VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or Try ConvertXtoDVD and convert all your movies to DVD. Free trial ! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
Thread
  1. I am tired of my slow Pentium 4 1.6 ghz computer taking over 6 hours to convert 4 hour AVI movies to DVD. All video rendering is way too slow. And I'm going to be video editing even more now that I have a digital camera with HD video.

    Could anyone recommend what processor or GPU I should get so that I can increase the speed of rendering substantially. My budget is around $300 so obviously I can't get the best that money can buy but I should still be able to get something better than what I have to cut down this slow rending time. I was thinking like one of the AMD Phenom or AMD Athlons because price per performance is a lot better. Also, someone told me that a good GPU will render at least 10 times faster than a processor. Any recommendations on that would be great too.
    Quote Quote  
  2. $300 for a whole system?
    for the CPU u need a new motherboard,memory,and a PSU like 500/600 w and up

    AMD Athlon II X4 640 $99

    G.SKILL 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 $65


    GIGABYTE GA-880GMA-UD2H motherborad (video on board) $99

    here goes your $300

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128445


    wait .you have $35 left.lol .Rosewill RD400-2-DB 400W $34.99(sorry no CORSAIR PS for you )
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817182074
    Last edited by MJA; 2nd Feb 2011 at 00:21.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Mod Neophyte Super Moderator redwudz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    You will likely also have to add in a operating system and some hard drives.

    If you are just running a 32bit OS, 4GB RAM will be a bit cheaper, ~$40US. A 32bit OS can't use more than 4GB RAM.

    That's a good MB and you don't need a separate GPU as the CPU can do the encoding. I'd like to see a GPU that can encode ten times faster than a CPU (At the same quality). Don't believe everything you hear.

    A 500W PS should be plenty. I wouldn't go cheap there as you could loose the MB and everything else if it fails catastrophically.
    Quote Quote  
  4. You have to take into account which codecs you will be using. GPU acceleration probably wont help you unless you are going to use H.264 and you buy a graphics card with some chest hair. Personally I would concentrate on the CPU, unless you also like gaming.

    With my Athlon II x4 640, I do see a huge improvement with MPEG-2 using TMPGenc Xpress or CCE, but I rarely use MPEG-2 these days. x264 benefits the most, with every core maxed out to 100%, a great improvement over my old dual core.

    Current versions of XviD and DivX don't seem to make full use of all 4 cores , the same applies to XviD/MPEG-4 using FFmpeg and Mencoder. They are a little faster, but not as fast as one would expect from having the 2 extra cores, quite disappointing really.

    As you can see from the screen shot, with FFmpeg/libxvid encoding at the highest settings and using 4 threads, only about 50% of the CPU is being used.
    Image Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Untitled.jpg
Views:	985
Size:	87.6 KB
ID:	5416  

    Last edited by mh2360; 2nd Feb 2011 at 08:23.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads