Encoding and Types of Processors

[mr. phantastik]

I'm looking to throw together a new rig mainly for video editing/encoding. Any advice on which proc to use? Intel has more memory bandwidth than an AMD, and I'm wondering if it will drastically effect encoding times in TMPEG.

[crahak]

Well, honest, you can expect more of a AMD vs Intel war for asking this...
This being said, encoding video is all number crunching, and basically, only cpu power will help. Get a CPU fast enough for your taste and that you can afford.

[kitty]

Yes, this could turn into an Intel vs AMD war.

In general the faster the processor the better.

An Intel 3.06GHz with hyperthreading wouldn't hurt. Dual AMD or P4 or Xeon processors would be high end also.

[The Maynard]

I use an AMD XP2000 cpu and it takes me about 2.5 hours to encode a 90 minute movie to divx.

[The Maynard]

Mind you, that's just the video. It takes another 5-10 minutes for the audio.

[mr. phantastik]

Haha, I figured it might turn into a war, which wasn't what I wanted

My main concern was memory access. MPEG2 encoding isn't affected by more of it? I guess it makes sense, as the proc can only handle 512K of data at any given time via cache..please don't fry me if i'm wrong, its just a tought

[Bodysurf]

I'm looking to throw together a new rig mainly for video editing/encoding. Any advice on which proc to use? Intel has more memory bandwidth than an AMD, and I'm wondering if it will drastically effect encoding times in TMPEG.

There is really no debate here.

If money is no object, then the fastest P4s (at 3.08GHz) are faster at pretty much anything AMD currently has. No one in their right mind will really argue that as it is a fact. This is especially true when they are combined with PC1066 RDRAM.

However, for the price, AMD Athlons still are a better value. This is especially true if you want to put together a dual-CPU system.

[The village idiot]

I would suggest the fastest multi-processor machine you can afford.

[henry_nettles]

A lot of the software that you might wish to use does not explicitly support multiple cpus. And some of it simply will not work with multiple cpus, at all. What I did was to build a separate computer for my video work, that way I can go on with whatever else while capturing or encoding on my video computer.

After reading a lot of other posts, I decided to use an Intel cpu in my video computer. I am very happy with an AMD XP1700+ cpu in my main computer, and I am very happy with an Intel Northwood 1.6A overclocked to 2133 mhz in my video computer.

YMMV...

[medievil]

I'm looking to throw together a new rig mainly for video editing/encoding. Any advice on which proc to use? Intel has more memory bandwidth than an AMD, and I'm wondering if it will drastically effect encoding times in TMPEG.

There is really no debate here.

If money is no object, then the fastest P4s (at 3.08GHz) are faster at pretty much anything AMD currently has. No one in their right mind will really argue that as it is a fact. This is especially true when they are combined with PC1066 RDRAM.

However, for the price, AMD Athlons still are a better value. This is especially true if you want to put together a dual-CPU system.

Not arguing, but you forgot, that the speed difference of those fastest Intel's over the Fastest AMD's doesn't make up the PRICE difference. the XP2600+ (or is it 2800+ now?) will almost keep up with that 3gb Pentium and it's a hell of a lot cheaper!! :P

[GandyMan]

I'm looking to throw together a new rig mainly for video editing/encoding. Any advice on which proc to use? Intel has more memory bandwidth than an AMD, and I'm wondering if it will drastically effect encoding times in TMPEG.

As I do this for my job I will tell u that a dual xeon can not be touched onthis task. Thier are faster things out thier but not Intel or AMD and I am sure u are talking about main stream Computing. Thier are reviews at all the popular sites on the diff between single and dual cpu and of course the Intel vs AMD. Really is on what u are willing to spend. A good xeon board is about 600. chips are another 350 apiece. Then if u have rdram or DDR but have to have ECC on most good boards. U would want raid if u do any DV work with Adobe software. For just mpeg, divx, converting no real dif. But do not forget the cost of a Power supply and case to fit the board in most require a new supply that is made for the board, SuperMicro is what I use and that is with dual 2.8 on my DV machine. But it is really expensive. So to end, almost all reviews out on CPU's rate them on video encoding, best place to start. Hope this helps

[THE RIPPER]

I'll take my dual xp 2400's and about a grand over any xeon system.For the few minutes you gain,in my opinion its not worth it.


http://www.2cpu.com/Hardware/iwill_dp400/index_7.html

[GandyMan]

I'll take my dual xp 2400's and about a grand over any xeon system.For the few minutes you gain,in my opinion its not worth it.


http://www.2cpu.com/Hardware/iwill_dp400/index_7.html

I agree with u. If money was of consern I would go with AMD also. But If he is doing and DV work he will se more than just a few min. dif between them. Almost as fast is not as fast. We just need to know what he really wants I guess. Like i said it is alot of money to have a dual xeon but their is nothing in AMD stock that can beat it. So if money is the issue I would say get an AMD no doubt. If u will be doing DV and got nothing but cash, then Intel xean is the way to go. No way I would spend 1000 dollars just so save a few minutes. But to the sme thier is not a big diff in dual AMD and the new 3gig single when it comes to cost and performance. Well have a nice day. AMD rocks for the price. And beats Intel on everything but Encoding video. U should have told him to look at the dif on the tmpeg he asked about a big dif if u ask me. I think he asked if it effects the time for tmpeg and it does. Also I just checked and it is cheaper to buy a xeon than it is an AMD.

http://www.2cpu.com/Hardware/iwill_dp400/index_6.html
http://www.2cpu.com/index.html#newsitem1041879080,41573,
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=7046

[THE RIPPER]

Yeah like i said,the p4's sse2 does make a difference in tmpge, i think these cpu's would give yer xeons a run for there money

http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29202&highlight=2800

Till the hammer falls.

[GandyMan]

Yeah like i said,the p4's sse2 does make a difference in tmpge, i think these cpu's would give yer xeons a run for there money

http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29202&highlight=2800

Till the hammer falls.

Kinda off topic Sorry but can't wait till Hammer, Gonna be good days ahead. And dual 2800 AMD I like that. Can't what to see the review when he compairs them.

[bartman]

Whatever you get, buy it now...use it....enjoy it. In 6 months it will be out of date and people will wonder how you ever cope with such a system and you will wonder why you didn't wait out that "little bit longer"

What you want is value for $$$. That means buying the second or third latest CPU. They are not that much older that the latest but are usually half the price or less (but don't have half the performance). For dedicated video work I would get a dual CPU system....this means either AMD or Intel Xeons....there is a BIG price difference there (unless you go dual P III's)

AND is good value for performance when compared to Intel, but AMD chips run hot so you need to be careful when putting together a system. Intel chips not only run a bit cooler but are more stable and are quieter (the constant whine of a high RPM AMD cooler gets to you after a while).

8)

[freak_in_cage_10k]

This is just a thought but:

Why not overclock a little??? Crank up the fsb to about 166 (on AMD CPUs) and you will notice significant performance gains! it will cost you about £10 to get 2 80mm fans (or £20 for really quiet ones), 1 intake, 1 outtake. as long as you have DDR 333 ram or above you should do it no probs, and all this for only £10!

[GandyMan]

Whatever you get, buy it now...use it....enjoy it. In 6 months it will be out of date and people will wonder how you ever cope with such a system and you will wonder why you didn't wait out that "little bit longer"

What you want is value for $$$. That means buying the second or third latest CPU. They are not that much older that the latest but are usually half the price or less (but don't have half the performance). For dedicated video work I would get a dual CPU system....this means either AMD or Intel Xeons....there is a BIG price difference there (unless you go dual P III's)

AND is good value for performance when compared to Intel, but AMD chips run hot so you need to be careful when putting together a system. Intel chips not only run a bit cooler but are more stable and are quieter (the constant whine of a high RPM AMD cooler gets to you after a while).

8)

Check the price of AMD MP to Xeon. Intel is cheaper right now. I was just looking and they are cheaper than the AMD MP so It is really worth the money to get a Xeon. Bigg diff in encoding time. So thier is no big differance in price anymore. I was going by when I got my dual Xeon setup and it was a big diff then but Intel has gotten really competitive on thier price. I would buy the fastest CPU I can afford. Yes the lattest cost more but u will have a fast CPU and it will have a longer life than just getting a good deal. Hyperthreading is a big boost when used with Tmpeg. AMD is all around good on everything, so guess he ( the guy that started this post) is really what motherboard he wants to use and like and trust and go from thier. They do make a diff too.

http://www.2cpu.com/index.html#newsitem1041879080,41573,

[THE RIPPER]

Yes the cpu's are dropping in price,but you forgot to mention the price of the boards Besides, if you have a little technical know how,you can mod xp's into mp's , like i did ,then the amd's are cheaper.

[kitty]

Like someone said - take your encoder into account.

TMPGenc is Intel optimized right now and will work with both single & dual systems.

Some hardware encoders are sensitive. Hauppauge WINTV PVR 250/350 work well for DVDs and are inexpensive but are not recommended for dual systems as they have had problems. Other boards may have their particular problems with other HW configuartions.

[rhegedus]

I know that this doesn't answer the question, but why don't we all do a comparison. If someone posts an avi (say in a peer to peer site) for us all to download, then we can all encode it to a pre-defined standard and see what our times are.

How about it?

Rob

[THE RIPPER]

Why not encode the sample 1 min movie from the tmpge site.

[rhegedus]

With what settings? Let's strain the CPUs!

Rob

[GandyMan]

I know that this doesn't answer the question, but why don't we all do a comparison. If someone posts an avi (say in a peer to peer site) for us all to download, then we can all encode it to a pre-defined standard and see what our times are.

How about it?

Rob

It is not a simple as that. Some people as I do have real hardware encoders. Not just the simple ones that encode as u play it through to the computer, but hardware to help encode to mpeg if more than real time. Some might have this and some might not so I would say make it that everyone has to meet some certain list or I guess we could just Put down what we got and they read for them self how it got the results we post.

[THE RIPPER]

Lets do tmpge sample , standard vcd template,motion estimate search set to normal, system video and audio.

[THE RIPPER]

I could only do the test with my single cpu system,my dual is in the middle of a batch encode.Will post later

Epox 8rda+
xp2400 @ 10.5x200 2100mhz
256 xms 3500

aero dancing tmpge sample video,ntsc vcd template all default settings ,system video andf audio,normal search precision = 31 secs

[rhegedus]

P4 2.26 oc to 2.55
Gigabyte 8IEXP
1024 DDR

convert to:
NTSC(film) = 34 sec
NTSC = 39sec
PAL = 39 sec

Max temp 46C

Rob

[THE RIPPER]

P4 2.26 oc to 2.55
Gigabyte 8IEXP
1024 DDR

convert to:
NTSC(film) = 34 sec
NTSC = 39sec
PAL = 39 sec

Max temp 46C

Rob

Do you have sse2 enabled ?

[rhegedus]

Yep, sse and sse2.

Rob

[THE RIPPER]

I guess that go's to show that amd's are better at video encoding.