Clone DVD 2.5.4.3, W2K Pro, and Buffer Reading

furballi 2005-01-23 20:09:18 UTC #1

Is it possible to view the NEC 3500's 2 MB buffer while burning with CloneDVD 2.5.4.3? If not, then is there a work-around solution?

TIA,
CP

Olli 2005-01-24 03:16:58 UTC #2

No.

Work around solution for what? What is your problem?

furballi 2005-01-24 10:42:52 UTC #3

Thanks Ollie for the response.

Some people were having issues with slow burn speed/bad burn. One can use the real-time drive's buffer cache and burn speed as diagnostic tools.

I noticed that CloneDVD/AnyDVD will initially rip/reauthor the original DVD to the CloneDVDTemp folder. Depending on the selected option, CloneDVD will then burn the movie to the blank DVD disc, or save it to the hard drive as an ISO file. Writing from the CloneDVDTemp folder to the DVD with CloneDVD uses MUCH more CPU load than writing from an ISO file to the DVD using Nero 6.6. Why would writing in ISO mode with Nero use so much less CPU load?

On my 600MHz PIII, the CPU load at 4X write speed with CloneDVD is around 35%. If I use CloneDVD to convert the data to ISO format, and Nero 6.6 to write the ISO file at 4X, then my CPU load decreases to about 9% during the write operation. My DVD writer and media support 16X write speed. But if I instruct CloneDVD to write at 16X, then the CPU load can exceed 98% (slower burn time).

Another question. Let's say a movie has 30 chapters and it takes 15 minutes to rip/reauthor the movie with CloneDVD. If I want to copy chapters 29-30 while maintaining all other settings, CloneDVD will still require about 12 minutes to rip/reauthor. Shouldn't this time be MUCH lower since I'm only copying two chapters (about 9 minutes out of the original 127 min movie)?

TIA,
CP

Olli 2005-01-24 14:05:42 UTC #4

Disable the damned sheep animation. CPU use will drop to 1%.

furballi 2005-01-24 22:12:35 UTC #5

I ran the test will NO Sheep animation.

Olli 2005-01-25 00:17:11 UTC #6

Oops... This is not good.

furballi 2005-01-25 08:46:02 UTC #7

Ollie,

Did more tests. Averaged 2% CPU load with Nero 6.6 and the ISO file at 4X burn speed. CloneDVD 2.5.4.3 consumed 35% CPU load when writing from the FILE mode at 4X burn speed. No sheep animation and no movie preview pane.

If I use CloneDVD to write in ISO mode, then the CPU load drops to 10%. Again, we see that writing in ISO mode requires less CPU clock time than file mode, and that CloneDVD uses more CPU load to burn the same ISO file. Do you know why ISOs are "more efficient" when it comes to write operation?

From these tests, it appears that CloneDVD uses more CPU load than Nero 6.6 when writing data to the DVD. I have reloaded CloneDVD and AnyDVD. No change. Note that the ISO tests were performed without AnyDVD running in the background.

Thanks again for your input.
CP

Olli 2005-01-25 09:08:31 UTC #8

furballi:

Ollie,

Did more tests. Averaged 2% CPU load with Nero 6.6 and the ISO file at 4X burn speed. CloneDVD 2.5.4.3 consumed 35% CPU load when writing from the FILE mode at 4X burn speed. No sheep animation and no movie preview pane.

If I use CloneDVD to write in ISO mode, then the CPU load drops to 10%. Again, we see that writing in ISO mode requires less CPU clock time than file mode, and that CloneDVD uses more CPU load to burn the same ISO file. Do you know why ISOs are "more efficient" when it comes to write operation?

From these tests, it appears that CloneDVD uses more CPU load than Nero 6.6 when writing data to the DVD. I have reloaded CloneDVD and AnyDVD. No change. Note that the ISO tests were performed without AnyDVD running in the background.

Thanks again for your input.
CP

I have no idea ATM... Do you know, if CloneDVD eats Kernel time or user mode time? (Enable "Show Kernel Times" in Task manager)

furballi 2005-01-25 10:29:02 UTC #9

Okay, will run more tests. I'm also going to burn Nero 6.6 in file mode (ISO/UDF) and compare with CloneDVD2.

furballi 2005-01-25 17:16:04 UTC #10

Quick recap of tested system...comparing CPU and KERNEL loads at 4X burn speed between CloneDVD 2.5.4.3 and Nero 6.6.0.3.

-600MHz PIII with W2K Pro and 386 MB RAM
-CPU load is at 0% before and after each test
-Peak Commit Charge (maximum total memory load) is 194 MB during the tests
-Ricohjnp W11 4X DVD+RW media
-NEC 3500A DVD writer with 2.18 FW (218btrpc1...bitsetting, riplock removed)

Load at 4X write speed in FILE MODE:

-CloneDVD...KERNEL TIMES is 15%...CPU USAGE is 40%
-Nero...........KERNEL TIMES is 1%.....CPU USAGE is 2%

Load at 4X write speed in ISO MODE:

-CloneDVD...KERNEL TIMES is 8%...CPU USAGE is 9%
-Nero...........KERNEL TIMES is 1%...CPU USAGE is 2%

The CPU load when running NERO is only 2% in both FILE and ISO burn modes. CloneDVD uses more Kernel times and CPU usage when burning a DVD, both in FILE mode and ISO mode. It appears that there are other subroutines running within CloneDVD when burning in FILE mode. This would explain why the CPU load while burning in FILE mode is higher than ISO mode.

I hope that Ollie and others can duplicate these findings with their systems.

@ Ollie,

Let me know if you need me to run more tests.

Olli 2005-01-27 02:17:39 UTC #11

No, thanks! Are writer & harddisk at the same IDE cable, or on different cables?

furballi 2005-01-27 08:34:08 UTC #12

Hard drive is on Primary IDE cable. DVD burner is on Secondary IDE cable. All cables are of the 80 wire type. The NEC 3500A burner is running in DMA mode 2. The hard drive is running in DMA mode 4. Minimum hard drive transfer speed is around 29 MB/sec.

furballi 2005-01-29 08:13:39 UTC #13

Did more tests with a clean WXP Pro SP1 partition. Same results (within 2%) as W2K Pro. The higher CPU load in CloneDVD while burning will not be a problem with a more powerful PC. However, with 500 to 1000MHz processors, the CPU load can hit 100% at 16X burn speed, resulting in buffer overrun and longer burn time. I have not seen any quality issue with the DVDs. Still, I would advise the user to monitor the burn time. 7 min for 12X, and 6 min for 16X. Reduce the burn speed if the actual burn time is longer.

With Nero, I can burn at 12X in 7 min. If I use CloneDVD, then the burn time goes up to about 8:30. When the CPU load hits 99-100% at the higher speed, the hard drive will slow down, triggering the buffer overrun circuit.

furballi 2005-01-30 08:31:48 UTC #14

Latest scoops...

Burn some movies with DVD Shrink 3.2. The CPU load at 4X burn is about the SAME as CloneDVD, in the 35% range. Nero must use a different write logic to achieve a 2% CPU load. I suspect this is proprietary stuff from Nero, cause the latest Nero Recode (remake of Shrink 3.2 for Nero) also uses 2% CPU load @ 4X burn.

@ Ollie,

Would it be possible for you to implement the write logic used by Nero in future version of CloneDVD? 30% drop in CPU load for a 600 MHz PIII is a big improvement.

I would also like the ability to crop out the junks at the START and END of the movie. CloneDVD only remove individual chapter. Unfortunately, some movies include a long lead-in on the first chapter, and the credits on the last chaper. If you kill these chapters, then you will miss the start and end of the movie. Removing these junks can save 5 to 7 minutes of playing time, and reduce the compression by about 3 to 5%.

Olli 2005-04-09 16:58:52 UTC #15

furballi:

Latest scoops...

Burn some movies with DVD Shrink 3.2. The CPU load at 4X burn is about the SAME as CloneDVD, in the 35% range. Nero must use a different write logic to achieve a 2% CPU load. I suspect this is proprietary stuff from Nero, cause the latest Nero Recode (remake of Shrink 3.2 for Nero) also uses 2% CPU load @ 4X burn.

@ Ollie,

Would it be possible for you to implement the write logic used by Nero in future version of CloneDVD? 30% drop in CPU load for a 600 MHz PIII is a big improvement.

I would also like the ability to crop out the junks at the START and END of the movie. CloneDVD only remove individual chapter. Unfortunately, some movies include a long lead-in on the first chapter, and the credits on the last chaper. If you kill these chapters, then you will miss the start and end of the movie. Removing these junks can save 5 to 7 minutes of playing time, and reduce the compression by about 3 to 5%.

It has been a while...
Can you try the following:
Start regedit, browse to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Elaborate Bytes\ElbyCDIO
Create a DWORD Value NoLockedIO
Set it to 1
Exit CloneDVD (if it was running). Now start it again. Can you see reduced CPU usage now?

iss 2005-04-09 17:14:23 UTC #16

Nero does use a proprietary software that reduces CPU usuage. it is one of the things that attracted many people to Nero to begin with the ability to multi task while burning.

Olli 2005-04-10 02:50:28 UTC #17

A little late for an april's fool...

iss 2005-04-10 10:30:45 UTC #18

A little late for an april's fool...

Hey that is what Ahead used to claim about their software they wouldnt mislead the consumer would they? :bigsmile: then again maybe there is a reason they dont claim this anymore.......LOL

dvduser 2005-04-12 20:50:38 UTC #19

movie ripped by dvdshrink v3.2-4464MB use clonedvd2 v2751 write to DVD+R 8x,
select file VIDEO_TS folder and CPU go up to 87% during writing, disable animate cpu no change, anyway to reduce cpu% ?

Olli 2005-04-13 03:51:45 UTC #20

Did you use the "Write existing Data" button?
Can you try the new versions with the new ElbyCDIO?
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=134011