processor and custom built question

Willen · Post by **Willen** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 7:10 am

Ok, I decided to encode a video in TMPGEnc that if you were curious, you could also do for a comparison.

For this test, I used the re-mastered version of Kusoyaro's Sappy Self-Indulgence (AVI / XVID 1848 kbps, 23.976 fps, 640x480 (4:3) / MP3 44.1 kHz, 192 kbps / 4:07 / 60.1 MiB).

Hardware:
CPU: AMD Athlon64 X2 3800+ Dual Core Processor "Manchester" (2.01 GHz, 512 KB L2 cache x2 (1 MB total), 90nm SOI, Socket 939.
Motherboard: ASUS A8N-E
RAM: 2 GB DDR generic Micron RAM (1 GB x2), dual channel
HDD: Hitachi 250GB SATA 7K250 (HDS722525VLSA80)

TMPGEnc settings:
DVD NTSC - MPEG-2 720x480, 29.97fps, 2-pass VBR (8000kbps max, 2000kbps min, 8000kbps average "auto" setting), Layer-2 48000Hz 384kbps, Motion search precision: Highest quality (very slow).

I left all the usual background programs and WinXP processes running (anti-virus, firewall, etc.), but closed all open programs (no browser, IRC, P2P, etc.)

Now for the results...

Test 1 - Dual Core enabled: Elapsed time - 00:15:00 (7431 frames)

Test 2 - Dual Core disabled: Elapsed time - 00:28:49 (7431 frames)

To disable Dual Core support for a program in Windows XP, start the program (TMPGEnc) then bring up the Windows Task Manager (Ctrl-Alt-Del). Select the Processes tab and find the relevant process (TMPGEnc.exe). Right-click on it and select Set Affinity..., then uncheck one of the boxes (CPU 0, CPU 1). Now, if you select the Performance tab, your CPU Usage will be at 50% (instead of 100%) and one of the CPU Usage History graphs will be idle.

I might do a Dual Core/Single Core XviD encoding test later, but since it will be encoding from a large-ish Lagarith file that you won't have access to I doubt anyone will be able to duplicate it for comparison.

Orwell · Post by **Orwell** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:09 am

I don't think mine would vary all that much from yours, it runs at 1.9 ghz, its supposed to be 2.0 theoritically, unless ram makes a huge impact. I'm rather curious though, does the motherboard make a huge difference in how stuff runs? A few sites I've browsed, they've given me options for various ones, but beyond the generic assumption that if you throw more money at it, it gets better, I know next to nothing about them. As far as duplicating this, I bought my current computer in jan 2000, and premiere says there's only a single processor. Was the dual core/two combined single cores out by then even? Thanks for taking the time to do that, I appreciate being able to see the difference.

Joe - I've used newegg for a internal to external drive case, but I've never seen them offer to build a computer for you. I do NOT trust myself to build a computer and would rather pay the labor/price jack up to just assure myself that it WILL work when its all done.

Will cooling make a large impact on performance? Someone mentioned that after they took the panel off and put a fan next to it seems to have run better, and right now mine is just sitting fully encased and inside a..... cheap desk computer slot that will either need to be remade or something if I decide to get something designed for storage. Kinda hard to hoarde on 700 gbs and your dvd burner will only burn stuff that will work on your computer alone.

Rem0 · Post by **Rem0** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 9:33 pm

Wow big difference with dual core! ^, I plan on upgrading when the prices are slashed in half by the end of the month. The 300$ 3800+ will become like 145$! Thats when i'll upgrade my single core A64 3000+.

Joe88 · Post by **Joe88** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:00 pm

Yea dual core prices have really gone done
im putting this one in my new PC
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819116238
3.0ghz dual core for $173 , not bad at all

plus I can OC to 3.9ghz without much of a problem