Finally started using Rebuilder/CCE was it worth it?

Ok then boys and girls, now i have a quick question (and since you all seem to be watching this thread like hawks, it seemed an ideal place to ask *.
I know this combo is worth it quality wise, but can take a while to do it's thing on some systems, so my question is, since i'm always short on time, will it worth investing in this combo right now, considering i have an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ and two gigs of RAM, or might i want to upgrade to an even better CPU and three gigs of RAM first ?

 

Unless you have Vista or a ridiculous amount of background programming, 2GB of RAM should be more than enough. R.A.I.D. 0 and a Core 2 Duo would speed things up. However, the system you have is adequate for doing the job. It's probably faster and has more resources than a lot being used. You're able to multitask, so Rebuilder can be used while doing other things. You can plan batch jobs to be done while not regualarly using the PC. That way there's no interference for you or the PC.

 

Background programming yes, Vista.... Well, not unless i'm forced to install it at gunpoint ;-)
I have to ask though, why RAID0 ? (using a secondary system with RAID0 as a storage server, so interested in the why's and whatfor's)
And of course, thanks for the fast reply *almost forgot common courtesy here, god i need to stop working this much ;-) *

 

I've got an XP system with internet security and a lot of processes running in the background and with encoding I rarely go over 1GB. Use your taskmanager to see what you're using. With 2GB I doubt your needing extra, but if you do the taskmanager will show it.

RAID 0 is striping and is fast, but doesn't back up data. RAID 1 is mirroring (does a backup ). Some businesses use RAID 1 for data storage so no data will be lost. If a drive goes down, another can be installed to replace it with the data backed up on a system drive. Rarely do you see 2 drives go down at the same time. For speed and safety a RAID 1+0 works good. I wouldn't suggest using a RAID 0 setup for any mission critical programing or data storage. Due to the speed of striping RAID 0 handles data faster which makes it handy for processing video files.

 

Ok, let me rephrase the question, seems you might have misinterpreted *and possibly mistaken me for someone who knows little about computers* :
I am fully aware of how RAID works, i am already running a RAID0 data server *two sets of RAID0, one serving as backup*, i'm wondering why you would say it would be more efficient,
because from my understanding, the SATA II drives i use already enable me to get top performance out of the system in their normal state.

As for 2GB's of RAM being enough, you'd be surprised at the amounts of software i use all at once, if i tell you i use 3 screens to multi task, would that clarify matters a bit ;-) ?

 

Indeed, different terminology seems to be the issue, i tend to overexplain things the wrong way it seems.
And indeed, after a quick google i realised that this might indeed speed things up even more.

As for RAM usage, right now i'm at about 1700 MB usage *fluctuates a bit, as i'm using Gordian Knot ATM*, i'd estimate in "normal" daily use i use about 1500 MB's *i should mention at this point i also use a lot of widgets, and some other things to make things look nicer than they are*

 

Looks like you answered your own questions.

 

Look what I've gone and started! lol

 

It's an old discussion. Had you used the search function and done some reading, you could have read it elsewhere. Some people don't pay attention to things like mosquito noise, pixelation, and loss of clarity, others do.

 

Ah, i guess i did answer my own question in a way...
D@mn i'm good

@Vurbal : but isn't that part of the fun of this, being able to tell subtle differences between encodes, just so you can brag to your friends that your choice of software is "the best" ? ;-)

 

which passes did you use for these? thats damn nice encoding time though

 

mord,

for folders under 6.8gb I use 2 passes. for folders 6.8gb+ I use 3 passes.

 

I'm the proverbial couch potatoe. I hate to move to make the setting change, so I leave it at 3 for everything. Actually it's a comfort thing. If there is additional improvement it would probably be for heavier compression. Since it's no race and I'm not sure when that extra pass might help, I leave the setting at 3.

 

There is no program that'll make an indistinguishable backup using 50% compression. The program doesn't exist and likely never will. You can do 100 passes with dvd-rb and whatever encoder you want and it'll still look crappy. So if you use 40% or less and compare it with shrink or recode the differences are very slight on a tv. people posting screenshots from their pc comparing the two. on an analog tv, which most people still have, you will barely see a difference. i have a core 2 duo 6600 processor too so I went ahead and made two backups yesterday. I used almost 50% compression and made one with dvd-rb/cce 3 passes and one with dvd shrink deep analysis and max smoothness enhancement. both looked crappy on a 27 inch sanyo. i'd love to know the secret matrices to making a backup with this much compression look good on a 52 inch tv. it's a flat out lie or you can't see clearly.

 

maxxjulie,

I in no way disrespected you in my previous post. for you to disrespect me the way you did in your last post is highly uncalled for. I don't appreciate being called a lier.

I don't know what you are doing wrong or different but I can honestly say that I have made several backups with 50% compression using RB/CCE 3 passes and there was very little video quality loss. I don't just make things up or lie.

There is no way in hell that dvd shrink even with deep analysis and max smooth can compete with RB/CCE on folders requiring 30% compression or more.

I make backups with RB/CCE with 40% compression or more all the time and they look good on my 52" hdtv. they wouldn't with shrink.

maybe you better figure out what you are doing wrong or learn how to use the software before you spout off anymore!!!!!!

please, by all means go ahead and use dvd shrink. your loss not mine. being member status I would have thought you would have learned some things by now. obviously not. go crawl back into the hole you crawled out of.

 

maxxjulie
Mort81 is right, no need to get disrespectful. Mort is right, few who have used DVD RB properly will agree with you. I do backups at high compression levels using RB Pro with CCE SP and get very good results. Here's a short list of backups I recently did along with the compression ratios. They all came out high quality, viewable on a 56" screen HDTV.
Casino Royale, 53.8%
The Holiday, 52.7%
Anchorman, 50.9%
Stranger Than Fiction, 53.4%
Thank You for Smoking, 51.2%

 

I rescently backed up a 6 disc set of 24 season 4 onto 3 DL dvd's using dvdremake to combine discs 1 & 2, 3 & 4, and 5 & 6. I then encoded with DVD-RB Pro/CCE SP in DL mode. the reduction level was about 51.7% per DL dvd. The video quality was better than if I was watching it on fox (excluding fox hdtv).

I haven't done any backups to a dvd5 with a reduction level near 50% lately but here are some I have done and the video quality is excellent. title, reduction level, and folder size after editing with dvd remake, prior to encoding.

A Good Year: 65% 6.60gb
Jet Li's Fearless: 68.3% 6.42gb
The Prestige: 66% 6.96gb
Man of the Year: 62.8% 7.18gb
Casino Royale: 67.8% 6.72gb
Stranger Than Fiction: 59.1% 7.01gb
Borat: 65.5% 6.67gb
Flags of our Fathers: 64.2% 6.73gb