cpu only @ 70% during dvdshrink

[trOver]

i noticed while encoding a dvd in dvdshrink 3.2 that my conroe 6600 at stock is only at 70% usage or so. Shouldnt it be at full 100%?? or is this just the bottleneck of my dvd drive?

 

[GeezerMan]

Originally posted by: trOver
i noticed while encoding a dvd in dvdshrink 3.2 that my conroe 6600 at stock is only at 70% usage or so. Shouldnt it be at full 100%?? or is this just the bottleneck of my dvd drive?

Probably so. Rip it to the hard drive, then shrink it. Big difference for me with an Opteron 165, especially if you rip it to a drive that is not the main drive.

 

[Duvie]

Also if you are doing an enocding but the shrink is very small....meaning virtually no compression this can happen. the more compression the more the cpus have to work and less the harddrive is doing a straight copy of data.

Also try to use multiple HDDs as well....HDDs can only do 1 read/write command at a time....common bottleneck...

 

[GeezerMan]

I find the heaviest CPU usage with shrink is when analyzing a movie prior to shrinking.

 

[Duvie]

deep analysis is big. It will actually tax my 4 cores of my quad as well....

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: GeezerMan

Probably so. Rip it to the hard drive, then shrink it. Big difference for me with an Opteron 165, especially if you rip it to a drive that is not the main drive.

Out of curiosity, is there any advantage to doing this? If the CPU is encoding so quickly that it's outrunning the DVD drive, wouldn't you get a faster combined rip + encode time encoding from the DVD directly instead of ripping to the hdd followed by an encode?

If the CPU is only at 70% when encoding directly from the DVD, I would expect that a rip + encode process would take 1.7 times longer than ripping directly. Or something like that.

 

[TruePaige]

My C2D rig also maxes out without a 100% utilization...your not alone. =)

 

[Yellowbeard]

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX

Originally posted by: GeezerMan

Probably so. Rip it to the hard drive, then shrink it. Big difference for me with an Opteron 165, especially if you rip it to a drive that is not the main drive.

Out of curiosity, is there any advantage to doing this? If the CPU is encoding so quickly that it's outrunning the DVD drive, wouldn't you get a faster combined rip + encode time encoding from the DVD directly instead of ripping to the hdd followed by an encode?

Yes, throughput on a HD is substantially faster than an optical drive.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: Yellowbeard

Yes, throughput on a HD is substantially faster than an optical drive.

How is this an advantage? If my CPU is encoding so quickly that encoding directly from the DVD drive isn't even pegging the CPU at 100% utilization . . . look, let's break it down like this: take a hypothetical situation in which it takes ten minutes to encode directly from DVD, and my CPU is only pegged at 70% utilization while doing this. Ergo, the DVD drive is limiting the encode time, right? So I can either:

Encode directly from DVD:
Total encode time: 10 minutes

Rip from DVD to hdd, then encode from hdd:
Rip time from DVD to hdd: 10 minutes
Encode time while encoding from file on hdd: 7 minutes (approx)
Total encode time: 17 minutes

See what I mean? No matter how low your CPU utilization, it's always faster to rip directly from the DVD so long as the DVD is your only source.

 

[Yellowbeard]

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX

Originally posted by: Yellowbeard

Yes, throughput on a HD is substantially faster than an optical drive.

How is this an advantage? If my CPU is encoding so quickly that encoding directly from the DVD drive isn't even pegging the CPU at 100% utilization . . . look, let's break it down like this: take a hypothetical situation in which it takes ten minutes to encode directly from DVD, and my CPU is only pegged at 70% utilization while doing this. Ergo, the DVD drive is limiting the encode time, right? So I can either:

Encode directly from DVD:
Total encode time: 10 minutes

Rip from DVD to hdd, then encode from hdd:
Rip time from DVD to hdd: 10 minutes
Encode time while encoding from file on hdd: 7 minutes (approx)
Total encode time: 17 minutes

See what I mean? No matter how low your CPU utilization, it's always faster to rip directly from the DVD so long as the DVD is your only source.

You are obviously correct that your total time is better by 7 minutes by ripping straight from the DVD. I was speaking of the encoding portion only being faster, not necessarily the whole operation. This is a common benchmark test and I misread your original post. I thought you were looking strictly at a way to increase or measure the CPU utilization.

 

[vaylon]

I have the same situation but I have a opty148 system.
Heres how mine goes.
winxppro striped down.
dvdshrink 3.2
2gb ram,4.5gb virtual ram
cpu overclocked to 2.87

total time to rip a dvd at 57%compression from dvd to hard drive takes 8 minutes.
My cpu never goes over 49%. Even Tho I give shrink highest priority.

Only time my cpu goes 100% is when I get a virus or doing something in an adobe product.
Playing FEAR only takes it up to 72%.

I think my last upgrade to the opty 148 will be my last for a while. Just not seeing big improvements and speed gains like I used to.

 

[lodmdma]

my 6400 stock never goes over 25% when encoding using dvdshrink..... did i not set my cpu correctly??