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. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    I ran the cache and memory benchmark test and it pretty much follows the line for my CPU when I select it for comparison with the exception of the 512 KB blocks which show somewhere around 10,000 MB/s but my test only showed 1200 for the 512K blocks. All else was exactly as it should be. I doubt this is a major concern... or is it?

    I also ran this test on my other PC which has a P4 1.99 GHZ processor and it followed the line almost exactly including the 512 KB blocks.

    I am considering swaping the CPU in the machines and see if it makes any changes. I can backup with my older computer slightly faster then I can with this one. I may do this later and see if that solves anything.
     
  2. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Thanks Sean and ddp. By the way, I NEVER was knocking Brobear's ability. Just that he is obviously on the wrong track or something. Bad day? Even though I didn't like him turning this into a personal debate, I can at least say he had some useful ideas if applied to the right issues, validating dvdripdvd's comment. Taking the unneeded critisism once was ok, but twice I felt I needed to say something, but still left the option for resolving.

    Anyway - Sean5775, the westeren digital is exactly what I have and I like it. I do know there is faster, like SATA etc, but it's not where your problem is. The WD did remove one of your bottlenecks, and if you can get back the setting that gave you the original high speed you might find that you do even better than 45mins. My guess is 35 for turnaround on a backup. The 13 minute cpu hit with quality on is not bad, and this shows good cpu power for at least that. The load on the bus stays the same, but the cpu takes the hit for extra analasis (well mostly). So you are still bottlenecked elsewhere, and not neccissarily due to perminanty slow hardware since it worked before. Something is still moved/changed (hardware/software). Only one warning. If you are able to get the system back to how it was when it was fast, and your qaulity settings are on, you might not notice that you fixed it. Here's how that can happen. It's only 13 minutes more, but in this case the quality settings could become the bottleneck. When it processes more, the overall data flow is less, and if it's slower than the other bottleneck you will be tied to that time and miss it if you fixed it like you did before. You always run as fast as the slowest bottleneck if it's very pronounced. (well they are additive too, lol) If you are absolutely sure that you backed up in 45 with quality settings on and there was no mistaking that, then you can ignore that. And I think your system should be capable of that, but with the curve balls thrown in, it's something to watch for as you make changes.

    I guess you re-installed XP since you mentioned needing to download Shrink and Sandra again. So we can exclude the possibility of goofed up settings. But can't exclude the possibility of something automatically being set wrong. Still that is less likely. You exchanged cables, so we can now rule them out. I know the memory scores are not too great, but I doubt they are what changed the time. I do wonder if the mem scores dipped when this other X factor went back to causing slow backups, OR if it's independent and the mem scores are a constant. Could you have in any way changed BIOS settings having to do with cpu/memory/bus and so on? Could you also list which Asus motherboard you are using? I already know what cpu. It looks like you have PC2100 (266mhz ram) which doesn't seem to transfer at it's normal rating across the bus. If your system supports dual channel memory you can boost memory speed by about 30% by putting 2 sticks of ram in, instead of 1 larger one. But at 266, I don't think yours functions that way.. not sure. Plus you already tried the 1GB (Hopefully the other ram was as fast as the 1st memory). If you made any special BIOS tweaks, it is possible to alter how that memory responds. Yes, I'd like the see the other sanrda benchmark please. I hope to get a better idea of how your memory is responding since your friends 1.3 just beat your system. Also, please post the result of the non-compressed DVD, the size of the contents (GB), unless it's a previous backup in which case it will be 4.3GB. I'll be thinking the figures over because I think I see a pattern (I hope). As for my few posts in the past, I just started trying out posting again and I usually only take on certain threads as I get time. I was a bit slow to want to post for some reason.. don't know why. lol. That's cool that you are an admin, which forum?

    I am posting now, I see your comment on doing the test.. It's' important that the cache test does well on larger blocks because you are transfering tons of data. But I need to look at this closer. Will post back shortly when I can.
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2005
  3. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Ok I tested the non compressed DVD earlier and I forgot to post the results. It is the same DVD that took 45 minutes from the time I put it in to the time it asked for a blank. For all testing purposes I skip the burning which I have no problems with. It took 37 minutes. And this is running them through shrink which at one time used to do the DVD's that didnt require compression in under 10 minutes, 8 minutes seems to sound right. So this is way off what it had done at one time. I can't say for certain, but I am almost possitive I could do it burn and all at 4X (14 mins usually) for under 25 minutes. The size of the test DVD is 3.9 GB

    My motherboard is an ASUS P4G-LA I believe it has 2 memory channels but im not sure. But then again I am still shopping for motherboards, this one just doesnt do what I need it to do, with features it has anyways. I still don't understand all this socket stuff though.

    When I got the new HD yesterday, I basically started off by installing XP again and starting over by downloading all required programs, its hard to not build up a bunch of useless stuff on a computer over time, so this probably was the best route to take.

    Possibly tommorrow I am going to try and swap out the CPU and see if the results are any better. Since my other PC has a 1.99 GHz P4 which is better then I thought it had, but thats what the SANDRA test said is in there. I had thought it was a P3 but aparantly I was wrong.

    I also tried removing the DVD ROM drive and running just the DVD burner and that did not improve anything. I might have already posted that one, I did it several days ago.
     
  4. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Oh yes I forgot to say I havent done anything with the BIOS. That is one thing I am not at all familiar with. Someone told me once I should 'flash the Bios' I looked into it, but never did actually do it, because whatever step one was, finding the version of something, I couldnt even find that.
     
  5. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    1200? Something seems wrong here, but I'm not confirming it yet.. 1200 is like 12% of what you should get. But the steep cutoff usually happens right after 512kb. It also depends on the cache size etc. You have 1MB cache, so I'm not sure that's right for it to be 1200. I'd figure it would do better..... But here's mine. These will be higher because of different hardware etc. But look at the smooth rate mine desends for an idea. At 512kB blocks I get 18,130 and thats 53% of the 2kB blocks at 33988MB/s. Again, I'm not forgetting that your problem may be solved by something else that got changed, and this is more a test to look your system over.. Looking back on your 1600+ score for memory bandwidth, it does seem to fall into the PC2100 catagory. I was just a little surprised it was 1/3rd of mine when I have 400mhz and you have 266 is not 1/3rd.... But the 800mhz fsb, plus dual channel gives performance. Still looking here and at other ideas elsewhere. As for flashing the BIOS, hold off on that. Your system worked with the BIOS you now have.. It might be a good idea later, but we don't want to make a mistake at this point. What motherboard do you have, and which version of the BIOS are you running? You can see the BIOS version during boot if you are quick... But it's also in sandra, only I forget where now. The motherboard type is also there. Will post back if I find it.

    SiSoftware Sandra

    Float SSE2 Cache/Memory Results Breakdown
    2kB Blocks : 33988MB/s
    4kB Blocks : 34606MB/s
    8kB Blocks : 27764MB/s
    16kB Blocks : 24674MB/s
    32kB Blocks : 24815MB/s
    64kB Blocks : 24961MB/s
    128kB Blocks : 25005MB/s
    256kB Blocks : 23166MB/s
    512kB Blocks : 18130MB/s
    1MB Blocks : 2582MB/s
    4MB Blocks : 2616MB/s
    16MB Blocks : 2617MB/s
    64MB Blocks : 2608MB/s
    256MB Blocks : 2612MB/s
    Data Item Size : 16-bytes
    Buffering Used : No
    Offset Displacement Used : Yes
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2005
  6. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Thanks.. I will also look into the other stuff you just posted, most likley later in the afternoon. Not that it will neccissarily help, but just to look things over.... I just came back because I realised something. You probably know this, but before you try to swap your CPU's you have to be sure it's compatible with your motherboard. Not only formfactor (well it wouldn't fit, lol), but there are other things like the fan/heat sink have to fit etc. Most likely it will work. I don't have time to type more now, but If you think it matches up, it probably does. .. One more thing, did your speed decrease happen right about the time you put in the new cables? I know you tried the old ones back, but am just curious. Can you remember anything else you did with cables etc, right about the time it slowed down?
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2005
  7. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Rather than try a different CPU, I'd like to suggest something less intrusive first, if you haven't started that already. Now that you have the WD, and you have ruled some things out like cables etc, I want to isolate the mainboard from the burner and even ide controler chip on that cable, but in a specific way. I really want to make sure we can discard this idea and be 100% sure. I did it here so you can look at my results and get an idea of what it might be like. I know my system is faster, but you can see how it should respond in a relative way. If you wouldn't mind, Put TROY in, and run Shrink.. Go to Edit->Preferences and select DVD-9 8.5 GB for the target size. Open TROY, when it asks for a folder for temporary files, make a folder called A on the HD. You can just type it in as C:\A by editing what's there. This is an extra folder that is needed in additon to what you normally use. ALSO before you backup, go to Quality Settings tab and turn off both, deep analysis and Quality Enhancments and leave them off for everything here. That way it won't throw the comparison results off and this can be flipped back on later. I want the cpu to be used in a certain way, and the qaulity settings behave very different on different cpu's which could give results that vary too much. You could also do it again later with quality on, but it's not needed and we only need the 1st numbers to notice wether it's going fast or really slow. - Let it read the whole movie and write down the time it takes. The original uncompressed movie (minus key) is now copied to A.

    Next using shrink again, click the Open files icon instead of Open disc, and point it at A. Leaving the target size at 8.5 for now, select Backup. Only make the backup go to yet another folder. Your usual folder, like TEMP, DVD_VIDEO etc. So you will end up with 2 copies of the movie on the HD. Time this and also notice the typical Kb/sec and write those down. Delete the files from the output folder. Next change the target size in Edit->Preferences to be DVD-5 (4.3GB. This will force your CPU to work. Use Open files again and point it at the original files in A. Tell it to backup again and the files will again go to the output folder, but be compressed. Time how long this takes and also notice the typical Kb/sec, and write them down. One last thing, go to your A folder do properties and get the total GB of the original movie. Please post all of these.

    I've done the same thing here with Phantom Menace, 8.3GB. The reading time from DVD to HD is 17mins 10sec with target size set to 8.3GB (basically making the non-compressed file set).. This time is the same as usual and less important. - But more important. When I stay on complete on HD, Copying from A folder (On HD) to destination (On HD), I get an initial 18,000kB/s that falls to about 13,700 and holds there. This is with target set to 8.5GB. My HD is really full though (only 10GB free) This took 9mins 58secs. This shows basic file movement, with less cpu overhead. I then deleted output files and set target size to back to 4.3GB and it took 12mins 45secs to compress the video from A folder to output folder. It did this at a rate of about 10,300 Kb/sec. About 2min 47 sec longer to compress on HD... But it was about 4-5 mins faster than from original DVD. This makes it seem like only 2mins and 47 secs went for compression, but in this case the HD most likely couldn't go any faster when compression was turned off, so it was a limiting factor. Without compression, it would probably fly if it were all stored on an say a 8GB ram drive ;-). I'd like to see how these do, and try to see if the system remains unusually slow, perks up, or who knows.

    The most important thing here is to see how this does in comparison to your previous good time of 45mins with TROY. If it still takes a really long time, it will say something about your motherboard, or mem, or cpu. But it will also point out that whatever changed to improve then degrade performance, X, is within those components. If it's really fast, it will hint at your burner's read speed. Not 100% conclusive proof at this point, but will make interesting points. I am also checking over your recent post on non-compressed video copying and will compare to these figures too. But there will be differences since it's from disc. As for the CPU, I got another idea. Is it possible that your local shop will allow you to temporarily try a different CPU and motherboard? Preferably in another case. If it fixes the problem, he/she should allow you to swap them since it's still within the time.. Otherwise there's still other ways, but the possibilities will begin to narrow considerably if we do all this.
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2005
  8. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Ok I havent had time to switch the CPU yet anyways and I do know that it is compatable with the motherboard as they were once in the same computer together. When I bought a new CPU I made sure it was compatable with the motherboard I already had so I know thats not an issue. But if its something I don't have to do I would rather not do it, but I am willing to at a later time if need be.

    I will try the steps you suggested, it sounds like a good move. I'm really surprised it wasn't suggested earlier or that I never thought to try this to work the computer and not do it all from the disc.

    I am going to do it right away and will post back with results and answer your other questions later on too.
     
  9. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    I managed to do some of the things you suggested. Not all would work, will explain that later.

    Ripping to HD

    Started at 4361 KB/s
    increased slowly to a peak of 6860 KB/s
    then slowed down slightly

    Total time was 19 minutes


    Open file save as DVD9 to C:\A

    Started at 5900 and averaged at at or near 5450 KB/s the entire time. Total time was 22 minutes 8 seconds.

    Now for the step where I open file and compress it to a DVD5 well this is interesting.... I would set it as I normally would saving to my usual folder. It would start encoding and about 5 seconds later DVD shrink would disapear. I tried this about 20 times and get the same result each time. I have never had something like this happen. So thats probably the most important part and for some reason I can't do it. I might try it with a different DVD maybe.

    I used the DVD Scarface for this test. I left my original copy of Troy at work today. But they are basically the same size. It was 6.82 GB

    I will try a different DVD, I had read that someone had trouble with Scarface and had to use decrypter for it a while ago. I only bought it today so I never have backed this one up. I will try something that I know works.
     
  10. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    I have done another DVD and got all the results.

    DVD to HD 6.81 GB (almost same size as last one)

    16 minutes at 4360 kb/s to a max of 6840 kb/s


    HD to DVD 9
    19 minutes
    5500 kb/s


    HD to DVD 5
    22 minutes
    3800-4570 kb/s


    Now this is way slower then your system. You got 13,700 kb/s from HD to DVD9 and I get 5450 kb/s which is only 39 % of what you are getting. And for HD to DVD5 you get 10,300 and I get 4570 kb/s which is 44% of your rate. And my DVD was smaller even. Wow something doesn't seem to be right here. I know you should get slightly more then I do but I don't think this much.

    I did rip it from DVD to HD in 16 minutes for a 6.81 GB DVD, yours was 8.3GB and this seems to be in line with your results.

    I will just wait for your thoughts on this before I proceed with anything else.

    One more thing... The first DVD I tested Scarface which didnt work for the last step, I used my DVD ROM which tests slower in NERO therefor the 19 minute rip time. The second DVD I used the burner to Rip, thats probably why the 3 minute difference in times between the 2 DVD's which are basically the same size.
     
  11. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ok, I'm going over the results you posted and comparing/combining them with not only the first figures, but now a 2nd system. I have a noticed a couple of fairly peculiar things, and will post back when I am done with these results. I want to double check some things. It will probably be later in the afternoon.
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2005
  12. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    I have tried the same tests on my other PC as well, and well its doing it all a little faster, I don't have enough space on there at the moment for a DVD 9 but processing of a DVD5 with a pretty loaded HD was at 8500kb/s I don't have a burner but I ran it through shrink on the other PC and thats how it was. This one certainly should at least be faster then the other one.

    I really appreciate your looking into the results and I feel like we are finally getting close to finding the problem.

    You asked earlier about what BIOS version I was running well I tried and tried to find that a few months ago when I was looking at flashing the BIOS but I just could not see it anywhere when I restarted the computer. And the only thing I really changed when the speed changed on me was the IDE cables, I switched from 40 wire to 80 wire and have tried the old ones again with the same speeds.
     
  13. ddp

    ddp Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Messages:
    39,118
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    128
    what is make & model# of motherboard??
     
  14. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    ASUS P4G-LA
     
  15. ddp

    ddp Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Messages:
    39,118
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    128
    you've got a hp computer???
     
  16. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Yes, you're right it is getting narrowed down, and you're welcome on the help, I don't mind... I'm still looking it over, but I'll mention some of the things I noticed.... I don't know wether this happened when the change happened, but you are only moving 4,000 kb/s on average during compression. I don't believe it's a lack of processing power because the time difference between compressed or not compressing is fairly small. It's 3 mins for both of us and that isn't much. It would have been larger had the cpu been a lot slower. Obviously the cpu is overkill for what you are doing. With the burner now removed from the picture, a new HD, that leaves your main bus and IDE channel(s). It could be be your memory, but it's score is in the ballpark of PC2100 memory. Not wonderful, but memory is a lot faster than what is needed for file movement. If anything the memory could slow processing for the cpu when shrink runs, but this doesn't seem to be the major problem.. So I am leaning towards your bus and IDE wether it's in the design, a conflict or a failure. As much as I like Asus, it makes me think it's partly due to a very low end Asus version. I also took the time to look up your board last night and noticed that it popped up as an HP package. I also see ddp is asking if you have an hp. But you put it together and your dealer got it from somewhere even if used in hp also. So this board must be popular with those. I also couldn't find it on Asus web site, but may have overlooked it.. I wanted to find details on the board description so I could know more what we are dealing with. So that has sort of held me up on part of it. Will check again later. I did find out it's max memory is 1GB then? But moving beyond the idea that it may be a low end board, there is still the fact that you had a better backup rate 3 or 4 days ago. So, that again, it makes point back to the fact that something happened. I also know you have tried just about every combination and way to hook it up correctly.

    Now you've re-installed XP, so chances are it's not that, unless something is automatically set incorrectly, which is much less likely. It could be the way the drives are configured, but you have tried every possible combination and nothing has improved. Have you made sure the jumpers on the back of the burner is set to Master? (unless cable select is there).. Did you make sure your new HD is set to cable select? I know the drives would not normally work, but believe it or not, I have seen some burners work anyway with jumpers set wrong causing a slow transfer rate and conflicts. At least check this even if it seems silly. Also I'm assuming these tests are done with only the HD and one burner, each on a seperate IDE channel and cable, and each at the end of the cable (not middle). Also the jumper being set on the WD to cable select, and the jumper on the buner being set to master. The HD cable going to the primary IDE on the motherboard. This is usually a blue connector on the motherboard, but it's better to read writing on the board that says primary IDE. Also the connector on the cable that is furthest away from the other two go to the motherboard. (just making sure, lol) That's what I usually do when I find a problem like this. Then I get fancy later after the problem is solved.

    Some of my tests on the 3.2 do great because my bus and memory are much faster. Yet, some of your scores are very odd, and a few pretty low under certain circumstances. I ran the same test on Phantom Menace with a slower P4 2.1GHZ system with a 400mhz FSB, and 266 PC2100 ram which is very similar to yours. DVD to HD for Phantom was 22mins 14sec. Notice that is very similar to what you are getting right now. A bit slower since the dvd is larger. So at least that is more in line. It also shows that you can move data at a normal rate when you are not compressing.. I then did HD to DVD9 (no compression) and it moved in 8mins and 37seconds with a rate of 15,000. This beat the 13,300 on my 3.2ghz because my drive was full and that one was 1/2 full (also WD). So your results on that test are actually a lot less than results here, even though I used a slower cpu in this test. And you tested on another machine are also finding it's better. This points to a possible problem on the bus, wether it's a conflict, fault etc. Again, I don't consider it proven to be this, since something may have been overlooked. I keep hoping that a misconfiguration is spotted.

    I did HD to DVD5 and got 6000kb/s on average with the 2.1 system. Not quite the 10,300 I got on my 3.2ghz but that's partly due to processing power. So it's quicker here too. What is really interesting is this. For your test, you get 22 mins to HD and 16mins to recompress to DVD5 (all on HD). Add these together and the total is 38minutes for your test! This is close to what you were getting before things went downhill. Now that really beats the 2 hours and 5 minutes. Yet, according to what you are saying, if you simply use shrink and compress to DVD5 while reading from burner (not HD) at the same time, you get that 2 hour figure. Do one or the other, and the speed is more normal.

    So you can move the movie from the burner to the HD in an OK time, and compress the movie all on HD in an OK time, but when you let both the burner and HD work on the IDE bus at the same time, it just dies. Yet, it didn't 4 days ago. It seems like your bus is really crowded and choking on the data when you do both at once. It keeps making me think there is a conflict. I'd say a very weak/slow bus and IDE section, but again it worked 4 days ago. Well, it isn't acting right now. So, it doesn't seem to be your cpu, burner, cables, possibly not memory, so I'm left with the IDE chain through the bus. It seems like you've tried just about everything when it comes to master/slave DMA, checking cables and more. So I wonder if something happened to your board.

    Before jumping to that conclusion I want to think about it more. Also, can you tell me what mode your HD is in when your system boots? You will see a black screen come up when you power on your computer. It will print the name of your Wester Digital hard drive. Does it say it's Ultra DMA 5?, or mode 5, or something like this? What does it say for your burner? At the rate this is going, pretty soon (but not yet), I'd be tempted to swap the entire motherboard.. I'd be tempted to look at BIOS, but you never touched yours when it was working, or afterwards, so I'm passing for now. Most motherboards come with a CD that has drivers for that motherboard. Drivers that cover the bus, bridge, HD, video and more. Did you install those drivers when you finished installing XP? All sorts of weird things can happen without those. I know your backup started slow, then fast, now slow, but missing drivers could cause stuff like that. I don't think that's it, but it might be worth checking. Some boards are not as affected as others, or need it, but many do. I'm still looking the original stuff over and will post more later.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2005
  17. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Ok first thing yes this motherboard came from a HP computer. I don't have an HP computer now with the exception of the board of course. Its now all in a custom case, and all my research and advice from a friend who is a computer tech showed that all the components I had or bought when put together would be 100% compatable. Now my friend certainly could help me but has moved some 2000 miles away and is very busy so thats out of the question. You are right though, I remember when I put this PC together I couldnt find a whole pile of info on the board I used. I looked again tonight and found less, almost nothing.

    You explained how the drives should be hooked up and thats exactly how it is. Except I do have my DVD ROM still installed but I tried removing it a few days ago and it didnt change anything and left it installed ever since. I have the burner on Master the ROM on slave, but there are cable select pins as well. Should I be using those? A long time ago when I bought the burner I tried that and it was acting very strange on cable select. It would only read cd's and the tray would only open if I used a button in a program to do. The actual button on the drive did work but it would close as soon as it opened. I switched it to master and problem solved.

    The hard drive is set to cable select and is the only thing on that IDE cable.

    You got a good idea with the burner and HD working together things die, but I ripped the DVD to the HD and then ran it through shrink for DVD9 NO COMPRESSION and its slow as hell right? You get 13,700 kb/s and I get 5500 kb/s on the new PC and 8500 kb/s on my other slower PC. It seems to me that I should probably be hitting 10,000 kb/s on this machine and the other one is performing as would be expected. These transfers are HD to HD, the DVD drives are not involved. And no compression so does that not sort of make that if the drives work together then things are slow, but still they are. I know that was confusing.

    My Hard drive is in Ultra DMA mode 5
    The Burner is in Ultra DMA mode 2
    And yes all drivers are installed from the cd with the motherboard, well its a cd from an HP computer but its all there, I have installed them well over a dozen times in the last year, I know exactly where to find them now.

    I am basically ready to replace this board soon anyways, but its actually still covered 100% by an extended warranty plan I got sucked into buying until August 2005, but again proving that its bad is probably not easy.

    I just think but I could be wrong that you overlooked my poor HD to HD DVD9 format times. Sorry could be wrong but just making sure.

     
  18. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I see what you mean about the rest being custom parts. When I was talking about HD to DVD9 and said, "I then did HD to DVD9 (no compression) and it moved in 8mins and 37seconds with a rate of 15,000. This beat the 13,300 on my 3.2ghz because my drive was full and that one was 1/2 full (also WD). So your results on that test are actually a lot less than results here". - I didn't overlook the HD to HD DVD9, but may not have been clear enough when I simply said your results on that test are actually a lot less than results here. It would have been more clear had I also compared the 13,300-15,000 I get directly to your 5,500kb/s (and 19mins) rather than say it was a lot less. Sorry if that wasn't clear. And the reason you can move the movie from the burner to HD in ok time is only because the burner is still slower than your HD. So the HD can keep up even if it's slow, making the IDE appear ok for that test. But when you are completely on HD, doing HD to DVD9 or DVD5, the results are pretty slow. Even in comparison to the 2.1ghz computer here with a WD drive. That's what I was getting at. And what's striking is when you make a DVD5 from the burner, it goes up to 2 hours. It appears that the IDE bus gets overloaded so bad at that point, that's what happens. And it really shouldn't.

    When I mentioned you could compress the movie all on HD in OK time, I meant it seemed "OK" in comparison to the 2 hour problem. But just ok, not really great. And it won't be because of the IDE problem. Also your HD to DVD5 score didn't look to bad in comparison to the 2.1ghz machine because they both took about 22mins. But your cpu is 3ghz!!, so it should be much less. My 3.2ghz took 12mins 45sec on an 8.6GB movie. It would have been 9.5mins for a 6GB movie. - Your cpu is not much slower than mine. But your ram is slower, and could add 2-3 minutes. I'd still think you could compress Phantom in about 15-16mins, and a 6GB DVD in 12mins. That's only a guess, but makes sense. The 22mins is your IDE holding you back. Your estimate of 10,000kb/s sounds right.

    You drives are in the right modes, but it's not working right. At this point it sounds like your motherboard. The options have become really narrow, but there's still a couple things you could try. I think you tried this, but you could completely disconnect the burner and DVD-Ram. Run a quick test ALL on HD going from your A folder to DVD9 to see if the speed goes up. There's no need to wait for it to finish. I think you did try that.... But you could also do this. Switch your HD from the primary IDE to the secondary IDE where the burner is. Leave the burner disconnected. Power up, and try that test again. If on just the chance that only the primary port isn't working right, then maybe you can get by on the secondary. Then you could put your DVD's on the primary which are slow in comparison to HD's anyway.

    The problem could be anywhere, but at least it's one of the things you can change around. I don't know if you know this, but when you make changes you should turn off the switch in the back of the computer to completely turn off the motherboard. Otherwise it could damage chips. If HP was too cheap to give you a switch on your power supply, just unplug the computer.
    I wouldn't worry about changing the jumpers on your dvd drives since we know the problem happens without them. I've also seen strange things happen when I don't force them to master/slave in the past too on a couple machines.

    It seems like HP has obviously paid Asus to make a stripped down board. It's not even covered on their site! In that case it might as well be like an HP which usually makes low end stuff, just like EMachines and so on. As for the warranty you're right. I doubt they will believe you. Also you moved the board. Maybe it could be put back, but big companies work hard to make it hard for the customer. The fine print is so picky too. Another friend got an emachines which has customer service like HP, and they didn't honor the rebates. Then it burned up and they were nearly impossible to contact. Then they had excuses and long waits and so on. After a week of this, I said to my friend. You can spend another week or two, or more with them, but it would actually cost you less to just put in a new board than lose the time. Of course you can try.

    Your machine is better than an HP because you choose some other good parts. Now all you need is a good motherboard. Asus is one of the best brands when you buy an ASUS board directly. Not one included in some other companies package. Mine is really fast as you see. I'd pick a motherboard with an 800mhz front side bus, and change your ram for 400mhz. Even if you mounted your old ram, your results would still improve vastly. But for $85 more you could get fast ram. You know how in windows when you click and open menus, or watch icons redraw etc? Running on this board with with 400mhz ram makes windows much snappier in comparison to the 2.1ghz wth ram at your speed. In my opinion, your cheapest option is to simply change just the motherboard for a good one. You don't need the very best, but I wouldn't suggest the very cheapest.

    I'll also post a couple of BIOS settings you can check for your drive. At least you can still backup a DVD in less than an hour if you copy the whole thing to HD, then compress it in a second step.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2005
  19. sean5775

    sean5775 Regular member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Well you got some good ideas there I can certainly try those out tommorrow.
    If its the motherboard I will still try to get the warranty for it since its not from HP or ASUS its from the store where that computer was bought, I read the fine print on it, it says the whole unit of components of are all covered until august 05, It apparantly doesnt matter if its been moved or not. Either way worth a shot.

    Is it a rare possibility that the new HD I just got is defective? would these problems suggest that in any way.

    Originaly when it was installed the computer seemed really quick at opening stuff and that quickly faded to basically as it was before. If I say click on microsoft word for example it takes about 12 seconds to open. At one point a few months ago this was basically instant. Everything is just seeeming so slow at processing.
    Saving 1 page MS Word document to HD 15 seconds. Thats insane.

    I just defraged this morning, no spyware according to 3 programs, no viruses, and all updated definitions for all 4 programs.


    Oh yeah and this might or might not be important but I forgot to post this originally and a few times after that. When I was copying the ripped DVD to DVD9 the computer was louder then I have ever heard it before. It however is very quiet when compressing to DVD5, And it acts this same way everytime.

    Sorry I forgot to post that before.

    Either way regardless of anything I think I might just get some new RAM and a Motherboard anyways then I could actually have the features I need in a motherboard. But will try your ideas first of course just to see what all happens.
     
  20. BlueLaser

    BlueLaser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    To go into BIOS usually you press the delete key when you first see the boot up screen. On some systems it might be F1 or another key, read the screen as it boots. pause key will stop the text from moving during boot. When you are in there, don't change things you are not sure of. Also, write down any setting you change in case you need to put it back. These will probably not help but you can look at them. Also they could look different or even be missing from your BIOS. Go to where your drive is listed and high light it, then select enter for details on your drive.. Well, actually every BIOS is slightly different and you may have to play around with it. It may even be in another menu. If something is off, you can try turning it on. If there is an auto option, it should automatically detect. When you are done go to the rightmost menu and select save and exit. If you think you goofed, select discard changes and exit. Look for things like this.


    LBA/Large Mode try setting to auto or on
    Block(Multi Sector Transfer) mode - auto or on
    PIO mode - auto or on
    DMA mode - Auto or UDMA5 (which is already on from what you said)
    32 Bit Data transfer - ON (not for anyone with win nt, unless patched to SP2)
    DVD PIO Mode - cdrom or dvd.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2005

Share This Page