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.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
$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
wait .you have $35 left.lol .Rosewill RD400-2-DB 400W $34.99(sorry no CORSAIR PS for you )
Last edited by MJA; 2nd Feb 2011 at 00:21.
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.
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.
Last edited by mh2360; 2nd Feb 2011 at 08:23.