VideoHelp Forum

Try DVDFab and download streaming video, copy, convert or make Blu-rays,DVDs! Download free trial !
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 21 of 21
Thread
  1. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    I have been purring along with a Core2Duo E8400 3.0 GHz. For complex stuff I just let it run overnight.

    I can get an "upgrade" for $280. It is a Dell with a Xeon X5450...4 cores 3.0Ghz. 4 gig ram.

    Am I going to see much of a speed increase? That is, with 4 cores, will encode time be cut in half?

    thanks!
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member DB83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    Common misconception.

    Your CPU is still 3 ghz so will perform at the same speed.

    If you are using software that utilize multi-cores then, yes, it will be faster. Twice the speed ? possibly
    Quote Quote  
  3. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by ron spencer View Post
    I have been purring along with a Core2Duo E8400 3.0 GHz. For complex stuff I just let it run overnight.

    I can get an "upgrade" for $280. It is a Dell with a Xeon X5450...4 cores 3.0Ghz. 4 gig ram.

    Am I going to see much of a speed increase? That is, with 4 cores, will encode time be cut in half?

    thanks!
    Old and slow stuff, don't bother with it, you would be wasting your money.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    Slow perhaps...but I can double my speed for under $300...i7 setup would be what...$800-$1,000? For how much quicker...I never like leading edge anyway. I'm not a pro encoder... I just would like a faster machine.
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member DB83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    I did not say you WOULD double your speed.

    It might help if you stated the software you use.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member wulf109's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Any 4 core at 3.0Ghz or more will increase your speed. You should look into what 4 cores will work in your motherboard and just replace the cpu.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Seems a little pricey, off-lease Optiplex 990's with 3.1GHz Core i5, 4GB RAM, 1TB HDD & Win 7 pro go for $330 (another $35 for 8GB). It will give you at least 50% boost in speed on single threaded applications and more than double the speed with multi-threaded with the same power consumption of your current CPU. As DB83 pointed out the Xeon is the same tech as the E8400 so single threaded apps won't benefit and the power consumption is double.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    Ok...food for thought...

    If I am running handbrake to convert a ton of 1920x1080 movies to 720p (hockey games for our sons hockey team) for either youtube or download. I think handbrake will use all cores right? So I could get some nice increases? The Optiplex route is interesting as well.
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote  
  9. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by ron spencer View Post
    Ok...food for thought...

    If I am running handbrake to convert a ton of 1920x1080 movies to 720p (hockey games for our sons hockey team) for either youtube or download. I think handbrake will use all cores right? So I could get some nice increases? The Optiplex route is interesting as well.
    So let me get this straight you need computer power to degrade videos?

    If you don't mind the lower quality then I suggest you simply record 720p, not need for conversion, no need for computer power.

    Quote Quote  
  10. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    I keep the 1080 stuff for myself. I cannot host movies for the other families and 1080 is useless for coaching on an iPad.

    So it needs to be compressed. For example, a 5 gig 1080 file from a 50 minute game can be compressed to 800 meg in 720p for distribution. I'm just looking for a faster way that does not cost too too much. Why don't I record in 720? To keep the best quality I can for posterity.
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote  
  11. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by ron spencer View Post
    Why don't I record in 720? To keep the best quality I can for posterity.
    Good thinking!

    But you can upload 1080p to YouTube!
    Quote Quote  
  12. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    Yah...but that takes way too long. I find the 700-800 meg encodes are a nice size. I'm not interested in 5 gig uploads.
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote  
  13. You can get a Q9550 to put in your current motherboard for well under US$100 (they're going for about $60 on ebay). It will be almost as fast as that X5450 Xeon system and you won't have to set up a new system. Just make sure you have enough PSU.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    If you replace a CPU, do you have to reactivate windows?
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by ron spencer View Post
    If you replace a CPU, do you have to reactivate windows?
    It isn't especially likely that you will need to do that, but you can use manual phone activation if it does. Replacing the motherboard is far more likely to be a problem.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by ron spencer View Post
    Yah...but that takes way too long. I find the 700-800 meg encodes are a nice size. I'm not interested in 5 gig uploads.
    The nights are long......
    Quote Quote  
  17. No, but you shouldn't be too concerned with that Microsoft will reactivate even if you replaced the whole PC (as long as the old one is out of service).
    Quote Quote  
  18. Originally Posted by ron spencer View Post
    If you replace a CPU, do you have to reactivate windows?
    No, not unless you've changed several other components lately.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Since it is brought up what OS are you running and at what bit depth?
    Quote Quote  
  20. Originally Posted by ron spencer View Post
    I have been purring along with a Core2Duo E8400 3.0 GHz. For complex stuff I just let it run overnight.

    I can get an "upgrade" for $280. It is a Dell with a Xeon X5450...4 cores 3.0Ghz. 4 gig ram.

    Am I going to see much of a speed increase? That is, with 4 cores, will encode time be cut in half?

    thanks!
    I have a Core2Duo E6750 and a Q9450. They're one generation apart (I think) but the same clock speed. For x264 encoding the Q9450 is pretty much twice as fast.
    For the times when it isn't (ie when using slow AVISynth filtering that bottlenecks the encoding process) because the four cores aren't being fully utilised, it's still effectively twice as fast because I can run two encodes simultaneously. The same applies to Xvid encoding because it doesn't utilise multiple cores as efficiently as x264, but I don't do much Xvid encoding these days.

    I see newpball is once again disrupting a thread with irrelevant nonsense. First "too old", then "don't re-encode" (how sad must someone's life be to spend time in a forum dedicated to video telling people not to re-encode?), then "doesn't matter how long it takes" and now we're at OS bit depth. Maybe if you're upgrading a PC that's too old to upgrade while re-encoding video you shouldn't be re-encoding you've at least got to do it using a 64 bit OS?
    Quote Quote  
  21. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    It would be on Windows 7 64 bit.

    I am thinking the off lease idea is good. I could run the unit headless via remote desktop in a hidden room. May be an older PC, but I do not think the large increase in cost of i7 is worth it for this task. I could get 2 handbrake jobs done overnight on the new quad core one plus a single one on the E8400. I would also get a new OS out of it as well.

    Or get a new CPU to replace the E8400
    Last edited by ron spencer; 21st Feb 2015 at 12:40.
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote