Full disc faster than 30gb to 25gb compression

[unknownbluray]

Nothing to do with full disc compression to 25gb. I have been doing some testing and I recently decided to go ahead and tell dvdfab to do a full disc to my hard drive. Thinking its going to take forever (still working on it as I write this) and I watch it 17% done with 13.05mb/s fine and dandy unfortunately I dont have any 50gb blu-rays waiting for one to show up. So I ponder to myself why does compressing 32.gb of video and audio take over 20 to 24hrs of time and the mp/s go down to .08? is this dvdfabs encoding issue or shrink program issue? I love the product just wish it would shrink blu-rays faster.

[Complication]

It is all about the processing power needed to make the calculations. Keep in mind that BD content is about 4x as large as DVD and that the new codecs achieve better compression but take much more processing power to calculate.

[IPopov50]

It is all about the processing power needed to make the calculations. Keep in mind that BD content is about 4x as large as DVD and that the new codecs achieve better compression but take much more processing power to calculate.

In addition to this. That's exactly where CUDA/DXVA or otherwise GPU acceleration comes handy. CUDA (for nVIDIA cards) and DXVA (for ATI cards) technology allowed GPU to participate in calculation process and speed up video decoding/encoding and other manipulations.

[unknownbluray]

Now I can also do dvx encoding with the ati card. But it only has 256 mb on board. Then I also have 1.5gb memory which maybe I should update to help the process? and th emain AMD 64 is 2.7ghz what would be the best to upgrade to? I wont be doing it for awhile but just curious. Also I figured out why my other burns where faster they were below 23gbs. But my other question is now that it should be all on my HDD and decoded would it be faster to shrink it?

[IPopov50]

You are really lost me here.
First of all, 256 mb card memory - so what. Amount of memory is predetermined by GPU capabilities. I must tell you that on my super-pooper card with 1.8 gig memory, I have never seen use more that 132 mb (I mean in encoding/decoding process). What GPU does is a massive amount of calculation of stream with very low framerate (nowdays framerate of some games are over 100 fps). Card don't need that much memory.
Your 1.5 gig RAM I would definitely upgrade to at least 3. Especially if you will run W7. Windows 7 along requires, I believe 1.5 gig minimum. Anyway, you might be really short on memory (RAM).
Now, this part I didn't get:
But my other question is now that it should be all on my HDD and decoded would it be faster to shrink it?

What this exactly means? What are you mean by "decoded" and "shrink"?

Now I can also do dvx encoding with the ati card. But it only has 256 mb on board. Then I also have 1.5gb memory which maybe I should update to help the process? and th emain AMD 64 is 2.7ghz what would be the best to upgrade to? I wont be doing it for awhile but just curious. Also I figured out why my other burns where faster they were below 23gbs. But my other question is now that it should be all on my HDD and decoded would it be faster to shrink it?

[unknownbluray]

I mean I had DVDfab put the full disc onto my Hard drive but I want to compress it to fit on a 25gb blu-ray, will it be faster than going from disc to disc or about the same? I wont be upgrading to Win 7 in a loooong time I like XP and I may want VIsta but with Win7 being able to track you etc no thank you. Now memory will help me process faster that I know I should look into it. I just hate thos 20hrs crap.

Complication I realize that BD info is huge compared to DVD just trying to figure it more. I am se to smaller movies like 23 to 25gb and compressing the 25gb in no time. Not use to the 40+gb.

[IPopov50]

No!!!! Don't do from disc to disc. What you are doing and how you are doing it just perfect. Between us girls, I wasn't able to turn a single full disc into BD25 1080 yet. I made couple of attempts, none of them successful. I looked at some internal scripts and realized that I should just sit tight and wait for another 3-4 betas goes by for this option. I just keep my ripped "full discs" on storage drive waiting for the right moment.

I mean I had DVDfab put the full disc onto my Hard drive but I want to compress it to fit on a 25gb blu-ray, will it be faster than going from disc to disc or about the same? I wont be upgrading to Win 7 in a loooong time I like XP and I may want VIsta but with Win7 being able to track you etc no thank you. Now memory will help me process faster that I know I should look into it. I just hate thos 20hrs crap.

Complication I realize that BD info is huge compared to DVD just trying to figure it more. I am se to smaller movies like 23 to 25gb and compressing the 25gb in no time. Not use to the 40+gb.

[unknownbluray]

Are ye saying I shouldnt even attempt it till a few betas goes by cause of bugs and it doesnt do it right? Guess I should have bought a 2tb hard drive. Maybe I should stick with smaller movies for the time being of ripping or find cheaper 50gb BD's

[RocKKer]

If you want to reduce processing time you will have to upgrade to a dual or quad core CPU. In my situation moving from a dual to quad core reduced my processing time for encodes by about half.

Additional memory won't help at all unless your extremely low, encoding is very processor intensive.

I use DVDfab to rip not "resize", but I'm sure it works wonderfully though.

[unknownbluray]

Rockker I was looking at a quad core I have a dual core right now. How long does it take you to encode?

[IPopov50]

Rockker I was looking at a quad core I have a dual core right now. How long does it take you to encode?

unknownbluray
you know how my machine looks like - Duo - with CUDA, from average BD, main movie, to BD9 - 3-3.5 hrs. People with quad reporting about 2.5 hrs.
I know for a fact, machine with 2 Tesla units ( and twin Xeon ) does it in 12 minutes.

[hanibal]

i have a quad core and have no problems putting movies on a bd25. Some need compressing, some don't. Average time 1-3 hours depending on lenght of movie and quality is awsome.

[unknownbluray]

OK now I want a quad core so I can get these movies compressed in no time lol. I thought my computer was fast maybe in the day it was. Atleast I wouldnt have to upgrade video card, Burners or HDDs.

[directeeccks]

Unknown,

I have a quad core and a geforce gt 120m with 8 gigs of memory. A movie around and hour and a have takes to 3 to 4 hours at most. Thats to bd9. The bd25 every time I have tried it takes the around the same amount of time. So ya its a kinda of a toss up.

I can say with the prices the way they are now you may be able to get a hex core from amd. I have intel but the hex core is a grand for theirs and the amd one is 285 U.S. dollars. So i could build 2 with ram,hdd, power supply,motherboard and okay graphics card for under 1000. As far as performance ya its not as good as I7 but the I7 only beat the amd by minutes not hours on encodes. So in my opinion i rather have 2 then one for encodes and so on.

So its up to you on exactly you want to do. The Intels are nice the i7 930 with dq stepping for overclocking is great. But as with i7 you have to by more pricey ddr 3 memory their boards and chipsets always change. So upgrading my be very pricey.

Cheers!

[directeeccks]

unknownbluray
you know how my machine looks like - Duo - with CUDA, from average BD, main movie, to BD9 - 3-3.5 hrs. People with quad reporting about 2.5 hrs.
I know for a fact, machine with 2 Tesla units ( and twin Xeon ) does it in 12 minutes.

LOL yea 12 minutes is right for the amount of money you will pour into a system like that. I wish I could afford that. Yea the fermi tech is great.