Jump to content
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 7 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • 0

Roxio EMC 9x and quad core


Big_Dave

Question

20 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

I don't particularly believe benchmarks because how do you know you can really trust the out comes? What I trust is MY OWN tests. Like I posted on my own DUAL CORE using and app that IS OPTIMIZED for multicore processors and an app that is NOT OPTIMIZED. The results of rendering the same DV AVI file was minuscule. I don't care is you had 16 cores, video rendering does not seem to take advantage of them with the software that I own even though the software says it does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought mine Jun 06 and the 5600+ weren't on the shelves until much later. just couldn't wait. LOL Amd has out the 6000+ now and the AMD Phenom Quad is supposed be out really soon like September I think. Will be interesting to see how it does plus the new Hypertransport 3 technology. I'll have to use what I have for at least another few years unless I win the lotto. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought mine Jun 06 and the 5600+ weren't on the shelves until much later. just couldn't wait. LOL Amd has out the 6000+ now and the AMD Phenom Quad is supposed be out really soon like September I think. Will be interesting to see how it does plus the new Hypertransport 3 technology. I'll have to use what I have for at least another few years unless I win the lotto. ;)

 

That's the problem with technology. It goes almost as fast as we can spend money on all the new stuff. :lol:

 

I remember years ago, when I was going to upgrade to a PII computer. My daughter told me that she wished technology would just slow down a little. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

Life is good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now if that was 5600+ , I swap with you in a heart beat. ;)

 

When I built my new tower in January, my son's advice was to not go overboard with the AMD dual core processor speed because newer cpu's would be coming out and it might make more sense to upgrade later on. So - it has a 3800mhz 64x2 in it.

However, if the price of the AMD2 64x2 6000mhz processor drops just a bit more on Newegg - it just might find its way into my tower . . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gary,

 

There is nothing like having a big uniprocessor to do a single task at a time. :P But if multitasking and multithreading is needed then you have to admit that multiprocessors is the way to go. I hope some task like disk reorg or a virus scan doesn't kick in during the rendering process. I like the big uniprocessors myself but multiple cores are here for the home user and I don't see them disappearing. Even hyperthreading will show some good for applications that are heavy I/O bound IF the application is designed to take advantage of multitasking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but multiple cores are here for the home user and I don't see them disappearing.
Mostly because they won't give us a choice. It makes them more money. LOL I'm still not sold on multi-tasking much yet either. That is totally up to how the OS handles it even if the application is 'optimized'. Just try burning a DVD at 16X and run several other CPU intense apps at the same time. I can almost guarantee you that the DVD will have errors on it. When rendering video or burning a DVD, I absolutely WILL NOT do anything else even with my 3Ghz dual core machine.

I hope some task like disk reorg or a virus scan doesn't kick in during the rendering process.
I've always had those things set to MANUAL use only. Personally, I have never had the NEED to multitask or multithreaded apps. I'm sure it would be needed for large businesses or certain instants, but for everyday surfing, writing letters to grandma or printing out pictures, I don't see how it would be needed by the average consumer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It runs on dual core so I can't see why it wouldn't on a quad core

 

It's the OS that depends on the CPU (no OS = no apps) ;)

 

The jury is still out tho as to whether or not there's any increase in performance with SMPs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With several CPU intensive tasks running, you might want to set the priority of the rendering software to high with task manager to ensure that it gets serviced before the CPU tasks cause a drive speed down situation. Still, I wouldn't recommend running more CPU intensive tasks than the number of REAL processors that are available. IF the OS doesn't time slice the intensive tasks properly than you could run into problems with tasks that are "timing" dependent rather than event or wait dependent. The other down side is that perhaps your patience will get tested with the important task at hand. One learns a lot from working with mainframes for many years and seeing the PC developers making mistakes that the mainframe developers discovered and corrected years ago. Actually, the MS OS is getting much like a mainframe OS. Look at READYBOOST memory, the old mainframers would call it extended storage or swap storage. It's cheaper than real memory but you pay for performance. With memory prices continuing to fall, I would expect the READYBOOST option to become less of a viable alternative over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone tired Roxio EMC 9 Suite on an Intel quad core platform? I am thinking about buying a quad core perhaps this fall. I wouldn't want Roxio to come back and say "sorry but we are not certified for running on a quad core". :unsure:

Yea it runs on my quad-core, except for the typical bugs EMC9 seems to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that EMC 9 is specifically compiled for hyperthreading and multicore CPUs, but the OS is. I'm not even sure that rendering video would even be faster if it was.

 

I have Adobe Premiere Elements 2 which IS multi-processor aware and I see very little difference in rendering speed between that and Videowave on the same dual core machine.

 

Personally, I feel that video rendering still depends more on CPU SPEED and not multi-core.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that EMC 9 is specifically compiled for hyperthreading and multicore CPUs, but the OS is. I'm not even sure that rendering video would even be faster if it was.

 

I have Adobe Premiere Elements 2 which IS multi-processor aware and I see very little difference in rendering speed between that and Videowave on the same dual core machine.

 

Personally, I feel that video rendering still depends more on CPU SPEED and not multi-core.

 

You won't get any advantage from multiple cores, if application is not designed to use multiple cores (threads).

Rendering video should be much faster on quad. Look fe. here, conclusion is obvious.

It's enough just to run rendering (preferable MPEG2) and check CPU utilisation.

 

a_t

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I would wait for AMD's Phenom Quad core. I've been a die-hard AMD user until my last machine. I have not been impressed with Intel processors or the support chips. I'm definitely going back to AMD when it's time to upgrade.

 

And I prefer Intel over AMD. I am not impressed with the AMD processor in this machine. It's all preference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...