Desktops forum

General discussion

dual processor for video processing?

If I was to build my own comp, would a dual processor be a nicest feature to speed up video processing (ie: processing HUGE files)? Obviously plenty of hard-drive space & RAM would be good. What about front side bus speed? what the heck does that mean?

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: dual processor for video processing?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: dual processor for video processing?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Noted at ..

In reply to: dual processor for video processing?

Collapse -
As far as I know...

In reply to: dual processor for video processing?

As far as I know, dual processors will only help you handle more tasks simultaneously...not one task better. However, "freeing up" your processors by dividing the work between them should make things run more smoothly.

As for the bus speed thing...Google it! Silly

Collapse -
exactly

In reply to: As far as I know...

AND

FSB is the speed at which the CPU communicates with the computer

more is better
the current max stock FSB is 266MHZ, by Intel, (it's FSB 1066) 800MHZ FSB is 200MHZ DDR

which is why PC 3200 DDR dual channel, can run 1:1 with 800MHZ FSB Intel chips


i'd say dual CPU's won't give a graphics rendering advantage, but dual GPU's will (SLi)

Collapse -
all these people are right

In reply to: exactly

the problem is with duel processing is the software has to be written for the technoloy if it is'nt it will run on the default processor.

I would not bother yet until the technoly it define yet.

Collapse -
Just one second.

In reply to: all these people are right

I had my dual Pentium, my dual Pentium Pro and video processing (many titles) used both CPUs. Not only that, it beat the pants off of single CPU setups.

Bob

Collapse -
Dual processors

In reply to: Just one second.

There is a difference between a dual processor MB with 2 processors and 2 scokets and a dual processor chips that have to share the same scoket.
If you look a the bench marks for the new Intel dual cores they are about the same as the single core high end P4s BUT thier clock speeds are lower, thus less heat.
It is easer to cool dual processors than a dual processor chip.
Dual processor MBs tend to expensive and are designed for servers.

I still have my dual PIII 1.2gh PC it renders video very fast. The program I'm using is Videowave 5. I timed how long it would take to render a 10min clip, took 9 min.
Then I remvoed the second processor and rerendered the same clip, took 20min. About the time as my Athlon 1.3gh PC. So the second processor was realy helping in this case.
But when I got a AthlonXP 2700 it would render the 10min clip in 8min, My AMD64 3000+ will render the 10 min clip in 4min.
Now keep in mind that the PIII has PC100 memory, the XP2700 has DDR2700 and the AMD64 has DDR3200, so there are many things to be taken in account. John

Collapse -
No there isn't.

In reply to: Dual processors

I write with authority here about the new dual core CPUs.

I've been to the show and it kicked it up a notch without the expense of 2 sockets.

Bob

Collapse -
your so wrong it's not even funny

In reply to: Dual processors

lower clock doesn't mean lower heat
it has to do with number of transistors, core voltage, and a few other thigns

Intel's new dual core is as hot as a PAIR of 3.2E's
it's pushing 130W
the 3.2E is around 75W

your seriously wrong
dual Xeon's would do better, but only because dual Xeon's would have more clock on the 840 (if your comparing best to best)

aside from that, dual processor MB's are no more expensive than single proc dual supporting mb's are...please understand

a PC-DL (Asus' dual Xeon 604 board, it supports AGP 8x which is it's selilng point, it's also ATX compared to the de facto standard of eATX for dual Xeon's)

but a PC-DL is around $170
a new 955X equipped board is probably going to be around $220...

the cost is saved in buying 1 840 compared to two 3.6 Xeon's (an 840 is like $1000, the 3.6 Xeon's are like $700 each)

the 840 is able to out-render any P4 iirc
including the 570J (currently it's the fastest of the single core P4's, even over the 3.73EE, which won't do well with the 840 just being released)

Popular Forums

icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

DEALS, DEALS, DEALS!

Best Black Friday Deals

CNET editors are busy culling the list and highlighting what we think are the best deals out there this holiday season.