Is my Intel possessor underperforming?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
E

Eirik

Honorable
Feb 6, 2014
1
0
10,510
I just installed my new Intel i7 4930k 3.40GHz. It is a quite expensive CPU, so I was hoping that it would give me some fast performance.
So I tested it out in Adobe Premiere. Using some footage I recorded with fraps.
Format: H.264
Length: 00:15:51;22
Estimated rendering time: 21 minutes
Dimensions: 1440x1080 (1.3333)

Ain't that a pretty long time? I also tried to render 2min of the footage and that had an estimate of 2m and 30s.
Personally I was hoping for a 10sec rendering time per minute. But I guess not.

Is some some drivers I need to install? Or is this just a bad video rendering CPU? Should I send it back and trade it for a Xeon instead?
 
Solution
hunter315
Take a look at this chart
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2013/-34-Adobe-Premiere-Pro-CS6,3171.html

Video encoding is a hell of a lot harder than you give it credit for, especially when encoding to that resolution, the amount of data in play is massive. As you can see on the chart i linked above they were encoding a 2:21 video, the fastest time was an i7 4960X at 166 seconds for 141 seconds of video, thats about 1.18 seconds per second of rendered video at 720P. Since you are trying to encode at a higher resolution its going to take longer, your 15:51 example is about 1.32 seconds per second of final video which is about on par.


Video encoding is hard, this is why people who do it professionally use dual and quad CPU...
Sort by date Sort by votes
hunter315

hunter315

Champion
May 12, 2009
10,653
3
51,960
Take a look at this chart
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2013/-34-Adobe-Premiere-Pro-CS6,3171.html

Video encoding is a hell of a lot harder than you give it credit for, especially when encoding to that resolution, the amount of data in play is massive. As you can see on the chart i linked above they were encoding a 2:21 video, the fastest time was an i7 4960X at 166 seconds for 141 seconds of video, thats about 1.18 seconds per second of rendered video at 720P. Since you are trying to encode at a higher resolution its going to take longer, your 15:51 example is about 1.32 seconds per second of final video which is about on par.


Video encoding is hard, this is why people who do it professionally use dual and quad CPU workstations with 64GB of ram and GPU acceleration.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
CTurbo

CTurbo

Pizza Monster
Moderator
Aug 27, 2013
22,424
14
84,965
Yeah 21 minutes is not really that bad for that size. Overclocking would shave off a couple of minutes, but don't expect miracles. It might cut off 2 or 3 minutes tops. Not 7 or 8. Maybe you should have invested in a dual socket 2011 setup.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom