1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is Shrink too slow?

Discussion in 'DVD Shrink forum' started by sean5775, Jan 5, 2005.

  1. mdinap

    mdinap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    sean5775 - did you completely move the drives or did you jsut change the pin in the back from master to slave and slave to master?
    If you could reply back on whether you changed the drive locations and switched the master to slave - or jsut moved the drives or jsut changed the master to slave?
    I think that might be my problem as well - and i will try it and reply back - if it works on mine too i think the problem has been solved
     
  2. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Your CPU score is normal as you said. The multimedia is 65% of what mine was. That is a little low, but is acceptable. It is a measure of how well your system can handle typical multi media, like watching video, extracting video, playing sounds etc. Even if yours was 50% it shouldn't take you more than twice as long as me in those areas. So this is one indication, but sounds like an effect of another problem pulling the score down a little. Your Drive index seems to be fine. Your memory bandwidth at 1766MB/s is roughly 1/3rd of mine at 4770. Considering I got my ram around Jan 2003 and it wasn't the best ram, the 1766 does seem abnormally low. Or unusually low at best. I also have a 2.1Ghz system that is that scores 2500MB/s. So I am trying to think of how this can be fixed... Just for a mini explanation, When you pull video off your dvd, all that data must go through all components. Before it stores on your hard drive, it is processed by your cpu, the shrink program using the cpu, the data bus to carry the data where it needs to go. Roughly, data goes from your burner down the data bus, through the cpu, through memory and finally down the IDE bus to your drive. If any one of those are slow, you end up waiting for the slowest one, or weakest link for the most part.

    Slower memory can pull some other scores down. Because shrink runs and pulls video through memory, it will also be slowed down as tries to do compression operations in memory. Usually when I see a nice new system like yours that has a slowdown, I usually figure it will be the HD. But it doesn't appear to be that. Last year a friends new computer was slow as cow on valium, but the specs looked great. I tested the drive and it was so bad I told him to throw it out. Got it a new Western Digital and added a little ram and all was good. But again, your 28MB/s seems normal. That's over a GB a minute.

    Your memory score could also be affected by the memory bus speed your system has. Great memory on a slow memory bus will also run slow. I don't know what kind of system you have, but my memory bus is 800mhz (the newest is over 1000 now). My memory is speed 400mhz, they label it PC3200 just to confuse things, lol. Sometimes computers or motherboard makers will list this speed as Front Side Bus, or FSB in ads on the internet. If your computer is fast but has a slower bus, most things will run fast, up until you try to transfer large files like videos. So I'm not saying your computer is slow, but most systems have a weakness, and large data tranfer may be the case here.

    So while your memory responds a bit slow, I don't want to jump to a conclusion too quickly. It is still possible that there is a conflict or other strange problem in your system. Then maybe you can improve things enough to matter. Still it would be good to know what your memory and front side bus speeds are. In Sandra if you look under Infomation modules you will see an icon that reads, MainBoard information. If you do that we can see it. After it completes press page down 3 times and you will see something like the partial list I put at the end. You can get it in to text with control C, or by pressing the copy to cliboard icon at the bottom of the window. Then if you paste it here, I can tell you if I see anything worth mentioning.

    Even with memory speeds at 1/3rd of mine, there may be more to this. Could your dvd drive be somehow slow at reading? You get 4200 KB/s avg which doesn't sound too bad. I get 8300KB/s near the end of my read. You got 150 frames per second, I got 299 to 300. If we 1/2'd my speed, I should take 30 minutes to decode, recompress to HD. So the hope is it's not your bus or ram. Being that your system is June 2004, there is hope that something else is causing the low mem speeds. Still the tests point at that. I am definately giving it more thought.

    The other suggestions here about drive master and slave, are also important, including DMA settings. If anything is wrong, it could cause a slow down. Your system probably has 2 IDE ports and cables. Each cable supports 2 drives for a total of 4. If you want to know how windows sees your drive hook up, go to start, right click on My computer, then select properties, Click Hardware, then Device manager. You will see your hard drive and burner. Click the "+" symbol to the left to see the drive. Right click and select properties. You will see "Location: Location 0 (0)" if your hard drive is the master device on the IDE cable. Location 1 (1) indicates slaved for a drive. If your burner is 1 (1) it means it's slaved to your hard drive. IF it is also 0 (0), then your burner is on the 2nd IDE port cable which is how I have mine set up. To answer your previous question, yes, switching drives around can improve things. It's usually faster to give each drive it's own cable and port. From what I read, I think you did this already. It's best to have the master hard drive be on it's own cable.

    This is important: Is that drive connected to the connector on the end of the ribbon cable?! If it's the only drive, it should be and the same goes for the burner on it's cable if it's seperate. DDP mentions 40 and 80 wire cable. I am surprised you have 40 wire. UDMA 100+ speeds should be with an 80 wire. But you get 28MB/sec in Sandra which isn't bad. HMmm. It could be a factor.

    Again, I'd be curious to see what your FSB and memory speeds are rated for in sandra. Well, at least we see the result. I get the feeling it's memory and bus slowness and some other little things going on. I'll let you know if I think of something else.



    Here is a cut out from mine:
    Chipset 1
    Model : ASUSTeK Computer Inc 82875P,E7210 Memory Controller Hub
    Bus(es) : ISA AGP PCI IMB USB FireWire/1394 i2c/SMBus
    Front Side Bus Speed : 4x 200MHz (800MHz data rate)
    Maximum FSB Speed / Max Memory Speed : 4x 200MHz / 2x 200MHz
    Width : 64-bit
    HTT - Hyper-Threading Technology : Yes
    IO Queue Depth : 12 request(s)

    Chipset 1 Hub Interface
    Type : Hub-Interface
    Version : 1.50
    Number of Ports : 3
    Width : 8-bit
    Full Duplex : Yes
    Multiplier : 1/1x

    Logical/Chipset 1 Memory Banks
    Bank 0 : 512MB DDR-SDRAM 2.5-3-3-6CL 1CMD
    Bank 1 : 512MB DDR-SDRAM 2.5-3-3-6CL 1CMD
    Channels : 2
    Speed : 2x 200MHz (400MHz data rate)
    Multiplier : 1/1x
    Width : 64-bit
    Refresh Rate : 7.80µs
    Performance Acceleration Technology : Yes
    Power Save Mode : No
    Fixed Hole Present : No
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2005
  3. mdinap

    mdinap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    sean5775 - one more thing, so your total time to completely burn a cd with menus and everything takes you now about 30 minutes for the whole process?
     
  4. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    mdinap just mentioned the improvement I didn't see before. I skimmed and didn't read the part about you changing your drive hook up and having IT WORK. Well at least to that extent. I somehow understood that didn't work and then was wondering about how good (or not) your drive was. Then we spotted the memory issue. I skimmed too fast and there were cross posts with 2 computers here, LOL. That's also why I started writing about it near the end above. cyberia said it before I started questionting it and I missed it, but changing your drive hook up solved it.

    The odd thing is that your mem speed is a little slow, but not so slow that is should have been taking the time you mentioned before. It's everything put together. The drive hook up was the main thing. So you don't need to bother with posting the Sanrda stuff. I'm glad you got it resolved. Now you can breathe easier knowing your system is really ok. :)
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2005
  5. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Well since I was last here Theres a ton of questions LOL

    First I switched the position of both drives, basically this was something that worked better for me having the DVD burner on top of the DVD ROM nothing other than being more convenient for me to have it set up that way. Last time I had it apart I put them back in wrong. I also switched the DVD burner from the middle of the IDE cable to the END and the DVD ROM from the END to the Middle. They are both on the same cable. I have just the hard drive on its own cable.

    I am going to be purchasing an 80 wire IDE cable soon, Will that possibly improve things?

    Here is the list you requested from SANDRA I didnt see that you didnt need it anymore but since I have it I might as well post it. I only posted the part that you had posted in your post, if you need more I can post that too.

    Chipset 1
    Model : ASUSTeK Computer Inc 82845G/GL/GV Brookdale Host-Hub Interface Bridge (A1-step)
    Bus(es) : PCI IMB USB FireWire/1394 i2c/SMBus
    Front Side Bus Speed : 4x 100MHz (400MHz data rate)
    Maximum FSB Speed / Max Memory Speed : 4x 133MHz / 2x 166MHz
    Width : 64-bit
    IO Queue Depth : 8 request(s)

    Chipset 1 Hub Interface
    Type : Hub-Interface
    Version : 1.50
    Number of Ports : 1
    Width : 8-bit
    Full Duplex : Yes
    Multiplier : 1/1x

    Logical/Chipset 1 Memory Banks
    Bank 0 : 256MB DDR-SDRAM 2.0-3-3-6CL 1CMD
    Bank 2 : 256MB DDR-SDRAM 2.0-3-3-6CL 1CMD
    Shared Memory : 1MB
    Speed : 2x 133MHz (266MHz data rate)
    Multiplier : 4/3x
    Width : 64-bit
    Refresh Rate : 15.60µs
    Power Save Mode : No
    Fixed Hole Present : No

     
  6. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    I also realized from those results that I only have 512MB of RAM now as opposed to the 1 GB I had at one time. I moved it to my other computer which seemed to need it more badly at the time. I will be expanding that soon as well, It says in Sandra that I can expand to 2GB which I didnt think I could because there isnt enough space, at least I didnt think there was. Will have to check into that. I was always under the impression that the max for my setup was 1 GB

    Someone asked about my time to backup a full DVD, well thats now at about 45-50 minutes, thats from the time I put the Original in to the time the backup is complete, at least for the one I did my test on. Exact same one that I did 3 times in the last couple of days taking about 3 hours and 10 minutes each time. So simply by switching my drives around it now takes less then 1/3 the time It used to. Thats amazing as far as im concerned. I was so amazed that I had to try one of my longest DVD's and that was complete today in under 1 hour, this is one that took me nearly 4 hours to do originally.

    Bluelaser - You really seem to know your stuff and I appreciate that. If you see anything in the info I gave you that could be upgraded to improve anything let me know, some of my components are a little old and could use upgrading, especially the RAM, thats the oldest part of this computer. I am also looking at a new motherboard as well since this one doesnt have enough PCI slots for what I need hooked up to it, came from an older computer as well as the RAM when I built this one.

    Also I am now getting around 6800 KB/s instead of the I believe 4200 it was before
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2005
  7. mdinap

    mdinap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    I did exactly what Sean5775 did, I switched them around and now i am getting 46 seconds to open a disc, 30 minutes to encode, and 22 minutes to decrypt. Giving me a total time of 53 minutes. This is a significant improvment the 2 and a half hours it used to take.

    Sean5775 - i was wondering if you ight be able to help me out in trying to see why i cant get my numbers as good as yours. I would like to be in the ball park that you are in right now. Also that time i listed before is without AEC and without the deep processing. So i still feel like i am a little bit far behind. Any suggestions or things for me to check please let me know - and of course other members as well.
     
  8. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Yes, it's one of the wierd things about IDE. I've seen cd rom drives slow HD's down while on the same cable. I've seen some drives that will only work as slave even though that's not supposed to happen that way. In some cases one drive can cause another to on the same cable to be slower. As for 80wire, usually that is for the hard drives because 40 wire limits you to 33MB/s or ATA-33 hard drive speeds and the hard drives need to be ATA100 or faster. So you could save money if it's not for the HD. I have 40wire and can make a DVD in just under 6 mins at 16X.

    1GB of ram is nicer but your 512MB of ram is just about right. 1GB won't give you a noticable better burn time. If your board supports dual channel memory, you will get an improvement by always having 2 memory sticks instead of 1 big one. 1 for each channel.

    It looks like either your bus or memory is at 266 and before I forget to mention, thanks for the compliment! If you want a new board then I would wait and spend the money on a great board and ram to go with it rather than pour more money into what you have. I noticed your board is an Asus. I like that brand. I could recommend my own board to start with then you could look at their newer versions that are more powerful if available.. and of course other brands too.
    http://www.asus.com/products/mb/socket478/p4c800-e_d/overview.htm .. It's a nice board, has 5 PCI slots plus the AGP.. But it has a lot more good features. If you don't need all those things on your board, then Asus has lower cost ones.

    The 45min turn around time sounds much better! It's amazing what the drive switch did :). It's not a bad time to backup a video, but you're asking about ways to make it better. So you need to find the next slow bottleneck or combo of small ones. Next most likely is the bus and ram situation since your cpu is plenty fast. (if I'm talking about the right board).. I'm not sure of your burners read speed but it's probably good since it's new. But let's use the sony for an example (since I don't know your drive). It can read a dvd in 12 to 15mins in shrink IF the computer can handle it. I also tried the Sony on a 2.1ghz with 1GB of ram that's about the speed of yours and it took about 12 mins longer to read/compress with the same drive. So the computer/bus/ram can and does shave minutes off.

    If your new burner reads as fast as mine does, then the same thing would happen. But if your burner is ALSO slower at reading, then maybe it is also a factor that can be added. If you add it all up, you could lose almost 20 minutes in processing. If your burner is as fast as mine at reading, then 20 minutes is being lost to just your system somehow.

    So it could be either. But I'm not so sure it's your new burner and lean towards your system. I checked your bus and it's 400mhz.. The Asus I use is 800mhz. Not to imply you get a computer double the speed, but its another place that it helps boost speed. To be fully sure about your new burner, it would need to be tested on a faster computer... Or the specs could be looked up. I do see you mention 6800 Kb/s, and that seems pretty good. Also your 6800 might become 8300 on my system, but I could never know without testing the max out point and that's why it's hard to pinpoint.

    It's hard to tie the numbers down perfectly, but you can see the results I am getting. You can always experiment a little with new parts (if you can return them). Also you say you now get 6800 Kb/s during read and re-encode (shrink etc). I'm not sure how fast yours gets up to speed, but it's not far off from my 8300 Kb/s now. Yet there is a difference in backup times between yours and mine. I back up a full/large Dvd (from movie in to finished DVD) in 22 minutes (16X +R), or 26 total minutes if I use an 8X -R. Many movies are about 5 minutes less.. It usually takes about 12 to 17 mins to read movies and get it on the hard drive. Then either 5.5(+R 16X) or 9.5(-R 8X) minutes to write them back out. So again, a majority of it probably points to the low memory score you got in Sandra.

    One more idea! Have you tried having just your burner and the one hard drive hooked up without the dvd-ram? Just in case the other one is slowing it some?

    In my opinion 45 mins is not too bad, but if you want better you'll have to make changes. And unfortunately you might need slight improvements in several areas at once to save 10 mins here and 10 there. That could mean changing lots of stuff. But take it one step at a time and see what you find. By the way what speed are you burning at? And are they -R or +R? HEY, at least you are not burning in 3 hours now! LOL. Hope this helps.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2005
  9. mdinap

    mdinap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    I am using a lite on 12x burner, and i am using the -R disc's because i was under the assumption that they are more likey to work in all DVD players because they were the original formatt. That the +R might not work in some DVD players?
     
  10. stonecld

    stonecld Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    I think Clone Dvd 2 with any Dvd is faster and quality is good too 30 minutes with Clone Dvd 2 and about 40 with shrink
     
  11. mdinap

    mdinap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    BlueLazer - RAM is also a big part of this right? im still working with a 256 and i have to admit i do alot with this computer and there is alot on it as well. Ive been meaning to upgreade to a 512 soon. I think that might solve the problem too dont you think? Would you sa that might speed it up a bit?
     
  12. ddp

    ddp Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Messages:
    39,164
    Likes Received:
    93
    Trophy Points:
    128
    yes
     
  13. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Hi mdinap. In short, you have 256MB, so yes it should help speed things up to get more. It's not that more ram makes it faster period. It's that if ram is so low that windows + programs (shrink etc) are starved for ram, then they mostly use hard drive which is slower. If you burned a DVD slow enough, then it would not matter. But having more ram could push your burn rate up to the next level (if available). Of course having tons of ram won't help more. Windows run's smother with more ram, but once you get past the amount you need, adding more and more won't make it better. So if you want to help your comptuer, get it 512MB, or 1GB, but you don't need more. My available ram of the 1000MB is about 700MB free. When I start shrinking a movie it falls to about 500MB sometimes. XP is odd. It will use ram differently depending on how much ram it has. Notice how my XP eats 300MB before I even start. Since you have 256 you will be left very little. Then it will sink near zero like crazy as you burn a DVD. If you give it 512 or more, it usually doesn't sink. My ram quit sinking, so that's how I know XP got what it needed. Do control+ALT+Del and see your performance tab to see your available to see what I mean. You can watch it as you burn or do other things. Mine says Available 701296 which is about 700MB.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2005
  14. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Bluelaser - Both my DVD drives read at 16X although they are both rated to read dual layer media at 8X which I believe most drives are and this is somthing that is overlooked by most. Although Im not sure how that works, like if it is the DVD originals that its reading or burnt dual layer media.

    I also only burn at 4X most of the time, as the quality of the burn is often noticably better. I am capable of burning +R at 12X or -R at 8X but I usually do not use +R media as they take alot longer to load on my standalone DVD players, sometimes they will not at all, on my main one, they work always on the others.


    I agree that my memory appears low, I compared with my other computer which is not near as good, has a 2.0 P4 processor, 512 RAM, and a really old board and lots of old components.
    I am in the market for some upgrades regardless, I could always swap out whats in this computer into the other one, I believe its all compatable.

    I can get one like you had the link to, I believe you said thats the one you had for $115 which seems to be a good price and definitly in my budget. I do have a question for you... theres choices in motherboards for socket 775, socket 478 etc. what does this mean? How do I know what one I need? I don't remember this stuff from the last time I bought one.

    I also got the 80 wire IDE cables, one for the hard drive, one for the disc drives, and one for the floppy (not that I ever use it) Got those from a friend new in package for $5, since he wasnt planning on using them. I will install those later, Although you say it wont make much difference, but it can't hurt.

    Also you mention that I should try my burner on a faster computer or look up the specs. well what specs am I looking for and where would I find this? Also maybe you might have meant that I should look up the specs on the DVD ROM, since thats where the disc is during anyalysing and encoding. Just so you know no matter what drive I put the original in, the speed and times are the same.

    The DVD ROM drive is not the newest, about 3 years old a Samsung SD 616F and the burner is LG GSA4120B which I bought in July I think and its seen alot of action in that time, but still works as good as the day I got it.

    I will give that idea of removing the DVD ROM a try tonight.
     
  15. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    mdinap- I can't suggest much except that alot of the stuff bluelaser and others have pointed out might apply to you. It is good to see that the drive swap helped you out. I will certainly post here if I get anything else to increase my speeds, but I can get some pretty good deals on motherboards and RAM and some other stuff right now so Im going to be upgrading whether it helps out with speed of DVD backups or not, I certainly can't operate with just the 3 PCI slots that I currantly have, I really need 5. I have a video card, sound card and a modem (for faxing) all of which I need and I have 4 USB slots and a bunch of USB hubs which I don't really like. I have right now 17 USB devices hooked up and running it through all those hubs.

    But with every change I am checking my times and speeds with the same disc as a test and will keep track of it and let you know if anything did much.
     
  16. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    sean5775, Ok, since your drive is rated at 16X, then that's mostly what I meant by the specs. I originally thought it was possible that your new drive might not have been as fast as listed. But I also read that many new drives are fast, so I don't wonder as much now. But if you want to measure you can. Nero 6 has a test program, and there is another free test program (the name evades me). Going back to what I said, If your 16X test reads slower than 16X then your computer isn't keeping up. One quirk, If you are shrinking then it will use more cpu and that could slow it some. But a watch to time it will work ;-). But that's all I meant by specs and checking.. Not that important if you are getting a better board at this point.

    I understand burning at 4X, makes sense. All my DVD's are currently -R for compatibility, but I burned a +R for fun because it was 16X. It won't play in my set top box, but is ok on the computer. But the 8X -R runs smooth as silk on the set top. I used to do 2X a month ago.

    I wanted to give advise but be careful not to steer you into spending money you don't have to. I know for a fact that TONS of ram running at 400mhz or more will help Shrink to work with the video better. The CPU is a part too. If your CPU is slower than mine, EVEN that will add minutes to backing up a movie since recompressing uses cpu. The 3.2Ghz Northwood version I have has strong floating point and that helps with re-compression. The combination of my bus with dual channel memory (even hyper threading helps a little) all together really makes windows respond fast. It's hard to know how much improvment you get with small upgrades, but if you get all good components, I think you will see a noticable difference.

    The board I listed I got for $145, but now I see it's $175. Sorry. I remember getting a deal for $145 at the time. Maybe a google search will locate a deal. It doesn't have to be that board though. Just make sure it has a super fast bus, with really good ram. It will help the cpu work better. I also get the impression you may want a faster system for more than movies. If so, you'll definately see a boost in windows.

    The socket type describes the type of cpu that will fit on the board. Most of it has to do with the number of pins etc (and how it works). It changes as cpu's and motherboards advance. I have socket 478. 775 is newer and has more and smaller pins. I double checked the 775 and it isn't any faster than 478, but it's advantage is that it will support the new PCI express graphics card standard. It's a small advantage in the graphics area, but has a disadvantage (read on). But, I listed my board as an example of something about twice as fast on the bus as yours. Mostly because I haven't googled and searched in a bit. But it hasn't improved much anyway. With that said, the board I just listed wouldn't work with 775. So you'd have to choose one or the other. You can't mix the two. The only disadvantage I saw was that the 1st new prescott cpu's were not any faster than mine and they got hotter. These socket types are the newer ones. Mine 478 (Northwood) fits the 1st board I showed you. Also See:
    http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1740/ which I found when checking up on the 775. (you might have to kill an annoying pop up, lol)

    It's a hardware analysis. They basically seem to keep hinting to stay with socket 478 (mine) for now. Partly because you can't use your AGP graphics card since it's been replaced with pci express. And other little nagging things like heat dissipation etc and it's not noticably faster. I read the 478 is getting bought up, so you have to search a bit if that's what you choose.

    I noticed you backup took 20mins longer than mine. 9 minutes of time is lost when you burn at 4X over what I have here. With -R I do it at 8X in 9.5mins. Total is 26.5 mins for this large movie I have. 21 mins for my smaller movies.. So if I add your extra 9 minutes to 26.5 minutes I get 35.5 minutes. That is 10 minutes less than what you got on your fastest transfers. (some where 55min I think). So that's where the time lost is going. And I lost 10 mins on the older system. So it all fits together now. My system is faster and making up those 10mins.. Plus the 8X burn makes nearly 10 more minutes. And that's how it happens ;-).. By the way, I got really compatible 8X for my burner, and have checked a bunch of movies. I have no smoothness problems with them being burned at 8X. Your 8X problem could partly be that your system *might* not be able to supply data evenly at 8X with the ram you have. My underrun meter is stable even at 16X. Even if your meter stays in green, the deeps could cause problems. I'll admit that I'm not sure that's your problem. It could be your media or burner that determins how smooth an 8X is. Even good media combined with some burners can cause problems.. (OH, the mess of burning!) I wish I knew what to tell you on that. All I know is what I have + the Sony equals good 8X burns for me on movies.

    Let me know how removing the dvd rom works. (it probably won't help, but you never can tell)
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2005
  17. mdinap

    mdinap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    Thanks alot guys - you definately helped out alot and got my speeds down a huge amount. I appreciate that as well. I think the next step i am going to take more is the RAM. I know i need it and i wanna test it out. I will be sure and post my results when i get the new RAM in my computer. Thanks again all of you.
     
  18. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    You're welcome mdinap. Don't forget that I said, more memory *could* bring your burn rate up to the next level, but can't be 100% sure it will. That's because I don't know your system that well. Just an example: If your system can lock onto a 4X write max, and the new ram makes 6x possible, you will still burn at 4X because it can't write at 6X, but will only try to do 4, 8, 16 etc.

    On the reading side, you should see an improvement IF your computer is not super slow and IF your Reader is a decent fast reader. You don't need the fastest computer, but if those things are true, the file managment will improve with memory. And things will operate faster and save minutes. If anything, windows and programs will run much much smoother with more ram. There's no question about that. You know how sometimes your icons redraw slow and the HD light flickers after you've just done something like copy something large? That happens when ram runs out and it swaps. When you get more memory, that will go away and improve majorly. No matter what, you can't lose with the ram and should see improvements in many areas. Good luck.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2005
  19. mdinap

    mdinap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    Thanks but that did'nt last long. I dont know what happened but the times are mack almost 2 hours again. I burned a DVD when i got home last night and the time was back to the way it used to be. I did nothing different this time. I think i gotta do a major clean up with the computer in the next few days. This gets very fustrating
     
  20. ddp

    ddp Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Messages:
    39,164
    Likes Received:
    93
    Trophy Points:
    128
    know all about it
     

Share This Page