Dual AMD processors

[mrtristan]

Is anyone on the board running a dual cpu based system? I'm actually looking into a dual AMD set up, but I'd like to hear about Intel based systems, as well.

The main reason why I'm interested, is to speed up my rendering times. I could just go with a faster chip, but something about having two processors intrigues me.

That's where my concerns come in. Building my PC was one thing. Getting to know Windows was another. My love-hate relationship was consumated when I got into video editing.

Would you say that a dual CPU system is more buggy than a single CPU system?

[-=NeeBone=-]

I've got a dual P3 1Ghz system and also an Athlon XP1800+ system. It all depends whether the software can take advantage of the dual system. Personally, I use Premiere and find that the AMD is quicker.

As far as being buggy, only if you use win3.1! Seriously tho, there shouldnt be a problem with either 2k or XP (assuming you're using one of the two). THe OS just detects the 2 CPUs and does its thing. No issues at all. Getting your capture devices working is the real headache!

[mrtristan]

Thanks.

I've read a lot of reviews and benchmarks, but I wanted to hear from someone with real experience - Not just the results of encoding tests.

What kind of motherboard do you use for your AMD setup? So far, Tyan seems like the most popular.

Also, do you ever use Tmpgenc? If so, are the encoding times cut down to roughly half, relative to a single processor of a similar speed? My current encoding times are just ridiculous.

[devinemi83]

Like the others said, it depends on the software you use. I believe TMPG supports it so it will speed it up. But it wont double your speed. 2 1.3GHz chips dont equal the specs of a single 2.6Ghz. there is overhead that bring the speed down a little. You would get between a 30-40% boost. Multi CPU machines are usually designed with multitasking in mind, not to blow away the performance. Meaning they would allow you to encode a video and do something else at the same time. So yes you will get a speed boost over one chip but not double or anything.


Also, your OS has to support multiprocessors. 2000 and XP Professional support it. Not OS's like Win 95-98, Win ME, Win XP Home.

[asifanwar]

I currently have:
Dual AMD 1600+ AthlonXP
Tyan S2460 mobo
512 Mb Crucial RAM
80 Gb HD
Pioneer A03
Lite-On 163 DVD
WinXP Pro

I get about 1.5x realtime on CCE (speed 1.5) and am pretty happy with it. TMPGenc can be set to use 2 procs and each DOES go up to 100%, but CCE only seems to use 1. Having said that, it seems as fast as TMPGenc while only using one....

I have a question: if I was to go to a SINGLE Pentium 4 (such as 2.0 or 2.2GHz), would I spped up encoding a sinlge file using CCE or TMPGEnc? Anyone?

[devinemi83]

From what I hear, CCE is a pretty fast encoder on its own. And if you like it and are financially invested in it and it only uses one CPU. Get a P4. The P4 IS designed to do complicated things like encoding alot faster. A 2.6 Ghz P4 is faster than 2 1.3Ghz CPU's.