22 replies to this topic

[hartleys]

I have a 1.3Ghz processor/512K RAM & 30GB spare disc space.  When doing any of the burn related processes, my CPU goes up to 100% & everything takes hours to process.  very little else is running.

Any ideas?

[cdanteek]

Quote

When doing any of the burn related processes, my CPU goes up to 100% & everything takes hours to process. very little else is running.

You need to explain what apps in the program your using and what your doing. Burning a Audio or data cd or a Video or data DVD, shouldn't take hours!

cdanteek

[lynn98109]

Easy Media Creator 7 System Requirements (click on the link to view) indicate you have barely enough processor for DVD burning, and not enough for capture.

You didn't give the rest of your system specs, so we don't know if you have a graphics card, or if it's big enough.

And we don't know if you've updated your burner with the latest firmware.

If it is DVD work you want to do, it is VERY resource consuming.

Lynn

[cdanteek]

Quote

Easy Media Creator 7 System Requirements (click on the link to view) indicate you have barely enough processor for DVD burning,

Don't believe everything you read. I burn Dual Layer DVD's with a P2 400Mhz w 98 machine, at 4x speed. The 1GHz p3 with 98se does a better job at 6x and 8x!
That's why I ask the op, what I did.

cdanteek

[gi7omy]

cdanteek, on Nov 13 2006, 09:37 AM, said:

Don't believe everything you read. I burn Dual Layer DVD's with a P2 400Mhz w 98 machine, at 4x speed. The 1GHz p3 with 98se does a better job at 6x and 8x!
That's why I ask the op, what I did.

cdanteek

I doubt if the actual 'burn' would take that length of time to be honest. I've a feeling here he's talking about the initial rendering to the vob format prior to the burn and that CAN take forever and a day to complete (I usually start and go watch a movie on TV)

[REDWAGON]

That's a pretty fair statement gi.... Rendering is what takes up the most time on any DVD's I burn. Although I have never had to wait for hours for a DVD.

I'm curious cd, how long, time wise, it takes to burn a certain size DVD in the GB range, with your P2 400Mhz win 98 computer, and what type media you are using with what model DVD drive.

Frank....

[cdanteek]

Quote

I'm curious cd, how long, time wise, it takes to burn a certain size DVD in the GB range, with your P2 400Mhz win 98 computer, and what type media you are using with what model DVD drive.

The same as it does on your system Frank at 4x! At 6x the buffer flops all over the place, so 4x it is on this machine. As for burners what do you want a 716,712,708,Plextor, 3550,Nec, 800,810,Sony, 1640,1650,1655, BenQ. Media Taiyo Yunden 8x and Verbatim 16x.
Like I said in the first post don't believe what you read. It takes a 1.3 GH CPU for this DVD Burner Drive, they're wrong!

cdanteek

[REDWAGON]

Well, I have a whole stack of 4x media, so I'll try some tests using my Sony DRU-820A and see what I come up with burning the same test DVD at approx. a GB and compare that with one of my 16X verbatim discs. As I remember I have noticed a difference in total time start to finish between the two. If there is no difference I'll be surprised. BTW, I'll do the test on the same computer that is running an Intel P4 3.2 GH processor.

Frank....

[cdanteek]

Frank,
if you burn both the 4x and 16x media at 4x, in the same machine and burner with the same software program! Results should be the same. Please do let us know your results.


cdanteek

[vid2man97]

Well, I gave away an old computer a while back that's still being used today.  (Too many people think old means useless.  Obviously there are people here who know different though)

Anyway, it's an AMD duron at 1.3Ghz and 512 of 2100 ddr ram. It doesn't even have a separate video card.

And....it captures from a camcorder and actually burns dvds.  It's running videowave7 professional.

Now...I know it's probably being taxed in doing so, but the system is slimmed down without scads of background programs and needless little utilities that some people may or may not have, and it seems to do a decent job.  

More is better (especially for the rendering), but I've seen the "marginal" systems do a fair job all things considered.

[REDWAGON]

I guess I must have mistaken what you were driving at cd. What I was going to do with the test was burn that given production to a DVD using all the same hardware but burn it using one of my 4x media discs and then burn it again using one of my 16x media discs. Maybe what you meant was that no matter what media you use if you burn a comparison at the same 4x, it wouldn't make any difference. And I am still not so sure about that either.

I think that a couple of the first original posts in this thread were speaking of what min. requirements should be used with EMC to burn a DVD. And it followed that I took added pots returns to suggest that it would take just a long with a P2 as it did with a P4, using the same media and at say 4x. I don't agree with that but I will take your suggestion and burn a DVD using 4x in both cases but will burn one using my 3.2 GHz processor computer and another computer I have that is only a 2.0 GHz. Hope that makes sense. If not what are you trying to prove ?

OR maybe we are talking about several different things in the same post.

Frank....

[REDWAGON]

cdanteek: "if you burn both the 4x and 16x media at 4x, in the same machine and burner with the same software program! Results should be the same. Please do let us know your results."

Well, I completed one of the tests I had planned on. The following setup was used:

TEST-1

Program---EMC 7.5
DMSD file size--2001.1 MB
DVD Media used--TDK 4X DVD+R
Processor--Intel P4 3.2 GHz (HP Notebook zd8002)
DVD Drive--TSST Corp. CD/DVDW, TS-L532M (Lightscribe Drive)
Advanced Burn Settins--BEST (Note: Only settings available in 7.5 are Best--Good--Medium--Low). There is no specific options in EMC 7.5 to burn at 4x, 8x, 16x etc.)

Time Required--(Click on Burn to to Complete)--18 minutes, 45 SEconds

TEST-2

Program--EMC 7.5
DMSD file size--2001.1 MB (Same as Test-1)
DVD Media Used--TDK 16X DVD+R
Processor--Intel P4 3.2 GHz (HP Notebook zd8002)
DVD Drive--TSST Corp. CD/DVDW, TS-L532M (Lightscribe Drive)
Advanced Burn Settings--BEST (See Note in test-1)

Time Required--(Click on Burn to Completion)--17 Minutes, 43 Seconds

To tell the truth, I was a little disappointed that I only save approximately a minute and 2 seconds. But the 16X media did burn slightly faster at the same "BEST" quality setting.

I am still planning on burning another test using the same two TDK media, however, Use my 3.2 GHz computer for one test and another 2.66 MHz computer just to see the burn time difference. I am still convinced that there will be a marked difference in burn time with these two computers.

I'm really not sure how all this relates to the original post in this thread but for what it's worth-----

Frank....

[d_deweywright]

REDWAGON, on Nov 15 2006, 11:55 AM, said:

cdanteek: "if you burn both the 4x and 16x media at 4x, in the same machine and burner with the same software program! Results should be the same. Please do let us know your results."

Well, I completed one of the tests I had planned on. The following setup was used:

TEST-1

Program---EMC 7.5
DMSD file size--2001.1 MB
DVD Media used--TDK 4X DVD+R
Processor--Intel P4 3.2 GHz (HP Notebook zd8002)
DVD Drive--TSST Corp. CD/DVDW, TS-L532M (Lightscribe Drive)
Advanced Burn Settins--BEST (Note: Only settings available in 7.5 are Best--Good--Medium--Low). There is no specific options in EMC 7.5 to burn at 4x, 8x, 16x etc.)

Time Required--(Click on Burn to to Complete)--18 minutes, 45 SEconds

TEST-2

Program--EMC 7.5
DMSD file size--2001.1 MB (Same as Test-1)
DVD Media Used--TDK 16X DVD+R
Processor--Intel P4 3.2 GHz (HP Notebook zd8002)
DVD Drive--TSST Corp. CD/DVDW, TS-L532M (Lightscribe Drive)
Advanced Burn Settings--BEST (See Note in test-1)

Time Required--(Click on Burn to Completion)--17 Minutes, 43 Seconds

To tell the truth, I was a little disappointed that I only save approximately a minute and 2 seconds. But the 16X media did burn slightly faster at the same "BEST" quality setting.

I am still planning on burning another test using the same two TDK media, however, Use my 3.2 GHz computer for one test and another 2.66 MHz computer just to see the burn time difference. I am still convinced that there will be a marked difference in burn time with these two computers.

I'm really not sure how all this relates to the original post in this thread but for what it's worth-----

Frank....

Frank, the intent was to use the two different media, but set the burn speed on both burns to 4X.  That is, even though you're using 16X media, tell EMC to only burn it at 4X, the idea being to show that 4X is 4X, regardless of whether or not the media supports a higher speed.  CD limits his burning to that speed to guarantee data throughput to the drive on his slower system.

Edited by d_deweywright, 15 November 2006 - 10:37 AM.

[REDWAGON]

If that's true Dave, I am wondering why when I set the burn speed to "Best" (Note: Only settings available in 7.5 are Best--Good--Medium--Low). There is no specific options in EMC 7.5 to burn at 4x, 8x, 16x etc.)

And had the two different TDK media (4X & 16X) that there was a difference in the total burn time ?? It does seem reasonable to assume that if the burn speed is set to 4X and even though you use different speed media (4X & 16X) that the time would be the same. I suggest that that isn't totally true.

Another parameter that will change the burn time is how the burner is designed to burn media. I'm talking about the differences between "CAV", "ZCAV", and "CLV" methods of burning. That's "Constant Angular velocity", "Constany Linear Velocity" and I'm not exactly sure about "ZCLV". I suggest that if one had burners that were made to burn at each of the methods and you set the burn speed to 4X and used two different speed media (4X and 16X), you would get slightly different burn times.

All that being said, I still burn all my DVD's at the "BEST" setting and whatever time it takes is fine with me. And although 4X media is probably cheaper than 16X, I continue to buy 16X media.

Frank....

[d_deweywright]

REDWAGON, on Nov 15 2006, 06:22 PM, said:

If that's true Dave, I am wondering why when I set the burn speed to "Best" (Note: Only settings available in 7.5 are Best--Good--Medium--Low). There is no specific options in EMC 7.5 to burn at 4x, 8x, 16x etc.)

And had the two different TDK media (4X & 16X) that there was a difference in the total burn time ?? It does seem reasonable to assume that if the burn speed is set to 4X and even though you use different speed media (4X & 16X) that the time would be the same. I suggest that that isn't totally true.

Another parameter that will change the burn time is how the burner is designed to burn media. I'm talking about the differences between "CAV", "ZCAV", and "CLV" methods of burning. That's "Constant Angular velocity", "Constany Linear Velocity" and I'm not exactly sure about "ZCLV". I suggest that if one had burners that were made to burn at each of the methods and you set the burn speed to 4X and used two different speed media (4X and 16X), you would get slightly different burn times.

All that being said, I still burn all my DVD's at the "BEST" setting and whatever time it takes is fine with me. And although 4X media is probably cheaper than 16X, I continue to buy 16X media.

Frank....

Are you burning a Data DVD?  Good/Better/Best sounds like a video setting.  I confess I don't recall the burn speed setting in 7.5, and I don't have it installed now.  

As for the different speed strategies, CAV, CLV, etc., you would see a difference if the disc couldn't be spun fast enough to handle the highest speed during the inner part of the burn.  For instance, on a CD-R/RW drive capable of "52X" writing, it will start at around 16X, then work it's way up as the burn progresses to the outer edge of the disc, and there will be a difference between the different write strategies.  If you tell it to write at 16X for the entire disc, then in theory, there should be no difference between the different write strategies as 16X can be maintained over the entire burn.

So, not arguing, just posing a couple other scenarios.

[REDWAGON]

On the tests I did Dave, I was burning a DVD to disc and not a data DVD.

There are so many parameters to all of this burning DVD's that is almost impossible to know exactly what a particular total burn time will be under any circumstances. Given that everyone has a different media, different DVD drives, different processors, different other prgrams running that take up resources and on and On. So I'm thinking that all that has been said is probably correct given any set of hardware and media.

Not at all an argument Dave, just a "work in progress" trying to figure it all out. Thanks for all your input.

Frank....

[myguggi]

REDWAGON, on Nov 15 2006, 06:22 PM, said:

If that's true Dave, I am wondering why when I set the burn speed to "Best" (Note: Only settings available in 7.5 are Best--Good--Medium--Low). There is no specific options in EMC 7.5 to burn at 4x, 8x, 16x etc.)

And had the two different TDK media (4X & 16X) that there was a difference in the total burn time ?? It does seem reasonable to assume that if the burn speed is set to 4X and even though you use different speed media (4X & 16X) that the time would be the same. I suggest that that isn't totally true.

Another parameter that will change the burn time is how the burner is designed to burn media. I'm talking about the differences between "CAV", "ZCAV", and "CLV" methods of burning. That's "Constant Angular velocity", "Constany Linear Velocity" and I'm not exactly sure about "ZCLV". I suggest that if one had burners that were made to burn at each of the methods and you set the burn speed to 4X and used two different speed media (4X and 16X), you would get slightly different burn times.

All that being said, I still burn all my DVD's at the "BEST" setting and whatever time it takes is fine with me. And although 4X media is probably cheaper than 16X, I continue to buy 16X media.

Frank....

I would think Good, Best, Medium and Low have nothing to do with burning speed but are only related to the quality of the video you are creating.

[lynn98109]

The difference (the 16x was a bit faster than the 4x) MIGHT be in part a difference in lead-in and lead-out and finalize, which don't have so much to do with the data.

Lynn

[cdanteek]

Quote

I would think Good, Best, Medium and Low have nothing to do with burning speed but are only related to the quality of the video you are creating.

Thanks Walt,
create your video folders or ISO, then just burn at 4x like d_deweywright suggested. "CD limits his burning to that speed to guarantee data throughput to the drive on his slower system."

cdanteek

[REDWAGON]

I thought that was what "Buffer Underrun" was for on most drives. Doesn't that keep the burning process limited based on how fast the drive is processing or burning the information coming from the HD ? So if one has a DVD drive that is real speedy and it's installed on a computer that has a slow processor, the burn will only take place based on how fast the processor can do it's job and the buffer underrun keeps the "Q" full, regardless of the media speed. Is that right ???

Regarding EMC 7.5 which has no options to choose a certain burn speed, at least when set to burn to disc, does that mean if I burn to an ISO file rather than disc, that it gives me any other options as far as burn speed is concerned ??

Frank....