Will a new system convert files faster?

[ibzomie]

Will a new system convert files faster? I know it seems obvious, but you never know til you ask.

Currently this is my system: Intel Pentium III 863MHz, 384mb RAM and WindowsXP.

I installed a DVD burner based on being told that it would work with this system, and it does. If I begin with already authored DVD files (a Video_TS folder) I can burn a DVD in a matter of minutes.

However, if I begin with an AVI file, it takes 24 hours or so to encode a feature length movie (an hour and a half or so) to MPEG2 using TPMGenc3.0Xpress. And it does so just fine. After the encoding is complete, it takes 45 minutes or so to actually burn the DVD (after adding chapters, etc using Nero).

Is this a normal time for file conversion using TPMGenc? Or will it actually be considerably faster with a new system? If this time is as good as it gets, there's no reason for me to get a new computer.

[junkmalle]

A modern CPU will convert video several times faster than your old P3.

[ROF]

Depends on how you define new. For someone with a 800 P3, a 1.0ghz Celeron in a new ATX Case may be considered a new system. You will definitely see an increase if you opt for a larger processor. If replacing your aging hard drive(recommended) you will also notice an increase in speed. You might also notice a jump by adding newer optical drives with faster read and writing speed specs.

The increased rate will be proportional to how you define "new system".

[mats.hogberg]

Yes, it's normal. Yes, it will be considerably faster with a new system. 863 MHz is too lean IMO, considering todays standard system with 3.4 GHz CPU.
Encoding speed is almost linear to clock frequency, all other things equal, so a new box would cut your encoding time in 4. Even so, 8 hours is very long - about 1.5 - 2* video time is what I get for AVI to DVD specs MPG IIRC (long time since!) on my 3.2 GHz box.
What settings you use in TMPGEnc also makes a huge difference:
Never use highest motion search precision. It's insanely slow. 2nd or 3rd best is good enough.
Avoid filters in TMPGEnc - filter with VirtualDub (if you have to) and frameserve to TMPGEnc.
There are faster encoders than TMPGEnc...

/Mats

[ROF]

863 MHz is too lean IMO, considering todays standard system with 3.4 GHz CPU.

I'm the only person I know of locally who owns a 3.0Ghz+ system. The typical systems I see today are around 2.5Ghz or less. Most people buying new are opting for either dual cores or 64bit procs which unless they have big bucks they are buying lower ends of those spectrums. Those are my recommendations for future proofing considering Vista is just around the corner.

[thecoalman]

Is this a normal time for file conversion using TPMGenc? Or will it actually be considerably faster with a new system? If this time is as good as it gets, there's no reason for me to get a new computer.

As menttioned above there's many variables. Using a P4 3.0 a straight conversion from DV-AVI to 6000VBR with AC3 takes about 1 hour per hour of video to be encoded using Ulead products which uses a version of the mainconcept encoder.

You'll see a vast improvement.....

[mats.hogberg]

my recommendations for future proofing

IMO, there's no such thing as "future proofing" a computer. No matter what you buy today, you'll find the same specs box for 1/2 what you gave within a year. Within 3 years, it will be hopelessly outdated. If you buy absolute latest greates specs (@ twice the price of second best), maybe you'll get another 6 months.
I admit that the development seems to have slowed down a little these last years, so maybe I can stick with my box a little longer this time!

/Mats

[BobK]

Currently this is my system: Intel Pentium III 863MHz, 384mb RAM and WindowsXP.

I installed a DVD burner based on being told that it would work with this system, and it does. If I begin with already authored DVD files (a Video_TS folder) I can burn a DVD in a matter of minutes.

However, if I begin with an AVI file, it takes 24 hours or so to encode a feature length movie (an hour and a half or so) to MPEG2 using TPMGenc3.0Xpress. And it does so just fine. After the encoding is complete, it takes 45 minutes or so to actually burn the DVD (after adding chapters, etc using Nero)..

When I started with DVDs I had a similar system, and it took about 20-22 hours to encode 2 hours of video starting with an avi file. Shortly after that I went to a 2.0Ghz AMD. It went from 20-22 hours down to about 5-6 hours.

Six months after that I got a capture card that captured directly to mpeg. That saved me another 5-1/2 hours for every 2 hours of video I was converting.

The 45 minutes it's taking to actually burn the DVD is more likely caused by the disks you're using- I'd guess they're probably 1X.

[ROF]

my recommendations for future proofing

IMO, there's no such thing as "future proofing" a computer. No matter what you buy today, you'll find the same specs box for 1/2 what you gave within a year. Within 3 years, it will be hopelessly outdated. If you buy absolute latest greates specs (@ twice the price of second best), maybe you'll get another 6 months.
I admit that the development seems to have slowed down a little these last years, so maybe I can stick with my box a little longer this time!

/Mats

I'm currently building two 64bit systems with 512MB DDR400, 128MB DX9 Video, a 160GB SATA-150, and 16x8x16 DVD for under $400. All parts purchased for less than $300. You are somewhat right on the future proofing but why would you spend twice this amount ($600) on a processor today when you can buy a decent board that will support that processor when it's priced at under $100? With ZIF today, gone tomorrow, it really makes no sense unless you have tons of cash to spend.

[GullyFoyle]

my recommendations for future proofing

IMO, there's no such thing as "future proofing" a computer. No matter what you buy today, you'll find the same specs box for 1/2 what you gave within a year. Within 3 years, it will be hopelessly outdated. If you buy absolute latest greates specs (@ twice the price of second best), maybe you'll get another 6 months.
I admit that the development seems to have slowed down a little these last years, so maybe I can stick with my box a little longer this time!

/Mats

I'm currently building two 64bit systems with 512MB DDR400, 128MB DX9 Video, a 160GB SATA-150, and 16x8x16 DVD for under $400. All parts purchased for less than $300. You are somewhat right on the future proofing but why would you spend twice this amount ($600) on a processor today when you can buy a decent board that will support that processor when it's priced at under $100? With ZIF today, gone tomorrow, it really makes no sense unless you have tons of cash to spend.

Could we get a link to where you buy parts? Under $400 seems amazing to me for what you list ( if you include case motherboard and processor).

I know Videoguys has an article about building for under $1000.
http://www.videoguys.com/DIY.html
Nothing about under $500.

[ROF]

Chaintech SK8T800 Socket 754 Barebone Kit / AMD Sempron 64 2500+ / 128MB Video Card / 512MB DDR PC3200 / ATX Mid-Tower Case with 400 Watt PS / Keyboard / Mouse for $189.00

Just add HDD and Burner.

BTW, this machine is faster than a 2.9Ghz Celeron on video and gaming apps. The case is clean and the thing I find I like the more I build with it is that when the power is on there are two green lights that look like alien eyes on either side of the bright silver power button, but when the hard drive is being accessed a red crescent shaped light appears to blink beneath the power button giving the appearance of a smiling alien. Pretty neat and built for under $300.

For under $1000 I can put together something much more impressive.