Pentium 4 vs. AMD

[Frisco]

Hi,

I was recently given advice that my new Pentium 4 1.5 Ghz machine is essentially crap and not up to the task of video conversion.

I would appreciate your opinions as to whether you agree. If you have a Pentium 4, do you have any problems capturing video, and if not, what exactly is your system setup?

Thanks.

[KingJohn]

I guess the person who gave you the advice owns an AMP or is it AMD I forget now

Take no notice, Have you done any TMPGEnce conversions yet ?, I'm interested to know how long a 200Mb (half a movie) takes ? currently its taking me 2 hours or so with a P3, 450

Going to buy one of those beasts soon

[Frisco]

Actually, I have had the computer for literally only a couple of days. The reason I had the question was that my prior machine was a PIII/ 500 Mhz and I seemed to be able to capture using Virtual Dub and convert with Nero better than with this new machine.

So, I have not actually gone beyond the capturing phase at this point as I've been dropping a lot of frames. I notice that the CPU usage is fine for a while, then tops out at 100% (it is a 1.5 GHZ with 512 MB of ram!), loses frames, then will settle back down to the 6-30% CPU usage range and it is fine again. The cycle then repeats itself.

One person's opinion is that the P4 is not as fast as the AMD, but I would think that even though this may be the case, it should still be able to capture, at the very least, your normal 29.97 fps with something less than Cd quality audio without pushing the limits of the computer.

The computer does run Photoshop 6 very well though. I'm wondering if maybe a switch to Windows 2000 would be in order (from ME) - perhaps that would increase performance?

I'm also considering the Dazzle video creator II if all else fails...

[H@Mouse]

Nononono... it's quite adequate. Must have been a REAL die-hard AMD fan who told you that!

I greatly prefer the AMD Athlons personally, and they do handle real-time compression and filtering effects leaps and bounds better than the fastest P4 (just due to the weak FPU of the P4 design), but for basic capturing, I've actually read that it's supposed to be slightly faster than the Athlon series.

In general, take a P4 speed * 3/4, and this will yield the corresponding speed of a similarly performing Athlon chip. For instance, in many apps, a 1.2 GHz Athlon will beat a 1.5 GHz P4 and just about all games but Quake III (does anyone actually play that crappy excuse for a game??? I don't think I have one single friend playing it! PRACTICALLY EVERYONE plays or has played Unreal Tournament, Deus Ex, Rune, or Undying though - which (the UT engine) still runs faster on 1.4 GHz Athlons even against the 2.0 GHz P4... unbelieveable!) It's just a matter of the apps though. There are a select few where the P4 will edge out that Athlon, you just have to look for them!

Watch the benchmark results on various hardware sites and choose the software that runs faster on the P4. Same with the video editting software (though I know of NONE that run faster on a P4)... you'll likely find some CAPTURE software that runs better on a P4 though! Flask I've heard is much better optimized for the P4 for DVD conversion also!

Games, same way... there's got to be a few that run better on the P4... Q3, sometimes Mercedes Benz Truck Racing, and Dronez are the only ones so far... there might be more in the future...

Sorry... truly... getting way off topic, but I noticed you did strike up the "hot topic" (tm) of P4 vs AMD in your subject and it just got me going.

Anyhow, no, your system is quite adequate for video capturing. Conversion tends to be much weaker with the exception of Flask. Is it usuable? A definite yes! Junk? No. By no means.

PS: yes, I've gone the AMD way for video capture, and all things are quite happy here.

[Frisco]

Well,
I guess at this point I will have to search for the best setup to make the most of my new system. I will try flask to see if it is an improvement, thanks.

I've obviously got some fine-tuning ahead of me to get this new system capturing better. Perhaps Virtualdub is not the way to go...

[homerpez]

Intel vs. AMD... I'm an AMD man myself (1GHz at home, forced to work on Intels at work)...

Bottom line on the P4 vs. Athlon... they are essentially the same. They are identical on most tasks, but neither is drastically better or worse at anything vs. the other.

For capturing, I can't help but to think maybe something else is at play. I know on my AMD system, and an ATI AIW Radeon, I have to have settings a certain way, DMA a certain way, capture to a certain drive my OS isn't on, have a certain amount of space left on it, have it defragged every so often, the list goes on. The CPU is just one more thing to add to that mix!

But aside from all this...

DUMP WINDOWS ME. I was unable to use it at all, due to mysterious chugging. I tried turning off "System Restore", but found I ultimately could not! It has a mind of it's own, it's demon-posessed.

You will probably find Windows 2000 to be the ultimate savior in this case, not necessarily an AMD processor.

But they ARE cheaper!

[Frisco]

Homerpez,

Have you encountered any driver problems under windows 2000? Do all the components you have in your machine work fine and dandy with Windows 2000? How about programs? Are there any limits to its compatibility?

[thxkid]

I have a thunderbirs 1.2 gig, I think he is correct about Win ME or WIN98SE,drop them, 2000 sounds good to me.
I personally use WIN98 Gold and have zero problems with any programs, no lockups, capture uncompressed AVI at 29.97 at 352x240 with no frame drops. On this forum I have notice when they have problems its with mostly WIN98SE, WIN98ME, a few 2000, but that is probably do to driver problems, or need patches or upgrades.
When I was using 2000, I had my drives at Fat32 not NTFS, less security on Fat32 but much more flexable.

[T-rad]

i find the L2 cache (through put) on the prosessor has a lot to do with media capture / encoding. I personally use intel, but they are really pricey.most AMD comes stock with 512 L2 cache, Intel comes 128 (Intel PIII 500 512L2 cache will out perform Intel PIII 750 256 L2 cache)this is why most AMD out perform Intel

[Freddie100]

I have two AMD"S (1.4G) and one P4 (1.4G). The P4 is better for video processing and the AMD better for gamming. In video capturing, AMD dropped frames, P4 no dropped frames.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Freddie100 on 2001-09-04 09:47:13 ]</font>

[EinsteinsStupidBrother]

It sounds like you hard drive can't keep up with the video streaming. I'd look at the specs. Is it a 7200 rpm ATA 100?
A SCSI? Your processor doesn't matter a whole lot if the systems around it are cheap or subpar.

Make sure your RDRAM is PC800, not PC600.

[Frisco]

I have two hard drives (both 7200 rpm and Maxtor) 20GB (main drive) and 60GB (storage drive).

The 512 MB of Ram is PC800 (Rambus).

I don't think I skimped anywhere...as far as I can tell.

Other than not going SCSI...but I can't believe that I would need to go SCSI for this. Perhaps an IDE Raid Card?

[jamawas]

Maybe you need a better cooler, sounds like clock throttling to me. The earlier P4's had this feature to prevent overheating. Essentially what happens is that when the core temp reaches a certain level the clock drops by 50%! until it's cool enough then goes back to normal which in your case is 1.5 Ghz. That's why you're dropping frames periodically rather than constantly. This is documented in the Intel whitepaper and is a real con to the consumer since you're getting half what you pay for when you really need the processing power.

[Frisco]

jamawas,

Is the problem you speak about a function of the cooler itself or the bios setting? The cooler is just performing as per the specs in the bios which dictate the temperature range allowed, isn't it?

[Frisco]

jamawas,

Is the problem you speak about a function of the fan itself or the bios setting? The fan is just performing as per the specs in the bios which dictate the temperature range allowed, isn't it?

[jamawas]

Frisco, read this link for more information.
http://www.vanshardware.com/articles/2001/july/010723_P4_Throttling/010723_P4_Throttling.htm

[Frisco]

After reading the article on clock throttling, I can say that I don't know if a new cooler would do the trick. I must say that I have been running with the case cover off since I got it on Saturday, as I was putting in a few PCI cards and didn't want to keep taking the cover on and off.
I don't know if this would keep the processor cooler or make it go hotter faster...I would suspect cooler is the answer, but could be wrong.

I mean, it is a new cooler, it should be perfectly fine. However, now I can add this to my list of maybe's:
Windows ME operating system vs. Windows 2000
Capturing software
Hard drive speed
Heatsink/fan

[jamawas]

I'd suggest doing some other cpu intensive apps like gaming or flask mpeg for a couple of hours and see whether there is the same cyclical cpu usage. The question is whether your cooler is powerful enough, is it a generic cooler?

[Frisco]

Off hand, I'm not sure if it is generic or not... I will have to find that out when I get home.

[Sefy]

First i'd like to take the blame here cause I believe i'm the one who told Frisco the P4 is crap, and I accept the blame with open arms, and I challenge anyone to prove the P4 is better! if it was, then Intel wouldn't CUT prices 5 times in less then a year!

ANY benchmark shows how a much clockwise slower AMD 1.2 wipes the floor with a P4 1.7, so if you saying diffrently, i'd like ACTUAL proves, I backed mine all the time, it's about time you back yours with proves, not words!

I'm not a die-hard fan of any computer chip, I go for what gives the performance I paid for, and in this case, AMD just wins, no matter what you say, unless you can actually prove it and show me benchmarks or tests or anything at all!! that shows P4 can actually beat an AMD on a same clock speed! - meaning 1.4ghz vs 1.4ghz! not a 1.2 vs 2.0ghz! although AMD would propably win there too! and new AMD CPU's that are coming out now (Duron 1ghz) supports the SSE instructions as well as Faster MMX and Faster FPU and 3DNow and Extended 3DNow!

[SHS]

Hey Sefy even a new P3 1.2GHz wipes the floor with a P4 hehehe.

[vitualis]

Sefy,

P4s are definitely superior to AMD when it comes to multimedia applications.

This is about what is AVAILABLE, not about what you can buy for a given budget.

Obviously, for a given budget, you can get more for your money on an AMD system.

However, to suggest that an AMD system has better performance over a P4 (in a generalised statement), especially for tasks such as video editing is biased and WRONG.

Regards.

[gf]

Come on guys some people love AMD and some people love , whats that other company I*tel. Check out these site and decide for yourself.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1524

[Sefy]

Vitualis, you out of all people should know me better then that!, i'm not biased, and I have given FACTS, TRUE benchmarks done by every website on the net, and each and every test shows that AMD Tbird kills just about any Intel P4 there is!

If you claim i'm biased and P4 is better, I want proof, raw hard, undeniable proofs, not by words, I want you to show me actually Benchmarks, comparing a megaherts per megaherz the P4 and Athlon!

http://www.aceshardware.com/Spades/read.php?article_id=45000205
http://www.aceshardware.com/Spades/read.php?article_id=45000195

[Frisco]

Sefy,

I don't disagree with you regarding which processor outperforms the other. From what I've read, it seems quite apparent that in 99.9% of the benchmark tests performed, the P4 comes in second.

However, it seems incredible to me that a P4 1.5 GHZ, 512 MB Ram computer cannot capture video except at some ridiculously low fps. As other people have surmised, there must be something else at play here, as my P3 500 Mhz 256 MB Ram machine actually captured better (but still not great).

I was thinking that switching to Windows 2000 would be a good step, but I may wait a while and just install XP.

[KingJohn]

Not since 1969, when we released the first commercial microprocessor, has there been a development at Intel as significant as this. The Intel® Pentium® 4 processor has just become the first microprocessor in history to reach the 2 GHz milestone. Learn more about the chip's advanced technology, including the tech specs, FAQs, and industry performance benchmarks.

http://www.intel.com/home/pentium4/digital-video.htm

Independent video producer Tobe Carey, of Glenford, New York, has experienced a "tremendous productivity gain" with the real-time editing the chip delivers. He said,"A lot of people have been frustrated up to now trying to do editing on their home computer. The Pentium® 4 processor will really change all that."

http://www.intel.com/home/pentium4/tech-info.htm

[speedy]

There's nothing wrong with your P4. As others said, ME isn't that good a choice for your OS. BTW I built a AMD 1200 using one of those hot ASUS A7A266 motherboards that supports DDR memory. It flys. The CPU also runs hot. So you need big time cooling if you push your system. The P4 runs cooler. There are many factors that effect how well and how long it takes to render a video. Your processor, system resources, total RAM, if or not you have high speed hard drives, your OS, if you have other programs running, TRS's. and on and on.

You want to do video, if you can afford it, render to a seperate drive set aside for just your video projects. I use a pair of Ultra 100 IDE drives. ALWAYS do a fresh reboot BEFORE you start any large rendering project. I and a couple buddies did some tests and just that little thing reduced rendering times by at least 20%. Have nothing else running. Defrag your drive often. Get a decent video card.

[gf]

Independent video producer Tobe Carey, of Glenford, New York, has experienced a "tremendous productivity gain" with the real-time editing the chip delivers. He said,"A lot of people have been frustrated up to now trying to do editing on their home computer. The Pentium® 4 processor will really change all that."

Yea! The software goes slower.

[jamawas]

speedy, if it's not the processor why are his frames dropping in a cyclical manner? If it was the OS or any other hardware the frames would suck from the beginning of encoding. When I try to do HQ Mpeg 2 capture with my AIW Radeon on a 750 Tbird the frames start dropping immediately. When I step down to lower quality I get good capture immediately, no cyclical patterns. I still think Frisco got one of those clock throttled chips that slipped through Intel's quality control.

[Frisco]

Jamawas,

If that is the case, rather than replacing the cooler, wouldn't I want to replace the processor itself? Or is this just something common to all P4 chips?