HORRENDOUS encoding results with Conroe

[skriefal]

Hmm. I don't own Garden State, but I pulled Star Wars Ep I out for a quick test. A straight "full disc" rip with no recompression was 13:59. I then tried a re-author, removing all but the primary audio track and adding 'auto' compression to fit the result onto a single-layer DVD-R. That rip was a little over 11 minutes. Yes, it was faster. Odd. If I had enough time (and interest) I'd run each test several times and get an average... but that ain't gonna happen.

Oh... this is an E6300 @ 3GHz (425FSB), using an ASUS DVD-E616A as the reader.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
hey all,

I'm running the Conroe rig in my sig (e6300 @ 2.6 ghz w/ MSI 975X).

I tried encoding a DVD with DVD shrink and i get horrible performance compared to old A64. It take 50 minutes to encode a DVD! My X2 used to do it in 12-15. What gives???

Are you ripping to the hard drive first? Took me 15 minutes to rip LOTR FOTR to the hard drive with DVD decryptor, took 6m 1s to encode it with DVD shrink @2.84ghz.

 

[TheRyuu]

Alright. I've done a little bit of research into it.

I did it twice. First time I ripped the movie "Pitch Black" with DVD Decrypter into an ISO format. Then mounted it with Alcohol 120%. Then used DVD Shrink to compress it.

Second time I just inserted the disc and let DVD Shrink compress it right off the original disc.

The first time was loads faster. It took about 6 minutes to copy the iso. Then another 17 to back it up.
The second time took 40 minutes.

If you do the math using DVD Decrypter+DVD Shrink is a lot faster then just using DVD Shrink.
It might add a few steps but it's still a lot faster.

 

[serializable]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: serializable
I have the MSI 975x and I was getting really poor performance when I was trying to rip cds to my harddrive. It was taking about 10-15 minutes which is how long it took on my old computer. Turns out I had my optical drives connected to the ide port that is controlled by jmicron. I switched it over to the other ide channel and then it only took about 2 minutes to rip a cd. So maybe thats whats causing the problem for you too? Just a suggestion.

JESUS, i swtiched IDE channels and now i'm gettin 100% usage but now it take 90 MINUTES TO RIP 4.7 GB!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The easiest way to tell what ide channel its on is during the initial boot. If on the opening screen it lists your dvdrom then its on the right one. If it lists your dvdrom on the last screen before the xp slash screen its on the jmicron ide channel which isnt the correct one. When I get home I'll look at how I have my BIOS set up and I'll post that because it might be helpful.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: serializable

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: serializable
I have the MSI 975x and I was getting really poor performance when I was trying to rip cds to my harddrive. It was taking about 10-15 minutes which is how long it took on my old computer. Turns out I had my optical drives connected to the ide port that is controlled by jmicron. I switched it over to the other ide channel and then it only took about 2 minutes to rip a cd. So maybe thats whats causing the problem for you too? Just a suggestion.

JESUS, i swtiched IDE channels and now i'm gettin 100% usage but now it take 90 MINUTES TO RIP 4.7 GB!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The easiest way to tell what ide channel its on is during the initial boot. If on the opening screen it lists your dvdrom then its on the right one. If it lists your dvdrom on the last screen before the xp slash screen its on the jmicron ide channel which isnt the correct one. When I get home I'll look at how I have my BIOS set up and I'll post that because it might be helpful.

thanx for the suggestion Serial. ATM, my computer is not booting at all, gotta trouble shoot for a while but i look forward to your BIOS config

 

[morkman100]

Originally posted by: wizboy11
Alright. I've done a little bit of research into it.

I did it twice. First time I ripped the movie "Pitch Black" with DVD Decrypter into an ISO format. Then mounted it with Alcohol 120%. Then used DVD Shrink to compress it.

Second time I just inserted the disc and let DVD Shrink compress it right off the original disc.

The first time was loads faster. It took about 6 minutes to copy the iso. Then another 17 to back it up.
The second time took 40 minutes.

If you do the math using DVD Decrypter+DVD Shrink is a lot faster then just using DVD Shrink.
It might add a few steps but it's still a lot faster.

Is there a reason that you mount the DVD image with Alcohol and run DVD Shrink from the mounted image? I just open the iso file directly from DVD Shrink (File-Open Disc Image). Just curious...

 

[TheRyuu]

Originally posted by: morkman100

Originally posted by: wizboy11
Alright. I've done a little bit of research into it.

I did it twice. First time I ripped the movie "Pitch Black" with DVD Decrypter into an ISO format. Then mounted it with Alcohol 120%. Then used DVD Shrink to compress it.

Second time I just inserted the disc and let DVD Shrink compress it right off the original disc.

The first time was loads faster. It took about 6 minutes to copy the iso. Then another 17 to back it up.
The second time took 40 minutes.

If you do the math using DVD Decrypter+DVD Shrink is a lot faster then just using DVD Shrink.
It might add a few steps but it's still a lot faster.

Is there a reason that you mount the DVD image with Alcohol and run DVD Shrink from the mounted image? I just open the iso file directly from DVD Shrink (File-Open Disc Image). Just curious...

...
Not sure either.
Just the way I do it.
It's probably just as fast. But I'd probably avoid some CPU overhead if I just gave DVD Shrink the ISO.
Didn't even know I could do that

Either way, DVD Decrypter+DVD Shrink is faster then just DVD Shrink (you think you'd save some time by just using one program)

 

[morkman100]

Opening the ISO directly in DVD Shrink will save you at least 10 seconds!

But I'm pretty sure either way will yield very similar shrink times.

 

[serializable]

Here are some of my BIOS settings. I'm using the 715 version which I believe is the most recent. These are just a few of the settings if there is anything else which you think might help you let me know. Under CMOS my optical drives are set to ide master and ide slave. In the intergrated peripherials the onboard jmb361 is set to ide. Under ide configuration the pio and udma are set to auto. Most all my other settings are the default ones.

 

[MXtra]

I don't think there should be much of a difference in time between the two methods. Unless, the disc is scratched up and the dvd drive has trouble reading it so it goes really slowly. I have a liteon dvdrom with a speedhacked firmware so perhaps that's why it's not a problem for me on my athlon 64 pc. I hope this isn't going to be a problem for the conroe system I'm putting together this week. I might just buy another pc case and keep my current athlon rig intact cuz I like making backups. I think I mentioned this already, but Nero Recode was made by the creator of Dvd Shrink. It gives the same exact quality in less time so why not use that? Shrink is old.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: serializable
Here are some of my BIOS settings. I'm using the 715 version which I believe is the most recent. These are just a few of the settings if there is anything else which you think might help you let me know. Under CMOS my optical drives are set to ide master and ide slave. In the intergrated peripherials the onboard jmb361 is set to ide. Under ide configuration the pio and udma are set to auto. Most all my other settings are the default ones.

my config is IDENTICAL except in CMOS i have the dvdrw set to Primary master and the SATA HDD set to third master...

 

[Conky]

Originally posted by: wizboy11

Originally posted by: morkman100

Originally posted by: wizboy11
Alright. I've done a little bit of research into it.

I did it twice. First time I ripped the movie "Pitch Black" with DVD Decrypter into an ISO format. Then mounted it with Alcohol 120%. Then used DVD Shrink to compress it.

Second time I just inserted the disc and let DVD Shrink compress it right off the original disc.

The first time was loads faster. It took about 6 minutes to copy the iso. Then another 17 to back it up.
The second time took 40 minutes.

If you do the math using DVD Decrypter+DVD Shrink is a lot faster then just using DVD Shrink.
It might add a few steps but it's still a lot faster.

Is there a reason that you mount the DVD image with Alcohol and run DVD Shrink from the mounted image? I just open the iso file directly from DVD Shrink (File-Open Disc Image). Just curious...

...
Not sure either.
Just the way I do it.
It's probably just as fast. But I'd probably avoid some CPU overhead if I just gave DVD Shrink the ISO.
Didn't even know I could do that

Either way, DVD Decrypter+DVD Shrink is faster then just DVD Shrink (you think you'd save some time by just using one program)

I don't bother with saving it as an iso... I just rip it straight to the HD and then direct DVD Shrink to the files and it does the rest.

BTW, my encoding times are definitely down with my E6400 which was my main reason for wanting to upgrade(that and a few more fps in my games never hurts). :thumbsup:

 

[TanisHalfElven]

if all your encodoing is done via "DVDSHRINCK" i don't see why you wo0uld even bring up the conroe issue. the proc is running at 15 % take a hint. the rest of your system is somewhere 50 laps behind your processor.

now if some one want to do HQ x264 encoding then a conroe would shine
otherwise for regular mpeg4 and lower encodes even low end X2s (like my opty) are enough to get 60+ fps in the highest of settings.

 

[Freze]

Is it me or are the 2 instances of this problem (this one and this one) both using the same motherboard. MSI 975X Platnium Powerup.

Maybe that is the problem?

It could also be the OS so try something like, if you have to opticals, using a linux live CD. Did it take longer than usual to instal Windows, that could explain if it is a hardware or software issue. I have never expirienced this problem, (and home never to need to expirience it,) but it probibly isn't that nice of a first impression about your new PC.