PDA

View Full Version : Is TyStudio optimised for the Athlon XP?



akeogh
06-11-2003, 03:03 PM
Using Ty Studio Beta 3 on XP Pro with 512MB RAM ( though 128 should be OK ) My PIII-800 takes nearly 25 mins to process a 1 hour 2.5GB stream ( no cuts but audio output is 48000) from a UK SA Tivo. The stream is held locally on the PC.

I have tried the same test on 5 other machines with a range of results but it appears that the Athlon is streets ahead of the P4.

All machines had 512MB Ram except for the Dell which had 640MB

Compaq Presario 3.06 P4 HT 16min 30 secs
Advent XP 3000+ 8min 7 secs
Asus A7N8X Athlon 2600+ (thoroughbred) 8 min 45 secs
ASRock G-Pro P4 2.4GHz 15 min 10 secs
Dell ??? Intel M/B P4 2.4GHz 10 mins 15 secs

The compaq's figure is especially crap since XP showed that it was using the "two" processors in the 3.06 core.

So is the P4 crap or is Tystudio optimised for the Athlon ?

Andy

:confused:

snedecor
06-11-2003, 09:13 PM
Looks like you haven't drunk the Kool-Aid, yet.

Athlon has *almost* always beat P4, and at about 70% of the price (and about 50-60% of the clock speed).

AlphaWolf
06-11-2003, 09:18 PM
It's actualy an i386 build, though you can compile it for athlon if you want. I have myself, it does run a bit faster. (but then I also use the -O3 build optimization as well as a few others)

caos1978
06-12-2003, 12:57 AM
[Tried to send this earlier, but DD was not accepting posts for some reason...]


Well I like to think of anything AMD now makes as superior to Intel as far as performance for the price is concerned, (although they also make good space heaters), but as I understand it TyStudio is not optimized for any specific processor. In fact I don't think there is even any MMX instructions in the demux/transcode/mux pipeline (not that I could be wrong about that) but a number of other things could have led to the Athlons performance advantage.

First- One Athlon motherboard you have (Asus A7N8x) has a nForce2 chipset on it. This enables double pumping of your DDR RAM if you have an even number of sticks (in essence the systems stripes the RAM, so performace is enhanced)

Second - The hard disks on those machine could be faster, or the partition on which the Ty file was stored could be in a better position
on the hard disk.

This is the most likely, as when I upgraded my CPU and memory, but left the same hard disks I did not see a great deal of improvement. Remember that 2.5GB is still a fairly large amount of data. One way you could check is by testing how long it takes to copy a ty file from one drive to another and back again. 2.5GB would take a few minutes on almost any machine.


Another Note:
The Compaq P4's hyperthreading (what XP reads as 2 processors) only helps if the application being used is multithreaded. TyStudio may have multiple threads, but they are all processing data into one file (so it's not going to see major advantages with the hyperthreading, as I understand it)

Hope that sheds some light.

-.\\oc

AlphaWolf
06-12-2003, 01:59 AM
Hmm...all I know is this much: the builds I compile myself run quite a bit faster.

I run gentoo though, and I have my make.conf compiler settings tuned to the max.

akeogh
06-12-2003, 11:58 AM
Thanks everyone. I have just ordered an Athlon.

I will do some reading but may be back for advice on how to compile on Linux. Can I just use the compiler that came with my Mandrake Linux or do I need any special libraries?

I have tystudio-0.5.0-beta2.tar.gz is this the latest without getting to grips with cvs?

As for whiplash .......... :)


Andy


Originally posted by rc3105
dl or compile the linux ver of the command line tydemux / mplex or typrocess, boot from a dbd floppy or zipslack (some bare bones kernel config) then batch process.

w/o all the gui / network / video / sound driver cruft - so that tydemux & the kernel are basically the only things in the L1/L2 caches - you will get WHIPLASH

--
Riley