Overclock.net banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,706 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Has anyone here tried both of these chips (or a Q9550 even) at video encoding? I am going to have to start taking HD video .mts to MP-2 and was wondering if I would see a big improvement.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,017 Posts
Video encoding is based on the amount of cores, and clock speed, it does not have much to do with cache, or a die shrink. That is why Core i7 is better at encoding than Q9650, because it can process more threads, and can has good clock speed (specially since you can overclock it to 4+ Ghz).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,774 Posts
depends on your frequency as well as the program...

I know clock for clock there will be just a minor difference, but if your getting a 9650 to 4.0 and a 66 at 3.6 it will shed some time off overall

stock vs stock the 9650 would be a bit faster as well... But we are talking shaving 3 - 5 minutes of a 60+ minute project so... I am not sure exactly what type of encoding you were speaking of, but if the program is optimized for multi threaded tasking it should shine on any Q

As mentioned above the i7 with 4 HT cores is really the way to go for an encoding machine....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,706 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
OK, thanks for the input. Sounds like I won't see enough improvement. If it was around a 20-25% speed increase then I'd consider upgrading.
 

·
Initializing...
Joined
·
23,796 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by gnolnats View Post
I went from q6600 to q9550 and don't see very much difference at all rendering dvd with convertxtodvd. About the same speed (between 8 and 9x usually) and same time to complete.
What about in gaming do you notice a difference at all in FPS? Because I have a eye on getting a Q9550 maybe but it depends if its worth it or not.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top