MPEG2 direct vs. AVI then MPEG2

[cryptpuppy]

I'm using MMC 7.2 under Windows XP and capturing anolog video. I'm interested in capturing to a final output of MPEG2. Is the capturing direct to mp2 that much worse than going avi then converting to mpg2? I have about 40GB of free space and would like to store my home videos using good quality compression. MPEG-1 seems rather poor, is MPEG2 the way to go or should I look into DIVX? I have no interest in playing on other than my PC. Thanks

[Greg12]

What is ur capture card?

If it is a software based MPEG encoder, then definatly go AVI-MPEG.

See software MPEG encoders use ur CPU n u gotta have a really fast CPU to do MPEG 2. (Around 1.7ghz)

If u have a hardware encoder, their is a chip on the board that does the encoding n it is highly specialized to the task of MPEG encoding it uses lil CPU.

All ATI cards are software based.

[cryptpuppy]

Unfortunately it seems I have an ATI Rage Fury Pro. Which means it is software based. Thanks. In that case, do you know if I should even go with mpeg2 or just use DIVX after I convert the AVI? Sorry for the "dumb" questions. I'm intersted in final quality on my PC and not to view on VCD or DVD player. thanks agian!

[nfielden]

it is my understanding that DivX encodes at a much smaller file size than mpeg2, so if your just interested in backing up your home movies on computer than it would save space to use smaller divX compression while still being at a good enough quality for future viewing. Also divX files are small enough to burn to cd as a avi file for easier storage.
mpeg2 is mostly for dvd's and their large file capacities.