Solve : why is intel Celeron faster??

1.	Solve : why is intel Celeron faster??
Answer» I have an old 2006 windows xp sp3 Compaq Presario intel Celeron "d" chip w/2gb of RAM. I use 2009 123 copy dvd & it will transcode & burn a dvd on avg. 15-20 mins. I just bought a 2012, made year. HP PAVILION windows 8 AMD vision A10 5700 chipset w/ 24GB of RAM. This machine takes 40-60 mins to transcode & burn a DVD. This machine should blow away my old machine, BTW nothing is running in the background. Help Please!!!I see on there website there is an update to your program, Initial release: 10.0.0.29 - Released 07/13/2012 if your program is 10.0.0.29 or later. The version you have was optimised for the 32 bit version of windows and that processor family. So therefore runs really fast. There is 2 options either a program upgrade there is a free trial you could test the speed with or to run your copy in a Virtual machine. If you have not set up a virtual machine can take sometime. Also if your windows doesn't have virtual machine support (built in) this would need to be purchased. That costs more than a REPLACEMENT copy of the program. Lisamaree Without exact file sizes and exact burn speeds with the same app there is no way to tell what is happening...Latest 2013 123 copy dvd is installed on new machine. but continues to run slow for some reason. Like before, nothing major running in background. Annnnny other possibilities? Now Desperate! Also, just the transcoding times are ridiculous! 2005 yr. Celeron w/ 2gb of ram to transcode in 15-20 mins. vs 2012 AMD A10-5700 chip 40-60 mins with 24 gb of ram??? Hmmmm....Lots of things affect how long it takes to rip a DVD. To get meaningful information it is necessary to compare like with like! Is the same DVD being used on each machine? Is the same transcoding program being used on both machines? The same codec? The same audio settings? With the same final video quality settings? For example, the one that seems "faster" could be doing a plain-vanilla one pass encode at a lower bitrate and PCM audio and the one that seems "slower" might be making a creditable job of a multipass higher bitrate encode with a bunch of filters enabled and mp3 audio. I use Handbrake for this task and I can use among others, these filters: De-telecine, Decomb, Deinterlace, Denoise and Deblock and they can drastically increase encoding time compared to a plain ordinary "good enough for my TV and eyesight" encode. Also there are a whole bunch of settings in an "Advanced" SECTION I haven't even touched. Once you know the same job is being done on both machines, if you still have a speed anomaly I would think about the drives used. If both machines have separate reading and writing drives, check speed settings and disk compatibility and see how fast the burn drives are running. The newer read drive could have Riplock in the firmware which slows the data transfer rate when reading DVD-Video data - usually a drive capable of 8x or 16x read speeds would drop to 2x or 4x. It does not prevent ripping however, just makes it less convenient. In some cases, firmware flashing is all that is needed to remove this feature from a DVD Drive. On some models pressing the eject button a certain way for a certain time cuts out Riplock. Ripping forums are full of - often quite specific- information about this sort of thing. Makers say it is to make machines run quiet, but some allege it is an MPAA initiative. Even if the slow machine's drive doesn't have Riplock, there may be settings in the encoding program that are limiting the read speed to keep the job quiet. One way to isolate the problem would be to first rip the same DVD to a VIDEO_TS folder on the hard drive of each PC and then use these as input for identical encode tasks, output being to hard drive folders. That way you are comparing computing performance and cutting out the optical drives. Quote from: jvc321 on May 11, 2013, 06:01:57 PM Now Desperate! You're "desperate" because a DVD rip takes 25 to 40 minutes longer than it used to? How many DVDs are you ripping each day? Quote from: jvc321 on May 11, 2013, 01:07:28 PM I have an old 2006 windows xp sp3 Compaq Presario intel Celeron "d" chip w/2gb of RAM. I use 2009 123 copy dvd & it will transcode & burn a dvd on avg. 15-20 mins. I just bought a 2012, made year. HP Pavilion windows 8 AMD vision A10 5700 chipset w/ 24GB of RAM. This machine takes 40-60 mins to transcode & burn a DVD. This machine should blow away my old machine, BTW nothing is running in the background. Help Please!!! Are these computers desktop systems or laptops? If desktops, you might remove the DVD drive from the old computer and install it in the new one, at least temporarily as a test to try to narrow down whether the culprit here is the computer or the DVD drive itself. BTW, how does the new computer perform in general? Desparate, meaning that I have a new machine which is supposed to kick the old machines a** . Thank you for all the replies. a new machine shouldn't be 40mins. slower......I'm just testing-using "Matrix Revolutions" as the test DVD. 123 Copy DVD 2013 has their own settings u cann't change when burining to a single-layer dvd, for archiving of course. I'd test using that same movie DVD between both and stop watch them for precise times. I have seen some MOVIES that were more difficult to convert than others using Format Factory to make MP4's of DVD movies so I can play them when traveling in plane etc and watch them on a 3" display of my modern Sony Walkman MP3/FM/MP4 player. Also that software is rated 2.5 of 5 stars which is usually an indication that people have issues with it. You might be comparing 1 movie that was easy to work with, with one that was more difficult for the software to process. Also some DVD's still dont convert because of anticopy protection which also keeps it from being used to make a legal digital copy for myself only! Making a exact copy of a DVD doesnt sound good. I only made copies of DVD's for making play copies for my 5 year old daughter vs trashing the master copy. Buying 2 or 3 copies of the same Disney movies at around $17 to $25 each costs too much. So she had a few that were shrinkdvd'd so that the copy would get scratched up and destroyed and when that would happen, I'd take out the master original and make a new play copy for her to scratch up or snap by accident when stepped on etc.

Answer»

I have an old 2006 windows xp sp3 Compaq Presario intel Celeron "d" chip w/2gb of RAM. I use 2009 123 copy dvd & it will transcode & burn a dvd on avg. 15-20 mins. I just bought a 2012, made year. HP PAVILION windows 8 AMD vision A10 5700 chipset w/ 24GB of RAM. This machine takes 40-60 mins to transcode & burn a DVD. This machine should blow away my old machine, BTW nothing is running in the background. Help Please!!!I see on there website there is an update to your program, Initial release: 10.0.0.29 - Released 07/13/2012 if your program is 10.0.0.29 or later. The version you have was optimised for the 32 bit version of windows and that processor family. So therefore runs really fast. There is 2 options either a program upgrade there is a free trial you could test the speed with or to run your copy in a Virtual machine. If you have not set up a virtual machine can take sometime. Also if your windows doesn't have virtual machine support (built in) this would need to be purchased. That costs more than a REPLACEMENT copy of the program.

Lisamaree
Without exact file sizes and exact burn speeds with the same app there is no way to tell what is happening...Latest 2013 123 copy dvd is installed on new machine. but continues to run slow for some reason. Like before, nothing major running in background. Annnnny other possibilities? Now Desperate!
Also, just the transcoding times are ridiculous! 2005 yr. Celeron w/ 2gb of ram to transcode in 15-20 mins. vs 2012 AMD A10-5700 chip 40-60 mins with 24 gb of ram??? Hmmmm....Lots of things affect how long it takes to rip a DVD. To get meaningful information it is necessary to compare like with like!

Is the same DVD being used on each machine?

Is the same transcoding program being used on both machines? The same codec? The same audio settings? With the same final video quality settings? For example, the one that seems "faster" could be doing a plain-vanilla one pass encode at a lower bitrate and PCM audio and the one that seems "slower" might be making a creditable job of a multipass higher bitrate encode with a bunch of filters enabled and mp3 audio.

I use Handbrake for this task and I can use among others, these filters: De-telecine, Decomb, Deinterlace, Denoise and Deblock and they can drastically increase encoding time compared to a plain ordinary "good enough for my TV and eyesight" encode. Also there are a whole bunch of settings in an "Advanced" SECTION I haven't even touched.

Once you know the same job is being done on both machines, if you still have a speed anomaly I would think about the drives used. If both machines have separate reading and writing drives, check speed settings and disk compatibility and see how fast the burn drives are running.

The newer read drive could have Riplock in the firmware which slows the data transfer rate when reading DVD-Video data - usually a drive capable of 8x or 16x read speeds would drop to 2x or 4x. It does not prevent ripping however, just makes it less convenient. In some cases, firmware flashing is all that is needed to remove this feature from a DVD Drive. On some models pressing the eject button a certain way for a certain time cuts out Riplock. Ripping forums are full of - often quite specific- information about this sort of thing. Makers say it is to make machines run quiet, but some allege it is an MPAA initiative. Even if the slow machine's drive doesn't have Riplock, there may be settings in the encoding program that are limiting the read speed to keep the job quiet.

One way to isolate the problem would be to first rip the same DVD to a VIDEO_TS folder on the hard drive of each PC and then use these as input for identical encode tasks, output being to hard drive folders. That way you are comparing computing performance and cutting out the optical drives.

Quote from: jvc321 on May 11, 2013, 06:01:57 PM

Now Desperate!

You're "desperate" because a DVD rip takes 25 to 40 minutes longer than it used to? How many DVDs are you ripping each day?

Quote from: jvc321 on May 11, 2013, 01:07:28 PM

I have an old 2006 windows xp sp3 Compaq Presario intel Celeron "d" chip w/2gb of RAM. I use 2009 123 copy dvd & it will transcode & burn a dvd on avg. 15-20 mins. I just bought a 2012, made year. HP Pavilion windows 8 AMD vision A10 5700 chipset w/ 24GB of RAM. This machine takes 40-60 mins to transcode & burn a DVD. This machine should blow away my old machine, BTW nothing is running in the background. Help Please!!!

Are these computers desktop systems or laptops? If desktops, you might remove the DVD drive from the old computer and install it in the new one, at least temporarily as a test to try to narrow down whether the culprit here is the computer or the DVD drive itself.

BTW, how does the new computer perform in general? Desparate, meaning that I have a new machine which is supposed to kick the old machines a** . Thank you for all the replies. a new machine shouldn't be 40mins. slower......I'm just testing-using "Matrix Revolutions" as the test DVD. 123 Copy DVD 2013 has their own settings u cann't change when burining to a single-layer dvd, for archiving of course.
I'd test using that same movie DVD between both and stop watch them for precise times.

I have seen some MOVIES that were more difficult to convert than others using Format Factory to make MP4's of DVD movies so I can play them when traveling in plane etc and watch them on a 3" display of my modern Sony Walkman MP3/FM/MP4 player. Also that software is rated 2.5 of 5 stars which is usually an indication that people have issues with it.

You might be comparing 1 movie that was easy to work with, with one that was more difficult for the software to process. Also some DVD's still dont convert because of anticopy protection which also keeps it from being used to make a legal digital copy for myself only!

Making a exact copy of a DVD doesnt sound good. I only made copies of DVD's for making play copies for my 5 year old daughter vs trashing the master copy. Buying 2 or 3 copies of the same Disney movies at around $17 to $25 each costs too much. So she had a few that were shrinkdvd'd so that the copy would get scratched up and destroyed and when that would happen, I'd take out the master original and make a new play copy for her to scratch up or snap by accident when stepped on etc.

Solve : why is intel Celeron faster??

Discussion

No Comment Found

Related InterviewSolutions

Reply to Comment