Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Which current CPU for encoding? (Read 4603 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Which current CPU for encoding?

I'm building an inexpensive, quiet and reasonably fast PC rig, mainly for CD ripping and encoding (mostly FLAC, some MPC, AAC and MP3). I've settled on a m-ATX case but was wondering which of the many CPU models out there that offers a good price vs. performance ratio, for this specific task.

How big are the differences in speed between, say a Celeron @ 2.8 GHz and a P4 at 2.6 GHz, compared to a Athlon XP 2500+ (Barton) or a "Thorton" XP2400+? Specific results from people with various CPU's would be interesting.

Thanks,
uosdwis

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #1 –
Goto Tom's Hardware, this site has a lot of benchmarks including LAME encoding for many recent processors.
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you."

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #2 –
If you go to http://www.tomshardware.com and read some of their reviews of various cpus, one of the things they test for is encoding time of a big wav to mp3 using lame. The Intel P4 cpus always seem to be faster at doing this according to Tom.  I have been running Intel hardware for a couple of years, and it does seem to me to be very good for audio encoding needs. But don't trust me, go read some cpu reviews at Tom's Hardware.
you will make mp3's for compatibility reasons.

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #3 –
I've always liked the Anandtech site (http://www.anandtech.com) for their CPU reviews.  Conclusions are the same, however.  For similarly "speed-rated" CPUs (e.g. Athlon XP 2600+ vs. Pentium 2.6Ghz) the Pentiums perform better during media encoding tests.  Of course, they also cost a lot more...

-Aaron

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #4 –
Quote
For similarly "speed-rated" CPUs (e.g. Athlon XP 2600+ vs. Pentium 2.6Ghz) the Pentiums perform better during media encoding tests. Of course, they also cost a lot more...


Considering the true speed (measured in MHz) of these pentium rated amd cpus they perform quite good. And paying less is always appreciated!

edit: clarification
edit2: more clarification (I'm human)

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #5 –
I don't think performance difference between the four is going to be readily noticable.
Quote
FLAC

I'm not aware of any speed tests done using flac as a benchmark.
Quote
MPC

AMD cpus are generally better at mpc encoding.
Quote
AAC

Same as flac.

I'd expect different flavors of AAC to give different results, too.
Quote
MP3

Intel CPUs are generally faster here.

However, I haven't seen any lame 3.90.3 --alt-preset tests.

Personally, I'd go with a 2500+ barton + a basic nforce2 motherboard. IMO it's a good compromice between price and performance.

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #6 –
OK, I've found results of a test that uses "flac --best" as a benchmark.

http://ixbt.com/cpu/images/intel-amd-cpu-r...-audio/flac.swf

It looks like Intel Celeron 2.8 would be the better choice. Interpolating the values for different intel cpus, I'd expect a 10% advantage over the 2500+ Barton.

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #7 –
Quote
OK, I've found results of a test that uses "flac --best" as a benchmark.

http://ixbt.com/cpu/images/intel-amd-cpu-r...-audio/flac.swf

It looks like Intel Celeron 2.8 would be the better choice. Interpolating the values for different intel cpus, I'd expect a 10% advantage over the 2500+ Barton.

I wouldn't trust a clockspeed extrapolation on a memory-limited plattform.

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #9 –
Quote
I wouldn't trust a clockspeed extrapolation on a memory-limited platoform.

Well, there's nothing to suggest that cache size matters in this test - the difference between a p4 and a celery at the same clock speed is negligible, so IMO extrapolation is more or less reasonable.

I must say, though, that 10% isn't such a big deal...

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #10 –
I wasn't thinking about cache, but about actual RAM
 

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #11 –
For price/performance barton+nforce2 is the best generally. But  I guess a really cheap via board suffice here.

/Johan

Which current CPU for encoding?

Reply #12 –
I wouldn't get VIA if I were you, they are cheaper than most value processors, however they will fall short if in the future you decide to use the PC for anything else.
The advantage of Intel's processors in LAME encoding are because of clock speed only, however I'd have an Athlon XP rather than a Celeron every day, perhaps not much for encoding/playing, but for almost everything cache does matter.

My advice is, don't go for the cheapest, buy something that will be upgradable, has a good bang for the buck, and does more than the basic, because even though the encoders today work fast enough at a certain speed, it doesn't mean they will be fast enough for the next best codec. AAC, or whatever they invent next.
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you."