Its "Black Friday" and everyone puts their computers on sale starting tomorrow...
I would like to upgrade my PIII to a quicker computer.
Does anyone know which computer would render a project more quickly?
I am not an AMD fan so really only interested in P4 computers.
The two I see locally listed are:
P4 820 dual processor 2.8g 1m cache ?memory etc etc etc
or:
P4 630 3.2g 2m cache ?memory etc etc etc
does the Dual processor really speed things up when you are only trying to do just this one task?
rendering quickly
Moderator: Ken Berry
-
Ron P.
- Advisor
- Posts: 12002
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:45 am
- System_Drive: C
- 32bit or 64bit: 64 Bit
- motherboard: Hewlett-Packard 2AF3 1.0
- processor: 3.40 gigahertz Intel Core i7-4770
- ram: 16GB
- Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645
- sound_card: NVIDIA High Definition Audio
- Hard_Drive_Capacity: 4TB
- Monitor/Display Make & Model: 1-HP 27" IPS, 1-Sanyo 21" TV/Monitor
- Corel programs: VS5,8.9,10-X5,PSP9-X8,CDGS-9,X4,Painter
- Location: Kansas, USA
Hi Choptop..
Well I use an AMD, and have in the past use Intel. Which boils down to personal preferance above all else.
A faster computer system does not translate to quicker render times. Unless you're talking about systems costing several thousands. There are members that have some really impressive systems. Just browse through the posts, and check out the systems button, found by the PM, Email, WWW buttons. Even with some of those, the render times are still about 2x the total time of the project..
However here's a couple of links that I found doing a quick search. There's much more concerning your inquiry.
http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic. ... ter+system
http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic.php?t=8903
Hope that helps...
Well I use an AMD, and have in the past use Intel. Which boils down to personal preferance above all else.
A faster computer system does not translate to quicker render times. Unless you're talking about systems costing several thousands. There are members that have some really impressive systems. Just browse through the posts, and check out the systems button, found by the PM, Email, WWW buttons. Even with some of those, the render times are still about 2x the total time of the project..
However here's a couple of links that I found doing a quick search. There's much more concerning your inquiry.
http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic. ... ter+system
http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic.php?t=8903
Hope that helps...
Ron Petersen, Web Board Administrator
Hi Choptop,
pity you have a thing against AMD.
They run much cooler, overclock very well, and are significantly better for general computing and games. Some now have dual channel DDR2 memory support, and if you have the money, they have dual core cpu's too.
With the Pentium 4's, the "D" Prescott version is actually a retrograde step when compared with a similarly clocked Northwood "C" series.
They had to increase the amount of cache to try to compensate for the burden of the longer pipeline. The CPU runs HOT.
As for rendering times - they are really dependent on what you are doing. If you add overlays, video filters, titles and audio, the render time may be several times the video run time, even on a fast system.
I did tests on my own system recently, and rendering DV type 1 avi to MPEG-2 took from 1.6x real time for the plain avi file to over 5x real time with filters, overlay, titles and audio.
If you use Media Studio Pro, it allows you to have many overlay tracks, so render times could potentially be very protracted.
You should just go for the fastest pc you can afford. At the present time, that would likely be an AMD machine.
I don't know how well VS makes use of dual core cpu's - it's hard to get those fortunate users to come up with quantifiable test results. There's also one regular poster with a $1000 Pentium Extreme Edition cpu, but he just says that his machine is very fast...
I also have a 1.5Ghz Celeron M laptop - and it seems to manage to run at about 70% of the performance of my pc, which surprised me. I believe the Intel "M" cpu's are more AMD-like, trying to get more done per clock cycle rather than just trying to run the fastest clock speed.
Try checking out Anandtech.com - not yet completely spoiled by commercials, though it's getting that way. They have lots of reviews of pc's and components.
pity you have a thing against AMD.
They run much cooler, overclock very well, and are significantly better for general computing and games. Some now have dual channel DDR2 memory support, and if you have the money, they have dual core cpu's too.
With the Pentium 4's, the "D" Prescott version is actually a retrograde step when compared with a similarly clocked Northwood "C" series.
They had to increase the amount of cache to try to compensate for the burden of the longer pipeline. The CPU runs HOT.
As for rendering times - they are really dependent on what you are doing. If you add overlays, video filters, titles and audio, the render time may be several times the video run time, even on a fast system.
I did tests on my own system recently, and rendering DV type 1 avi to MPEG-2 took from 1.6x real time for the plain avi file to over 5x real time with filters, overlay, titles and audio.
If you use Media Studio Pro, it allows you to have many overlay tracks, so render times could potentially be very protracted.
You should just go for the fastest pc you can afford. At the present time, that would likely be an AMD machine.
I don't know how well VS makes use of dual core cpu's - it's hard to get those fortunate users to come up with quantifiable test results. There's also one regular poster with a $1000 Pentium Extreme Edition cpu, but he just says that his machine is very fast...
I also have a 1.5Ghz Celeron M laptop - and it seems to manage to run at about 70% of the performance of my pc, which surprised me. I believe the Intel "M" cpu's are more AMD-like, trying to get more done per clock cycle rather than just trying to run the fastest clock speed.
Try checking out Anandtech.com - not yet completely spoiled by commercials, though it's getting that way. They have lots of reviews of pc's and components.
JVC GR-DV3000u Panasonic FZ8 VS 7SE Basic - X2
Hi Choptop,
I just spent far too much time reading numerous cpu articles on Anandtech.com, updating my knowledge on AMD vs Intel.
I therefore need to modify and add to my previous post.
Check out this article:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sh ... spx?i=2389
Intel have always been strong in encoding performance - which prompted me to go for my P2.8c over an Athlon XP3200. The "E" models (which I wrongly referred to as "D" are actually slower than the C models of the same clock speed, but whereas the fastest C was 3.2Ghz, the Prescott E tops out at 3.8Ghz.
It seems the dual core Pentium D models do very well at encoding - in fact better than dual core AMD's, and they're cheaper too!
Comparing your Intel choices, the 2.8Ghz D830 is about 45% better than the 630, and assuming the D820 is not too disimilar, it should be the better machine for video encoding use, and good for multi-tasking. (the 830 and 820 are both 2.8Ghz, 2 x 1Mb cache, so should have similar performance)
Plus if you get one, I may be able to bore you to death pestering you for rendering times!!
I just spent far too much time reading numerous cpu articles on Anandtech.com, updating my knowledge on AMD vs Intel.
I therefore need to modify and add to my previous post.
Check out this article:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sh ... spx?i=2389
Intel have always been strong in encoding performance - which prompted me to go for my P2.8c over an Athlon XP3200. The "E" models (which I wrongly referred to as "D" are actually slower than the C models of the same clock speed, but whereas the fastest C was 3.2Ghz, the Prescott E tops out at 3.8Ghz.
It seems the dual core Pentium D models do very well at encoding - in fact better than dual core AMD's, and they're cheaper too!
Comparing your Intel choices, the 2.8Ghz D830 is about 45% better than the 630, and assuming the D820 is not too disimilar, it should be the better machine for video encoding use, and good for multi-tasking. (the 830 and 820 are both 2.8Ghz, 2 x 1Mb cache, so should have similar performance)
Plus if you get one, I may be able to bore you to death pestering you for rendering times!!
JVC GR-DV3000u Panasonic FZ8 VS 7SE Basic - X2
2Dogs, thank you for the replys. I went to the site you suggested
Anandtech.com and ended up far more confused than when I started.
This morning the stores opened at 5:00 I thought I would go and browse the computer isle at Best Buy, even had my wife talked in to letting me buy one! WOW! I got there an hour late, no parking in their lot was found and when I got inside the check out line went all the way around the parimeter of the building and back and fourth the last few isles, just like at Disneyland.
I just looked at them and then left. Maybe next week...I still see the 820 or 830?? in my furture.
Anandtech.com and ended up far more confused than when I started.
This morning the stores opened at 5:00 I thought I would go and browse the computer isle at Best Buy, even had my wife talked in to letting me buy one! WOW! I got there an hour late, no parking in their lot was found and when I got inside the check out line went all the way around the parimeter of the building and back and fourth the last few isles, just like at Disneyland.
I just looked at them and then left. Maybe next week...I still see the 820 or 830?? in my furture.
Hi Choptop,
we even had a mini-riot here when some people were let in 10 minutes early into Circuit City! Maybe you'll be in luck, though, since a lot of people will be going for stuff with instant rebates and cheaper stuff in general. I had my eye on a 75 pack of DVD+R's for $2:99 - but by the time I went in to the store, which was still horribly busy, they had all gone.
I couldn't resist reading more articles. Although none of the tests actually ran VS, most of the video encoding tests pointed to dual core cpu's doing well.
Currently, the 820 is just about the best bang-for-the-buck dual core. It doesn't have HyperThreading - Intel only put that on the Extreme edition dual core cpu's now, perhaps in an attempt to justify the prices they charge for them.
There are faster AMD dual core CPU's, but unusually for AMD, they actually cost quite a bit more than the nearest Intel equivalent.
Happy hunting!
we even had a mini-riot here when some people were let in 10 minutes early into Circuit City! Maybe you'll be in luck, though, since a lot of people will be going for stuff with instant rebates and cheaper stuff in general. I had my eye on a 75 pack of DVD+R's for $2:99 - but by the time I went in to the store, which was still horribly busy, they had all gone.
I couldn't resist reading more articles. Although none of the tests actually ran VS, most of the video encoding tests pointed to dual core cpu's doing well.
Currently, the 820 is just about the best bang-for-the-buck dual core. It doesn't have HyperThreading - Intel only put that on the Extreme edition dual core cpu's now, perhaps in an attempt to justify the prices they charge for them.
There are faster AMD dual core CPU's, but unusually for AMD, they actually cost quite a bit more than the nearest Intel equivalent.
Happy hunting!
JVC GR-DV3000u Panasonic FZ8 VS 7SE Basic - X2