memory (one 2x4GB kit and one 2x2GB kit)
Palit GTX 570 Sonic graphics card
Samsung Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB SATA2 hard drive
Samsung SH-S223C SATA DVD burner
Win7 Home Premium 64-bit w/ SP1

-----

Results for x264.exe r1913
==========================

Pass 1
------
encoded 1442 frames, 144.78 fps, 3912.26 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 145.51 fps, 3912.26 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 145.51 fps, 3912.26 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 145.36 fps, 3912.26 kb/s

Pass 2
------
encoded 1442 frames, 28.54 fps, 3961.32 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 28.41 fps, 3961.39 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 28.53 fps, 3961.48 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 28.50 fps, 3961.32 kb/s


System Details
--------------
Name Intel Core i5 2500K
Codename Sandy Bridge
Specification Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2500K CPU @ 3.30GHz
Specification PC3-12800
Specification PC3-12800H
Specification PC3-12800
Specification PC3-12800H
Core Stepping D2
Technology 32 nm
Stock frequency 3300 MHz
Core Speed 1600.3 MHz

Northbridge Intel Sandy Bridge rev. 09
Southbridge Intel P67 rev. B2

CAS# latency (CL) 9.0
RAS# to CAS# delay (tRCD) 9
RAS# Precharge (tRP) 9
Cycle Time (tRAS) 24
Command Rate (CR) 2T
Command Rate 2T
Command Rate 1T
Command Rate 2T
Command Rate 1T
Memory Frequency 800.2 MHz (1:6)
Memory Type DDR3
Memory Size 12288 MBytes

Windows Version Microsoft Windows 7 (6.1) Home Premium Edition Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)

Number of processors 1
Number of threads 4
Number of threads 4 (max 16)
L2 cache 4 x 256 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
Instructions sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, EM64T, VT-x, AES, AVX
Package (platform ID) Socket 1155 LGA (0x1)

Temperature 0 21°C (69°F) [0x15] (SYSTIN)
Temperature 1 0°C (32°F) [0x0] (CPUTIN)
Temperature 2 64°C (147°F) [0x80] (AUXTIN)


__________________________________________________ ________________________________________________



That was my result at stock speed. Here it is at 4.8GHz overclock:


Results for x264.exe r1913
==========================

Pass 1
------
encoded 1442 frames, 199.72 fps, 3912.26 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 198.62 fps, 3912.26 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 199.72 fps, 3912.26 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 198.90 fps, 3912.26 kb/s

Pass 2
------
encoded 1442 frames, 40.65 fps, 3961.26 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 40.72 fps, 3961.84 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 40.73 fps, 3961.16 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 40.57 fps, 3961.39 kb/s


System Details
--------------
Name Intel Core i5 2500K
Codename Sandy Bridge
Specification Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2500K CPU @ 3.30GHz
Specification PC3-12800
Specification PC3-12800H
Specification PC3-12800
Specification PC3-12800H
Core Stepping D2
Technology 32 nm
Stock frequency 3300 MHz
Core Speed 1600.3 MHz

Northbridge Intel Sandy Bridge rev. 09
Southbridge Intel P67 rev. B3

CAS# latency (CL) 9.0
RAS# to CAS# delay (tRCD) 9
RAS# Precharge (tRP) 9
Cycle Time (tRAS) 24
Command Rate (CR) 2T
Command Rate 2T
Command Rate 1T
Command Rate 2T
Command Rate 1T
Memory Frequency 800.2 MHz (1:6)
Memory Type DDR3
Memory Size 12288 MBytes

Windows Version Microsoft Windows 7 (6.1) Home Premium Edition Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)

Number of processors 1
Number of threads 4
Number of threads 4 (max 16)
L2 cache 4 x 256 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
Instructions sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, EM64T, VT-x, AES, AVX
Package (platform ID) Socket 1155 LGA (0x1)

Temperature 0 25°C (76°F) [0x19] (SYSTIN)
Temperature 1 0°C (32°F) [0x0] (CPUTIN)
Temperature 2 64°C (147°F) [0x80] (AUXTIN)

[deadmeow]

Sorry to upset a fanboi. I was referring to the 1090T, not the slower 1055T processor. The 1090T is able to hang among the i7 series in video processing.

The i5 2500k is a great processor for the price. About 25 dollars more than the 1090T. However, it may be cheaper to put together an AMD system, and if you choose AMD, the 1090T is great for video encoding. If you were to choose an Intel, the 2500k is a good choice.

The next gen of AMD processors will be out in June (including more hexacores and new 8 core cpu's) and you will have more options and maybe lower prices from Intel and AMD on older cpu's.

Here is a benchmark using Handbrake (which unlike most apps, it will max out all cores, even in a hexacore at 99%), that includes the 1090T and the 2500k, and you can see the 1090T is still a competitive processor.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1501/14/

[rhegedus]

As deadmeow says, I'm not convinced the X264 benchmark is accurate as I could not get it to max out my i7 2600k at stock or various flavours of overclock even using a RAM drive partition to remove any hard drive confounders.

For what it's worth:


@4.6Ghz
======

Pass 1
------

encoded 1442frames, 187.88 fps, 3911.63 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 184.87 fps, 3911.63 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 184.14 fps, 3911.63 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 186.74 fps, 3911.63 kb/s

Pass 2
------

encoded 1442frames, 43.89 fps, 3959.42 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 47.04 fps, 3959.14 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 47.60 fps, 3959.48 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 47.72 fps, 3959.32 kb/s


4.8GHz
=====

Pass 1
------

encoded 1442frames, 184.87 fps, 3911.63 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 185.25 fps, 3911.63 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 185.99 fps, 3911.63 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 184.12 fps, 3911.63 kb/s

Pass 2
------

encoded 1442frames, 49.12 fps, 3958.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 49.14 fps, 3959.43 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 49.17 fps, 3960.14 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 49.12 fps, 3959.13 kb/s


System Details
--------------

Name IntelCore i7 2600K

product SystemProduct Name

Codename SandyBridge

Specification Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600K CPU @ 3.40GHz

Specification PC3-12800

Specification PC3-12800

Specification PC3-12800

Specification PC3-12800

Core Stepping D2

Technology 32nm

Stock frequency 3400 MHz

Core Speed 1600.0MHz

Northbridge Intel Sandy Bridge rev. 09

Southbridge Intel P67 rev. B3

CAS# latency (CL) 9.0

RAS# to CAS#delay (tRCD) 9

RAS# Precharge(tRP) 9

Cycle Time (tRAS) 27

Command Rate (CR) 2T

Memory Frequency 800.1 MHz (1:6)

Memory Type DDR3

Memory Size 16384 MBytes

Windows Version Microsoft Windows 7 (6.1)Ultimate Edition Service Pack 1 (Build7601)

Number ofprocessors 1

Number of threads 8

Number of threads 8 (max 16)

L2 cache 4x 256 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size

Instructions sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, EM64T, VT-x, AES, AVX

Package (platform ID) Socket 1155 LGA (0x1)

Temperature 0 31°C (87°F) [0x1F] (SYSTIN)

Temperature 1 0°C (32°F) [0x0] (CPUTIN)

Temperature 2 64°C (147°F) [0x80] (AUXTIN)

[jagabo]

As deadmeow says, I'm not convinced the X264 benchmark is accurate as I could not get it to max out my i7 2600k at stock or various flavours of overclock even using a RAM drive partition to remove any hard drive confounders.

Set the number of x264 threads to 1.5 times the number of CPU threads.