Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SSSLLLLOOOOWWWW!

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 4, 2006 1:47:39 PM

I have a xpress 200 card, athlon 3400, 512 ram, 160 gb hd. Burning home DVD's takes an eternity...Is my video card what is holding the speed back?

More about : ssslllloooowwww

February 4, 2006 2:07:20 PM

Need more info.

Are you converting/compressing from raw DV data from the camera? If so, it's the transfer from the camera holding you back.

If your home video file is on your HDD, then it would be the processor speed mainly.
February 4, 2006 2:08:00 PM

thanks, but sonic DVd is the only program I run when i burn dvds
February 4, 2006 2:09:34 PM

yes it is raw video from analog camera on my computer, but digital video is slow to burn also.
February 4, 2006 2:20:21 PM

Some may have different ideas, but IF you're converting the video from raw to finished format FROM your HDD to your burner, these are the bottlenecks in my estimation.

Processor
HDD
RAM

More processor speed always helps with large chunks of data like video files.

Hard drive can have a dramatic impact in performance. Case in point, I encoded a video stream twice. Once from a IDE drive and a second time from my WD Raptor 36Gb. The faster Raptor reduced encoding time from 44mins to 20mins.

Ram, possibly. Fast RAM i think would be more important than a lot of it. ALthough I think 1Gb might give you a bit of a boost as well. If the program has a large bit of itself on the swap file, or if lots of the data to be encoded is there, you're going to experience slower encoding performance.
February 4, 2006 2:24:11 PM

Thanks alot for the help...I'm not about to get a new processor or hd on this computer, but I will porbably get more ram...will 1.5 gb have a noticeable difference over 1 gb?
February 4, 2006 2:31:52 PM

Chances are probably not. Somewhere along the chain, something is slowing down the process. Check all connections and make sure all cables are good.
February 4, 2006 2:34:59 PM

Hmmm, possibly. The more data that fits onto system ram, the better. HOWEVER, most programs will only load so much to memory, still sticking the rest onto the swap file and slowing you down still. Some programs you MIGHT be able to set the physical memory usage, in which case having tons of memory would be the best.

Heh...I have 2gb of ram and could never figure out why I never got more performance from my games with the extra memory. I did a lot of research and found out about programs having internal limits to their memory usage. In some games I can use a command line option to manually set memory usage and it does give me a few FPS here and there.
February 4, 2006 2:36:12 PM

1,5 is a bad idea, go for even numbers of ram chips you will likely lose some potential performance if you use an odd number of chips.
February 4, 2006 2:42:22 PM

I think a big part of the problem is that it just takes a really long time to redering and burn video files. While a faster processor and more memory will help, it will still take a long time. Right now when I want to burn a video, I wait till I'm done using the machine and then start burning and leave it run over night. I think the best solution right now, when you have the money, is to get a dual core processor. Then you'll be able to do other things while burning. Won't speed it much but will let you use the machine while burning.
February 4, 2006 2:45:49 PM

I agree. Even with an extremely fast processor it's still going to take time. Dual core and a nice 2Gb of RAM would ensure that you could encode and play games/surf/etc with little or no slow down on those other activities.
February 4, 2006 4:15:46 PM

are u using slo ass dvds???
February 4, 2006 4:34:22 PM

no, i'm using them at 8x speed
February 4, 2006 5:37:06 PM

Check and see in Device Manager to see if your DVD drive is running in PIO(SLOW) instead of Ultra DMA 2 or something like that... that could be a possible cause.

My Computer(right-click)/Properties/Hardware(tab)/Device Manager/Expand-IDE ATA/ATAPI Controllers/Select the Channel that your DVD drive is installed on (CD and DVD rom drives are typically Secondary) and show properties for it, somewhere in one of the tabs... it will show the transfer mode(s).

If its PIO then you could uninstall the controller and restart the comp, windows should reinstall everything automatically setting it in Ultra DMA
February 4, 2006 7:27:47 PM

nope, it is not in pio...I guess it is just my hardware. :( 
February 4, 2006 7:37:33 PM

If you have a resident program like Antivirus, spyware. You may wont to try to disable them. Disconnect from the outside world first. I have seen Norton try to filter everything, thinks the activity is a worm.
February 4, 2006 8:14:39 PM

dude, what are you talking about? This has nothing with antivirus programs blocking burn speed...I mean it works, it is justr slow
February 4, 2006 8:30:33 PM

When I used Ulead DVD studio, I had to convert whatever file into an ISO image or the VOB folders etc etc. At about the 47% mark, I could here my HDDs go nutz and start going to town. I guess I had ran out of memory and i was switching to virtual memory or something. This would go on for about 18 minutes non-stop. Does this happen to you? Other than that, I would say it just takes a long time to encode video. The more compression, the more time it takes. But you should be converting at a little over real time with your CPU (a 2ghz athlon XP does Divx encoding at real time) Other than that I would also say you might want to swtich programs. ATI has a tweaked out encoder that is about twice as fast as the Nero version it is based off of (no comment on quality though) Also, you made need a new codec or something. For instance, newer Divx codecs in the past have imprved the performance of Dr Divx alot.
February 4, 2006 9:01:34 PM

You have an AMD processor... That´s a big problem.

Buy an Intel with HT, then you´ll see performance changes. Maybe not if you play games, but with a lot of apps running...
February 4, 2006 9:10:16 PM

Ding Ding Ding Ding, We have a winner! :mrgreen:
February 4, 2006 9:26:59 PM

More Like DUMB DUMB DUMB, hyper threading slows your pc down like a bitch if you are runnng high memory programs.
February 4, 2006 9:53:40 PM

Quote:
More Like DUMB DUMB DUMB, hyper threading slows your pc down like a bitch if you are runnng high memory programs.


More like you are talking out of your ASS?!?

All shitty answers in this thread. Not that the question is much better when we have to use pliers to get some details that should be in his post.

@crizazykid2:

You have to clarify your claims if you want help:

Is the burning slow like -- you start burning process, the DVD light goes on and it burns slower than it should? For 8x DVD speed approx. 7min burning time is normal. If it takes more than that, then probably DVD or the application doesn't recognize the media as being writtable at 8x speed. Test with another burning application like Nero. If it is the same and your DMA and cabling is properly configured, then the DVD drive is shitty -- get NEC ND4550A for $40 and it will fly.

If you are doing video conversion/compression and if that part takes too much time -- well, you should have bought Intel CPU with at least Hyper-Threading or any dual-core solution which start as low as 240$. I have Pentium D 930 and it compresses 720x576 into DivX using latest codec at the average of 60 FPS meaning that the 3hr 12min movie takes 1hr 20min to compress and I can still use my computer for other tasks.

It can also be the software -- try to find some alternative applications that do the same things you need so you can compare the speed.

Hopefully your PC is not loaded with spyware, trojans, etc? Several of those can bring even the strongest machine down to Pentium 166.

Btw, Xpress 200 -- is that an ATI chipset with integrated graphics? If you opted for such a low end chipset, tell me honestly what kind of performance were you expecting?
February 4, 2006 10:06:17 PM

You are talking about authorized a dvd, that is slow. Antivirus and spyware programs eatup a lot for ram and resources. Especially if it is made by symantic. All I am suggesting is to disable them and see if there is an improvement. You are running on a min amount of ram. Should be at least 1gig.

If you are going to blow off on people trying to help you. Pull the plug, and keep running at a snail pace.
February 4, 2006 10:18:25 PM

Quote:
When I used Ulead DVD studio, I had to convert whatever file into an ISO image or the VOB folders etc etc. At about the 47% mark, I could here my HDDs go nutz and start going to town. I guess I had ran out of memory and i was switching to virtual memory or something. This would go on for about 18 minutes non-stop. Does this happen to you?
No, thankfully I don't have that issue.
February 4, 2006 10:19:56 PM

Quote:
You have an AMD processor... That´s a big problem.

Buy an Intel with HT, then you´ll see performance changes. Maybe not if you play games, but with a lot of apps running...
I've already said in this forum that I'm not getting a new processor for this computer.
February 4, 2006 10:24:14 PM

Quote:

@crizazykid2:

You have to clarify your claims if you want help:

Is the burning slow like -- you start burning process, the DVD light goes on and it burns slower than it should? For 8x DVD speed approx. 7min burning time is normal. If it takes more than that, then probably DVD or the application doesn't recognize the media as being writtable at 8x speed. Test with another burning application like Nero. If it is the same and your DMA and cabling is properly configured, then the DVD drive is shitty -- get NEC ND4550A for $40 and it will fly.

If you are doing video conversion/compression and if that part takes too much time -- well, you should have bought Intel CPU with at least Hyper-Threading or any dual-core solution which start as low as 240$. I have Pentium D 930 and it compresses 720x576 into DivX using latest codec at the average of 60 FPS meaning that the 3hr 12min movie takes 1hr 20min to compress and I can still use my computer for other tasks.

It can also be the software -- try to find some alternative applications that do the same things you need so you can compare the speed.

Hopefully your PC is not loaded with spyware, trojans, etc? Several of those can bring even the strongest machine down to Pentium 166.

Btw, Xpress 200 -- is that an ATI chipset with integrated graphics? If you opted for such a low end chipset, tell me honestly what kind of performance were you expecting?
the problem is converting not the actual burning...no spyware is not the issue...what other programs (for cheap) can I use...I did not know xpress 200 was bad at the time of purchase.
February 4, 2006 10:27:17 PM

Quote:
You are talking about authorized a dvd, that is slow. Antivirus and spyware programs eatup a lot for ram and resources. Especially if it is made by symantic. All I am suggesting is to disable them and see if there is an improvement. You are running on a min amount of ram. Should be at least 1gig.

If you are going to blow off on people trying to help you. Pull the plug, and keep running at a snail pace.
sorry, just didn't not know what you were talking about...I thought it was some random comment. But, don't really want to disable protection. I have had problems in the past.
February 5, 2006 12:20:59 AM

Stick with your hyper threading turned on, you lose performance, I however don't.
February 5, 2006 1:03:58 AM

Quote:
Stick with your hyper threading turned on, you lose performance, I however don't.


Cut the BS.

Hyperthreading on the desktop with modern apps does not affect performance negatively.

I have used Hyperthreading enabled CPU for more than 2 (yes that's two!) years and I never experienced performance decrease because of it, nor I ever had to disable it and I worked with video a lot.

That means I am talking based on my own experience and you are spreading FUD so stop it. If the AMD was that good for video processing he would never come here to ask for advice in the first place wouldn't he? Btw, I am not suggesting him that he should go out and buy a new CPU. I am merely informing him.

Quote:
the problem is converting not the actual burning...no spyware is not the issue...what other programs (for cheap) can I use...I did not know xpress 200 was bad at the time of purchase.


xpress 200 isn't that terribly bad but it is considered somewhat low end solution and frankly I am surprised at how many reviewers and journalists said so many good things about it. You should have opted for nForce 4 chipset if your choice was AMD.

I am really not sure what other programs would fit you but I can suggest you to visit www.doom9.net as a starting point in your hunt for better video processing software. Check Guides and Download section there.

Be sure to check whether your CPU and RAM work at their rated speed, you can check that in BIOS or using say CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php) although it can sometimes report multipliers incorrectly for AMD CPUs.
February 5, 2006 8:59:04 AM

Benchmark it in 3dmark2005 with hyper threading on and then with it off.
February 5, 2006 12:57:36 PM

Quote:
Benchmark it in 3dmark2005 with hyper threading on and then with it off.


That is completely irrelevant for me. 3dmark2005 is just a benchmark and I am talking about real life usage.

If you insist so much check this first:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/quake_4_dual-core_p...

Note that Hyper-Threading improves performance. There is also a patch for CoD 2. And if you use archivers, you can use 7zip which has multithreading optimizations and works faster even with Hyper-Threading not to mention dual-core. And DivX encoding is optimized too and it works faster with either Hyper-Threading or dual-core.

For every synthetic example you give where it can hurt, I can give you one real-life scenario where it helps. Now what?
February 5, 2006 4:04:46 PM

Try battlefront 2 or something NOT using a product of id. When your cache fills up hyperthreading slows your computer down. 3d mark runs slower, not because it is synthetic but because it is very complex and pushes your computer in all areas, so more cache is used to fetch possible instructions the second you run anything that is really high performance you will lose out by using ht. If it can go wrong it will go wrong and with ht i does.
February 5, 2006 5:31:11 PM

yall are getting kinda off subject...
February 5, 2006 7:23:42 PM

Sorry for the offtopic folks, but someone insists on it...

Quote:
Try battlefront 2 or something NOT using a product of id. When your cache fills up hyperthreading slows your computer down. 3d mark runs slower, not because it is synthetic but because it is very complex and pushes your computer in all areas, so more cache is used to fetch possible instructions the second you run anything that is really high performance you will lose out by using ht. If it can go wrong it will go wrong and with ht i does.


I haven't tried Battlefront 2, I have PLAYED IT WHILE ENCODING MPEG2 VIDEO TO DIVX on HTT CPU and it was smooth while encoding was still working at impressive 20FPS as opposed to 35FPS on average when it was doing only that. I dare you to try that on AMD. Filling 2MB of L2 is not that easy anyway and Athlons get away with only 512KB. I am a developer so you should trust me on that one.
February 6, 2006 5:42:07 AM

Then your pc obviously cost more than the sun so congrats on that, run ONE memory intensive app and you will see, you are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay
too much of a fanboy to ever be converted.
February 6, 2006 6:40:58 AM

Quote:
You have an AMD processor... That´s a big problem.

Buy an Intel with HT, then you´ll see performance changes. Maybe not if you play games, but with a lot of apps running...


i somewhat agree[/i]
February 6, 2006 11:19:08 AM

But should I believe you, just look at your avatar...lol.
February 6, 2006 12:03:00 PM

I don't know long it actually takes to burn/convert a DVD myself... but based on benchmarks, I can assume it would take a long time... even if its CD-video.

Yes Pentium's tend to peform better in audio/video encoding, and if its HTT enabled, you would be able to actually do something other than sit there and watch it convert(the long process).

The A64-3500 and the ATI chipset is fine as it is, but while you're burning/converting a DVD and trying to multitask at the same time, the multiple processes will tend to fight over cpu time thus reducing overall cpu efficiency in both programs.

Just ignore Rabitpeanut and he BS that comes out of his mouth...*muzzles Rabidpeanut*
February 6, 2006 12:16:02 PM

yeah he does not seem to know what he is saying!
February 7, 2006 10:23:06 AM

You lot obviously own pentiums. Look turn hyper threading off and then run 3d mark your score will imrove, this shows that hyper threading does not work, IOW your pc is not going to be a good performer for very long... Figure it out yourself. OH. WAIT. You bought an intel when a AMD is currently cheaper and faster. Now that is just :cry:  . How very clever of you. I don't need you to believe me, you are set in your ways and are unlikely to change, why do you think MAC and intel get along so well. Expensive, useless... Yup, that sums it all up. You have a feature that has the potential to sseed your pc up, but the second that there is too much work it will anchor it, face it: hyper threading as a double edged sword, with the bad edge considerably sharper than the good one.
February 7, 2006 10:59:03 AM

Quote:
You lot obviously own pentiums. Look turn hyper threading off and then run 3d mark your score will imrove, this shows that hyper threading does not work, IOW your pc is not going to be a good performer for very long... Figure it out yourself. OH. WAIT. You bought an intel when a AMD is currently cheaper and faster. Now that is just :cry:  . How very clever of you. I don't need you to believe me, you are set in your ways and are unlikely to change, why do you think MAC and intel get along so well. Expensive, useless... Yup, that sums it all up. You have a feature that has the potential to sseed your pc up, but the second that there is too much work it will anchor it, face it: hyper threading as a double edged sword, with the bad edge considerably sharper than the good one.
Wrong! I have a AMD athlon 64, but it makes no sense to me how a company could sell their product with hyperthreading and charge more if it actually didn't work!
February 7, 2006 11:09:42 AM

3dmark is not optimized for Hyperthreading, programs that are work so much more efficient compared to those that are not. At the same time, as said before Hyperthreading makes multitasking more efficient by preventing programs from fighting over CPU time... do some background research before you start talking....
February 7, 2006 1:09:57 PM

This forum is notorious for getting off-topic and just plain dumb answers.

More memory will help your system, but not as much as a faster processor would. Video processing takes a lot of RAM because you are dealing with large files here, and you don't want to use the hard drive's swap file if you can avoid it. Faster CPU will always help video encoding since that is tied to raw clock speed (sorry AMD, but good for Intel owners.)
February 8, 2006 9:37:47 PM

Grow a brain before you do.
February 9, 2006 1:17:07 AM

Think about what you say before you start bringing up any more stupid comments.. oops you already did ...

Maybe if you stopped eating those rabid peanuts you'd be fine...
February 9, 2006 2:17:22 AM

Quote:
This forum is notorious for getting off-topic and just plain dumb answers.

More memory will help your system, but not as much as a faster processor would. Video processing takes a lot of RAM because you are dealing with large files here, and you don't want to use the hard drive's swap file if you can avoid it. Faster CPU will always help video encoding since that is tied to raw clock speed (sorry AMD, but good for Intel owners.)


memory is not going to do much for this situation. This guy hasn't been forthcoming in what he is trying to do.

Half the posters thinks he is having problems burning a disk and half the posters thinks he is having a problem encoding the video.

He hasn't said what software he is using to complete the encode. A processor is a processor is a processor. While Intel maybe a bit better than Amd during the encoding process it's not by much.

The biggest problem Amd has in this category is that "alot" of their chipsets exhibit pci bandwidth limitations. Typically any Via chipset and all nforce chipsets suffer this problem. You might get away with it on Nforce4 chipset.

However if all you are doing is encoding this is nothing that fancy because your really not moving much data--- just crunching it alot, but the software you use to do the encoding can make all the difference.

If you are using freebie software well you get what you pay for in this area. There was a good cheap encoder along time ago like over 5yrs ago called TMPG it's probably evovled into something else by now. It was very cheap back 5yrs ago and I would suspect it would be reasonable today.

But when you encode video using software only method, meaning no hardware acceleration it will take a long time. This could be as much as 10X realtime or longer depending on how many passes you use to encode.

10X real time means that if the video is 30min long it will take 300min to encode it. This is just and example as it could be worse or better depending on your computer and how many passes the encode is doing.

The more passes the better the quality will be when it finishes. If you get tired of waiting for encodes to finish then spend some money on a hardware accerated card or usb device there are many on the market and even in this realm you get what you pay for.

Additionally some solutions may require you to use specific chipsets as some computer systems will not do video and will just stutter lock up etc.

So when you try to do video on the computer you must use the best of the best, lately Intel has typically been better in this area because they are big enough to make chipsets as well as processors.

Where as Amd passes the chipset task off to third party developers, so because of this certain mobo makers aren't very good at handling video over the pci bus. The worst is Via then Nforce in that order. So the options for Amd in this area are pretty much non-existent. There is nothing wrong with the processor!

Video is one of the most intensive things you can do on the computer, so any weakness you have in your system will be exploited 100 fold and the world will come crashing down to a screeching halt.
!