Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
4th February 2004, 15:36 | #1 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ozzie
Posts: 42
|
Ok isn’t Intel meant to be faster in Audio & Video encoding then Amd?
Ok I came from Amd was running it at 2.3g 24/7 in summer, now that I have a P4 2.4c@3.4g I was expecting faster results but I was wrong!!!!
OK my Amd at 2.3g did Audio encoding in 25-30min depending on the length of the movie. Intel at 3.4g 293FSB 320MHz, is doing it in 1h now what’s whit that? I came from AMD to INTEL to get faster results So is this true or is it just me? I see better scores in Sandra, PC-Mark 02 then Amd which is good but once comes to encoding its heaps slower even a 2200xp@ at 2g was faster Just tell me what u think I might be doing some think wrong? ASUS P4P800 2x256MB XMS REV:1.1 2.4C@3.4G THX |
4th February 2004, 17:09 | #4 | Link |
HDConvertToX author
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cesena,Italy
Posts: 6,552
|
is cpu at 100% during encoding time ?
is stable your os (winxp, i suppose) ? even at this overclock ? are you running many other task during encoding ? (like encoding another video, as i usually do ...) try headac3he-0.23a (just for test) Defrag ? NTFS or Fat32 ? Mersenne prime ? Memtest86 ? regards BHH |
4th February 2004, 17:12 | #5 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 216
|
P4 vs Athlon performance depends a lot on the software used.
Generally, AMD is stronger on MMX/FPU code, but the P4 is faster when using SSE2. Older SW, optimized for P3/Athlon does not use SSE2. |
5th February 2004, 02:23 | #7 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ozzie
Posts: 42
|
Quote:
Yes stable Not running much I use NTFS And prime Ok will try dl the headac3he-0.23a |
|
5th February 2004, 02:25 | #8 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ozzie
Posts: 42
|
Well what program for Audio and Video uses SSE2 for support P4-c?
EDIT: Was looking for headac3he-0.23a couldnt find it any one have links for these? THX EDIT: Just DL the DVD2AVI dg it does it in 11mins but it saves the file as .AS3 I need .WAW file how can i do this? THX Last edited by Winxp; 5th February 2004 at 04:43. |
5th February 2004, 08:08 | #9 | Link |
HDConvertToX author
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cesena,Italy
Posts: 6,552
|
Headac3ha http://mitglied.lycos.de/darkav/
AS3 ??? What is this kind of audio? (search in audio forum section) In audio option check channel format : auto select dolby digital: demux all tracks,(set Decode for wav output file) mpeg audio : demux all tracks 48-44khz : off you would have an dts/ac3/mpa/wav but as3 ... BHH |
5th February 2004, 12:40 | #11 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ozzie
Posts: 42
|
NAZDAR Ja umim Cesky
As I sad it's faster it does it in about 10-12 mins in Audio that’s all good But I can’t find a Video encoding program that would be that fast I am use to TMPG any Ideas which version I should get? THX |
6th February 2004, 04:48 | #13 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Fennville, MI
Posts: 125
|
If I might shed some light. While the Intel has a higher clock speed and so on and in most results that would seem that an Intel would beat out an AMD, except for one overlooked item. This is where the AMD people have really done their homework. An AMD Athlon executes more instructions per cycle. Example: Car running down road. Has faster revving engine, but smaller pistons, and has to "rev" up to provide the necessary horsepower for a 2500 lb automobile (Intel). Car running down road has large pistons that take in more air/fuel and can create the same horsepower but at a lower rpm due to the internal size of the each cylinder firing and does not need to run at excessive high rmp (clock cycles) to attain the same speed to get a 2500 lb car down the road (AMD)
If I knew how to put in a picture I have a great one to show a comparison of these and what I'm talking about. MWIPS is one measure ... Million Write Instruction Per Second my AMD does 6,137 Million/second.. an Intel Pentium 4 at 1.8 GHz writes 1,252 Million/second as a comparison.
__________________
Vernon Jenewein jenefarm@direcway.com ICQ : 3826345 Eastern Time Zone "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill" |
6th February 2004, 07:52 | #14 | Link |
I'm back! :D
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Matrix
Posts: 1,029
|
OK guys, I have a sinple doubt.
How would you calculate AMD AthlonXP's speed as in GHZ if its specification shows 2600+ ?? Do it mean its 2.6 Ghz or more ? One more, What cache sizes are used in AMD? I know intel P4 uses 512KB L2 cache and 8KB L1(AFIAK), similarly in AMD? Thanks.
__________________
My Blog |
6th February 2004, 12:30 | #15 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Fennville, MI
Posts: 125
|
"How would you calculate AMD AthlonXP's speed as in GHZ if its specification shows 2600+ ??"
Nope, 2600+ is not 2.6 GHz it's more like 1.7 GHz in actuality. My AMD Barton 2500+ is somewhere around 1.83, but I run it around 2.1 GHz and there are others that have tweaked their systmes a bit more to achive a higer clock rate, usually done with adjusting the FSB (Front Side Bus) up a bit, and then with multipliers. "One more, What cache sizes are used in AMD?" The AMD Athlons (Thoroughbreed, Thunderbird, -XP) have an L2 cache of 256 KB, the Barton core processors L2 cache of 512 KB (along with an increased FSB of 333) The newer processors, have a higher FSB and a cache of 1 MB Also they are true 64 bit proccessor chips, receiveing and sending 64 bits per instruction. (they are QUITE fast). might try this web site for a LOT more info on the AMD... http://www.amdmb.com/index.php
__________________
Vernon Jenewein jenefarm@direcway.com ICQ : 3826345 Eastern Time Zone "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill" Last edited by vljenewein; 6th February 2004 at 13:32. |
6th February 2004, 13:06 | #18 | Link |
I'm back! :D
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Matrix
Posts: 1,029
|
Thanks vljenewein and Port66 for answering my stupid questions.
And btw, port66 welcome to doom9 forums. Sorry for another question, do 3D now variants of optimizations are better than SSE variants? @WinXP TMPG supports SSE2 and future version Of it calle TMPG express as in www.doom9.org news says support SSE3. VirtualDub and divx/Xvid codecs also support SSE2. You question was already answered by mikeson.
__________________
My Blog |
|
|