AMD dual core or Intel Pentium 4 hyper thread + Videostudio

astor · Post by **astor** » Thu Jun 15, 2006 10:38 am

Hi all,

Does anyone has experience in terms of stability and speed with
Videostudion 9 and dual core or hyper thread CPUs.

Is there any advantage with this product at all using new CPUs ?

Have fun
Ralph

TDK1044 · Post by **TDK1044** » Thu Jun 15, 2006 12:51 pm

Within any version of Video Studio I'd be surprised if there was any real difference between using a dual core processor and a hyper threading processor. I use a P4 3.0 hyperthreading processor in VS10, and, given the functionality of Video Studio, I can't imagine how a dual core processor would perform better. Maybe someone on the forum has used both types of processor in the same version of VS and can inform us accordingly.

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Thu Jun 15, 2006 3:13 pm

Hyperthreading helps, and a real second core is even better. But don't expect the differences to be dramatic:

http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic.php?t=14202

I should note that if you encode to WMV, a second processor (logical or physical) seems to get utilized fully. I haven't done benchmarks, but Task Manager indicates that the second processor is completely busy.

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:00 pm

I didn't see this before, but Ulead has the following on the UVS 10 System Requirements page:

According to this, a 3GHz P4D can transcode DV to MPEG2 format essentially in realtime, whereas a single-core P4 without HT takes 50% longer. A P4 with HT falls halfway in between.

Post by **Ken Berry** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:18 pm

And that accords roughly with my experience with my P4 with HT: I transcode from DV to mpeg-2 at around 1 hr 15 minutes for one hour of DV (a little more or less depending on how much, and what sort of, editing I have done, it seems).

shoalhaven · Post by **shoalhaven** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:51 am

I am currently running a 3 GHz 800 MHz Pentium D 830, Dual Core, and quite honestly, I expected a bit more.

(Quite honestly, I also expected a bit less heat from that unit)

maddrummer3301 · Post by **maddrummer3301** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:23 am

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:38 am

Or, for a comparison, you can deprive Videostudio of the second processor.

Open up Task Manager, go to the Processes tab, find VSTUDIO.EXE, right-click on it, and select the Set Affinity option. Leave only CPU 0 checked, and Videostudio will only be allowed the first processor.

If you have a system with Hyperthreading, the physical processor is CPU 0, and the logical processor is CPU 1.

With a dual-core processor, the two cores are obviously CPU 0 and CPU 1.

With a dual-core, Hyperthreading-enabled processor, the two physical cores come first, and CPU 2 and CPU 3 are the logical processors. This allows applications that are trying to take advantage of a basic Hyperthreading processor to talk to the physical cores instead, which should result in better performance.

Sal M · Post by **Sal M** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:01 am

I built the overclocked Pentium D 805 in Tom's Hardware (http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/10/ ... ghz_cores/) and am currently running at 3.8 Ghz. My entire system cost $1,100 and I can render 1 hour of MiniDV AVI into 8000Kbs, 29.97fps, 100% quality with MPEG audio 256Kbs, 4:3, single-pass in 30 minutes. I normally don't overclock, but Intel shifted production to the B0 series which can handle 3.2Ghz easily. If I had supercooling, I'd go to 4.1Ghz as they did in the article.

GuyL · Post by **GuyL** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 12:55 pm

I have run VS on single and dual core and experienced no difference. However, I can now encode a video while doing other minor tasks with no effect to the rendering process.

maddrummer3301 · Post by **maddrummer3301** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:01 pm

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 10:17 pm

MD, that's not how it works.

Changing the PAM (Processor Affinity Mask) only controls which processor(s) the Windows scheduler will allow a process to execute on -- it will not let you run more than one instance of Videostudio. The procedure I described should be used only for comparing multi-processor performance on an otherwise identical system.

lespurgeon · Post by **lespurgeon** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:47 pm

Check out the VS10 and system optimization thread from earlier this week. Ongoing discussion of use of the second core.

J_fike · Post by **J_fike** » Sun Jun 18, 2006 12:12 am

I use a lot of 3D graphics programs on a dual core AMD 4800. Some support multi-threading and some don't. With a non-multi-threaded application like Bryce, I can run two instances of Bryce and plop render half of the same scene with each, and thereby approach 2x in render speed.

Carrara 5 supports multi-threading so it will render nearly twice as fast on a dual core machine.

Your graphics card and the amount of system memory will also determine how efficient your computer will be with dual cores. So playing a highly graphics intense game and doing a video edit (you probably wouldn't be doing that anyway) wouldn't work too well. But you could run an Excel spreadsheet and do a single core render and probably never notice a slowdown.

As maddrummer3301 said, one advantage of a dual core machine is you can do a normal render while working in another application without very much processor penalty at all.

shoalhaven · Post by **shoalhaven** » Sun Jun 18, 2006 12:55 am

Maddrummer3301, thanks for your info.

Do I read you right, should I be able to do a normal render and work on Word Processing at the same time?

By the way, I have my Pentium 'D' CPU temperature alarm set at 74C. Would this be considered too hot, or is it normal? With variable fans, at times, it sounds like a jet getting ready to take-off.

Thanks all,

Alludo USER to USER Web Board

AMD dual core or Intel Pentium 4 hyper thread + Videostudio

AMD dual core or Intel Pentium 4 hyper thread + Videostudio

Dual Core

Twice Realtime Transcoding

Dual Core