more dual processor support

[poopity poop]

We need more programs that support dual processors. virtualdub is a good program that sort of supports dual processors. I can get up to around 89% usage from my dual 1900+'s. Also, all command line based programs, when you run two at a time, each takes up a processor, and does not slow the other one down in processing speed.
This is a list of programs that I use that I would love to have proper dual processor support:
If possible - All command line based processing tools: i.e. Lame, tooLame, SSRC, pulldown.exe, Azid, and what the hell: boost(the most awful executeable invented).
Virtualdub: full Multi-threading support, just fix it so that it uses both effciently
All the good filters in vdub:
Resize smart resize, resize, simple resize, whatever)
Smart Smoother HQ
2-d cleaner
warpsharp


Now I'm not sure who I'm talking too, I guess everyone. I feel that many many people actually have dual processors, and maybe this will show, and get people interested in producing software that can better handle them.
This is just a quick post and I'm sure I can think of many other programs I would love to see made dual processing, but I can;t think of any, or they are TMPEGenc, and CCE, which are REAL programs, and I'm talking to the wrong crowd

[hakko504]

Well I for one second the motion that more programs should be able to use Dual processors. I currently only have a single Athlon system, but I intend to make my next computer a Dual system, probably Athlon, but for economical reasons I have postponed upgrading until next year, and by then it might be more interesting to go with Intel.

[Acaila]

I couldn't agree more. Nowadays more and more people get dual processors, so programs should be made with that in mind.

However as I understand it it's quite difficult, and not always beneficial, to make a program SMP capable...

[dragongodz]

Acaila hit it on the head. smp support is not that easy to implament, especially in a large program. i actually did a special test compile of DVDx 2.0 with some smp support. the guy that tested it for me (dual athlon xps) said it used 100% of both cpus. cool huh ? only 1 small problem, it was slightly slower than the normal version. yes thats right even though it was using both cpus to the max for decoding and encoding (both had some parrarlel processing so one wouldnt hold up the other so much) based on time to encode the same amount of frames (he mostly tested using 15000) the smp version was slower.so until an smp version of DVDx is faster than the normal version there is no point releasing it. why would you want a slower version even if it did use both processers ?

just my 2 cents :)

[phamilton]

Some real programs are coded for multiple processors - for example TMPEGenc version 2.5.

Writing multi-threaded code, which is what is needed to use multiple processors, can place demands on programmers. However the answer for most of us is compilers that automatically identify sections of the program that can run independently of each other and run them in different threads. Many of the current FORTRAN compilers do that to varying degrees, and FORTRAN programs compiled with them pick up speed when more processors are available. As making faster processors becomes more difficult the multiple processor option is all that is left to meet the demand for computing speed, and that will see more effort into compilers that make more effective use of this option.

[beta447]

i agree, i'll be getting dual 2000+ soon and it's mostly to give greater benefit and speed to encoding.

[\AX]

this has been about 80% of my dilema on getting dual cpus.

in time all good apps will support it

the other dilema is im running a 1.33 ghz now and the price range for dual 1.73's (althon mp 2100) is really not much of a upgrade as i would like.

im the type that like's to upgrade to atleast 3x the current power which makes me hold out for a machine that can do 3.99 or 4.2ghs with maybe even a fsb of 333.

i can live with the speed for it only takes about 6-8 hours to get what i want done. that is bed time for me so it's obviously not a burnden.

im hoping there will be a 4.2ghz setup by january i can affordabley price. by that time amd will have there new faster cpu's out and probably the second fastest MP they will have will be 2.0 ghz. which it being 2nd in line will decrease the $$$ tremndously.

after just loading pricewatch.com the
mp 2100 is 205usd and the
mp 2000 is 156usd

not to mention the mainboard being about 230 so it's defientely not worth it to me right now to invest since im going to be sleeping on it regardless how fast my machine is. it could be 10ghz and i would still encode while i sleep. i just like to wake up to a good thing :-)

to reflect on those above price's you will see that in just 2 months the 2000 has droped down over 50% of cost.

this would mean if they debut a MP cpu that could pump 2.0 or 2.1 ghz by mid November it would be probably lower in cost than the 2100 is right now which is something im not banking on...but would seem logical to wait and atleast see. if that logic becomes false i know i could see that price range or even lower by late febuarary or early March which is not bad at all.


IMO spec's
the
the mboard will still be about the same but just alittle lower like 190usd and the ram of course would be much cheaper than the listed price at pricewatch.com of

pc2700 (333) for 111usd per 512mb or
pc3000 (366) for 150usd per 512mb

a dual system is a must IMO to have atleast a total of 1gig...but i would want to be atleast 2gigs so the overall price on that would probably by that time be around these current figure's for 2100 2400 ram

pc2100 (266) for 96usd per 512mb or
pc2400 (300) for 120use per 512mb

that too me would look like the pricerange for the pc3000 at that point which would save me around 80usd to put towards the mboard which would reduce the overall cost (why am i stating the obvious :-)

to sum up for me who wants to do some hard encoding on a consumer based machine i have to wait not only because the price will drop but also for the fact there is not enough power in the curren amd cpu's to do what i want...and intel is too much $$$ for me as it is.

if you don't have a machine that has as much power as mine (1.33) i highly suggest getting one because it suits the mean's of your sleep hours great. I can encode 5 20 min clips of huffyuv.avi in cce at 7 pass in about 5 hours and have room for 2 or 1 1/2 hours of more stuff. now if you sleep longer than 6 1/2 each night , like 8-9 hours you clearly should try a system like mine

My current setup for 512ram, cpu and mboard can be had for about 150usd. this is a good system and when early next year rolls around im going to put this on the burner and get a dual. In fact i might by 1 or 2 more of these since it handles good gaming, multimedia play back, and good encode times. I could get actually 3 of these setups for the same price of a dual 1.73ghz right now. to me it's worth having 3 computers right now (although im only getting 1 or 2 more) to just have networked around the house for general purpose's such as the above mentioned

so before you go off buying duals right now...think what 4 to 5 months my due to your budget and cpu power. it's worth the wait to buy several machines right now if you due have the money to spend than it would be to get a current dual setup. the speed's the dual setup to the single cpu setup right now are too heavy in price and don't supply IMO a large enough power increase.

[Koepi]

Uh, it's nice to see computer scientists mambling.

SCNR.

:stupid: