«

I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
overall performance but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also I am very confused as to
whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about dual
core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed for
dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off
upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to
the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to do
this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be cheap.

"updownup" <flying@around> wrote in news:43e96e03$:

> I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
> running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3
> 500 make a big difference to processing time when encoding video into
> dvdformat video. From what i understand I could expect very little
> improvement in overall performance but in video encoding I may expect
> some and has my computer currently takes a long time to do this task a
> big improvement in this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also
> I am very confused as to whether you need special dual capable
> processors or not, I know about dual core but it also sounds like
> their are single core processors designed for dual processor
> motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off upgrading
> single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to the
> fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to
> do this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be
> cheap.
>
>
>

Some times you can have different steppings but same speeds and be ok. A
second CPU WILL help IF your encoding software is aware of multi CPU
setups. I know that there is an option in TMPEGenc that enables/ disables
multi threaded.
Check the options, post here what you use, you know the routine, give us
more details.

--
Ciao, Dave

updownup wrote:
> I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
> running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
> a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
> video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
> overall performance but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
> computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
> this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also I am very confused as to
> whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about dual
> core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed for
> dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off
> upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to
> the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to do
> this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be cheap.

You require a second CPU with matched stepping for reliable operation.
This may not be an easy thing to obtain.

The performance will be boosted significantly if the video processing
application is multi-threaded, and the task can be divided up between
threads with each thread operating on independent data.

Most applications are single threaded or use additional threads for I/O
tasks, and won't benefit significantly from a second processor.

The Other Guy

"The Other Guy" <> wrote in message
news:43e97382$...
> updownup wrote:
> > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
> > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500
make
> > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
> > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
> > overall performance but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
> > computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement
in
> > this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also I am very confused as
to
> > whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about
dual
> > core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed
for
> > dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better
off
> > upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested
due to
> > the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu
to do
> > this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be
cheap.
>
> You require a second CPU with matched stepping for reliable operation.
> This may not be an easy thing to obtain.
>
> The performance will be boosted significantly if the video processing
> application is multi-threaded, and the task can be divided up between
> threads with each thread operating on independent data.
>
> Most applications are single threaded or use additional threads for I/O
> tasks, and won't benefit significantly from a second processor.
>
> The Other Guy

Thanks, how many different steppings are there?
I also read that you need ecc memory to run dual processors although I may
not have understood it right, if you do need ecc then that kills it for me.

"Dave Taylor" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9764AF80DC034daveytaynospamplshot@203.97.3 7.6...
> "updownup" <flying@around> wrote in news:43e96e03$:
>
> > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
> > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3
> > 500 make a big difference to processing time when encoding video into
> > dvdformat video. From what i understand I could expect very little
> > improvement in overall performance but in video encoding I may expect
> > some and has my computer currently takes a long time to do this task a
> > big improvement in this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also
> > I am very confused as to whether you need special dual capable
> > processors or not, I know about dual core but it also sounds like
> > their are single core processors designed for dual processor
> > motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off upgrading
> > single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to the
> > fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to
> > do this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be
> > cheap.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Some times you can have different steppings but same speeds and be ok. A
> second CPU WILL help IF your encoding software is aware of multi CPU
> setups. I know that there is an option in TMPEGenc that enables/ disables
> multi threaded.
> Check the options, post here what you use, you know the routine, give us
> more details.
>
> --
> Ciao, Dave

Thanks, I use ulead video studio 9 but can't check for options at the
moment.

updownup wrote:
> I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
> running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
> a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
> video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
> overall performance

You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
(hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
compared to older systems and systems with less memory.

I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
other things being equal.

but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
> computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
> this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu.

If your encoding software knows about multiple processors, it should be
faster; but in any case, the system will remain usable even while one
processor is running continuously at 100%

More memory would help, too.

Also I am very confused as to
> whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about dual
> core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed for
> dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off
> upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to
> the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to do
> this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be cheap.

XP Home or Pro? I'm not sure if Home supports SMP but I'm sure I'll be
corrected

"-=rjh=-" <> wrote in message
news:...
> updownup wrote:
> > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
> > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500
make
> > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
> > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
> > overall performance
>
> You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
> processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
> (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
> compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
>
> I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
> other things being equal.
>

That's good to hear, I would be happy with something that performed like a
1ghz system.

In article <>, -=rjh=- <>
wrote:

> updownup wrote:
> > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
> > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
> > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
> > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
> > overall performance
>
> You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
> processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
> (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
> compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
>
> I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
> other things being equal.

You must be joking! I might take a dual 800 MHz over a 1 GHz, but no
less than that. And I say this as someone typing this on a dual 2.0 GHz
machine. Some things rock on dual CPUs, but most programs just use 100%
of one CPU and leave the other one idle.



> but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
> > computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
> > this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu.
>
> If your encoding software knows about multiple processors, it should be
> faster; but in any case, the system will remain usable even while one
> processor is running continuously at 100%

I've heard that Windows is more responsive on a dual CPU system. But
both OSX and Linux remain perfectly responsive on single CPU systems
even if the CPU is continuously at 100%. That's why they have different
CPU priorities for different programs, automatically adjusted.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

updownup wrote:
> Thanks, how many different steppings are there?

I'm not certain of this. There doesn't seem to be that many.

If you have a brand-name system, the simplest solution is to purchase an
upgrade kit. This will give you the right processor stepping and the
necessary heatsink/fan assembly if it is non-standard.

If you have a white box system, open it up and look for a label on the
side... there should be an identifier SLxxxx or similar.

> I also read that you need ecc memory to run dual processors although I may
> not have understood it right, if you do need ecc then that kills it for me.

ECC is certainly a desirable thing to have, but I don't see any reason
why this would be required.

The Other Guy

Bruce Hoult wrote:
> In article <>, -=rjh=- <>
> wrote:
>
>> updownup wrote:
>>> I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
>>> running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
>>> a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
>>> video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
>>> overall performance
>> You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
>> processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
>> (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
>> compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
>>
>> I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
>> other things being equal.
>
> You must be joking! I might take a dual 800 MHz over a 1 GHz, but no
> less than that. And I say this as someone typing this on a dual 2.0 GHz
> machine. Some things rock on dual CPUs, but most programs just use 100%
> of one CPU and leave the other one idle.

I agree with Bruce on this one, although there are some specific
circumstances under which I would take a much slower SMP system over a
modern CPU.

For example, the old PII/PIII Xeon processors with 2MB full speed cache
which can be run in 4-way and greater configurations. These make
excellent database servers. The processors are still readily available,
and still cost more than newer processors at four times the clock speed.

>> but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
>>> computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
>>> this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu.
>> If your encoding software knows about multiple processors, it should be
>> faster; but in any case, the system will remain usable even while one
>> processor is running continuously at 100%
>
> I've heard that Windows is more responsive on a dual CPU system. But
> both OSX and Linux remain perfectly responsive on single CPU systems
> even if the CPU is continuously at 100%. That's why they have different
> CPU priorities for different programs, automatically adjusted.

Yes, I've found Windows to be more responsive on dual CPUs on I/O
intensive tasks. Hight CPU load itself is not necessarily a problem on
Windows either. I suspect the same would apply to other systems as well,
since the lack of responsiveness comes from servicing interrupts. With a
second CPU, programmes can continue to execute while interrupts are
serviced by the main CPU.

The Other Guy