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

Speed of CCE and Rebuilder

Discussion in 'DVD / BD-Rebuilder forum' started by Blighter, Dec 5, 2005.

  1. Blighter

    Blighter Regular member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    I have everything shut off in the background, and i'm using DVD RB 1.00 RC 5.1. I tried upgrading to latest version but i kept getting errors at the end of each process and RB shutdown on me :-(
     
  2. BigDK

    BigDK Regular member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,610
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    I use DVD RB Ver 1 RC.1 with CCE 2.70.

    Rebuilding Star Wars 3 took 94 minutes from start to finishing making ISO.

    Burning was longer, but not relevant to the speed of CCE.
    Main difference for me, is that I can still happily other applications on my PC when rebuilder is running without always having delays.

    Best CPU I used before on RB/CCE was using an FX55 and although quick, it was still using all the CPU resource and making multi-app work a pain.
     
  3. Blighter

    Blighter Regular member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    So basically, you're saying that it's the type of CPU which matters mainly, not how fast the cpu clock is?
     
  4. Sophocles

    Sophocles Senior member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    5,991
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    128
    Blighter


    Clock speed does make a difference but it's only part of the equation. The reason that Intel P4 always encoded faster than AMD's was the result of their faster clock speeds. Never mind that Intel lost in almost every other measurable category. With the latest AMD CPU releases clock Intel lost some of their clock speed advantage for a couple of reasons. The first is that AMD's clock speeds are beginning to approach those of Intel chips and their overclock-ability brought them even closer still. The 2nd is AMD's front side bus and memory handling in general.

    But where AMD really took over was with their dual core chips, Intel dual cores were built as an afterthought while AMD chips were designed from the ground up. Intel dual cores are still stuck with an 800 mhz front side bus while AMD's dual cores have an effective 2000 MHz front side bus. The front side bus feeds directly to system memory and it takes into consideration both input and output which divides the frontside bus up into two lanes of traffic. Two lanes of 400 Mhz going each way which bottlenecks the Intel dual core. AMD has a much more effective design which allows for a much more effective relationship with memory and front side bus speeds.
     
  5. Tweak32

    Tweak32 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2005
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    Sophocles, you seem to have a nice computer setup, have you ever done any encoding with DVD-RB/CCE? How long did it take?

    I just started using DVD-RB, and my little 1.4 pentium takes around 6 hours for one movie, so I'm looking to upgrade.

    Thanks
     
  6. Sophocles

    Sophocles Senior member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    5,991
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    128
    This is about average for me. I've had some faster and some slower, for instance the movie Pocahontas took only 34 minutes for prepare/encode/rebuild. Here is a screen shot of a recent encode.

    [​IMG]

    77 minutes for all three stages and another 7 to burn.


    I've been known to use RB/CCE once or twice.

    http://forums.afterdawn.com/forum_view.cfm/157



     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2005

Share This Page