Slower speed with new burner

Hello,

I use to have a SOHW-1633S that would analysis and encode my dvd backup in 30 minutes flat using DVDShrink (bunring them at a seperate 8-10 minutes)
After that died from many many burns later I got a new one and wanted to try the BenQ DW1650, it works just as good as my old lite-on i guess it works with my same media and my home dvd players but what it lacks is speed. It takes 25 minutes just for it to analysis, I even overclocked my CPU settings from 1.6ghz to 1.9ghz to try and get some faster speed, could this be a firmware issue of somesort or maybe the dw1650 is trying to get a good rip one time around…??

Thanks for any input in advance.

Analysis with DVDSHRINK is CPU intensive which has nothing to do with the speed of the 1650 drive. 1.9ghz is not the fastest CPU speed which is why it will take long to transcode with DVDSHRINK. It sounds like you’re ripping directly from the dvd disc. It would be best that you rip the files to your hard drive first then use DVDSHRINK.

You want the DVDSHRINK process to go faster then you’ll need to invest in a new CPU.

That sound’s right for a 1.9Ghz CPU. My old P4 2Ghz CPU will take around 20-25 mins to analyse depends on the movie length. The new Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD Dual Core can take only 3-6 minutes to do the deep analysis on dual layer movie.

:stuck_out_tongue: You’d get better video quality using DVD REBUILDER PRO then there’ll be no need for Deep Analysis in DVDSHRINK. Although using DVD REBUILDER PRO it would take longer to encode because your CPU speed is slow at 1.9 ghz. Difference between the two softwares are DVDSHRINK only transcodes while DVD REBUILDER PRO uses a video encoder like CINEMA CRAFT ENCODER as well as other video encoders. :wink:

But when I had my old 1633S my CPU was never overclocked I had it on bios defaults at 1.6ghz and the timing was still better 15 minutes to Analysis!?

I’ll give DVD Rebuilder Pro and try copying the disc to my drive instead of the disc

Remember I mentioned DVD REBUILDER PRO will take longer to encode because your CPU speed is slow to begin with but you’ll have better video quality. When using DVD REBUILDER PRO it takes me about 1 hour 20-30minutes to convert a 2 hour movie. This is with using a Pentium 4 3.00 ghz CPU.

You have to remember some imporant things with DVD Shrink.
If you re-author your disc to do the main movie only will decrease the time spent.
If you do a deep analisis it will take more time to encode.
On the Quality Settings page of backup if you have the box checked for “Compress video with high quality adaptive error compansation” it will take quite a bit longer.
Remember that the more you have to compress the files to fit on a single layer disc and the more quality you want in the final results the longer it is going to take.
To copy an entire disc with all the extras, doing a deep analisis with AEC on two hours is not uncommon. Where as to re-author doing just the main movie and the one track of audio without deep analisis and AEC aprox 10 min is about right.
These figures are inline with my 3200 Athlon and my 3500 Athlon systems. My 2.6 Celeron system takes quite a bit longer.

You might want to check to make sure that DMA is enabled for your drives, check this link .

Then you cant use more than 2-passes ?

I advice everyone to use no less than 5 passes using CCE to ensure the best possibly video quality. I have a AMD 64 3700 +. It takes me 7-8 hours to backup a full movie with 6 passes and 2hour + length.

What quantitative analysis have you performed to suggest this? I’ve read that there’s only a miniscule and not noticable difference between two passes and three passes, and that anything over three passes is simply a waste of time.

I use two passes with CCE and get excellent results in under two hours with a long movie.

In another forum the author of DVD Rebuilder said that there is no evident benefit in doing more than 3 passes. He even hinted that in future releases the pass option would be limited to 4 or less passes.

In a way i have done quantitative anylises cause ive have done a project on my own where i have ripped 4 different movies; all with 2 and 6 passes. I ripped scarface (wich have poor quality originally), gladiator (long movie with good quality), grapes of wrath (black/white) and cypher (good quality, not so long).

Then i examined before and after on each rip and looked for differences. I took the same scene and zoomed in 300% of normal size. What i found was this:

Scarface: Slight quality difference, Gladiator: significant difference, grapes of wrath: didnt notice any difference, cypher: slight differece.

My conclusion was that the lower bitrate (longer movies) and good sources need more passes while the higher bitrate and poorer source quality need fewer passes. Even though i only on gladiator saw a significant difference in quality i would do 5 passes or more on all my rips since i did see a slight difference on the rest. Thats the whole point: i would ensure the best possibly quality even though you gain little quality in a long time. I think if you start to compromise quality you can get into a “bad” circle. Just like people compromise their media quality to save money. You buy the media that suits how much money you got. This is the same case: I would always advice people to buy tayo yuden since its the best, and i would always advice to do 5 or more passes to ensure the best quality. That doesnt mean that 2 passes gives you bad quality, but its not the best. It depends on how much time you wanna spend getting it.

I use two passes with CCE and get excellent results in under two hours with a long movie.

Sure you can get good quality, but not the best.

I think that sounds weird. That would be to decrease functionality and why would he do that ?

Seems like a lot of time is wasted if you need to zoom to 300% to see the differences. I don’t generally watch movies while zoomed, especially to 300%. It all comes down to what looks good to you and the time you have to spend on the project.

Please spare your sarcastic commentaries. You dont have to zoom, but thats the easiest way to see the difference fast. Im sure i could have seen the difference on my projector, but that would take more time and you cant compare direct.With the project i saw with my own eyes that there is differences so the extra passes aint wasted. Its small differences, but thats not the point. And thats what it all boils down to: My first advice was to do at least 5 passes to be sure to get the best quality and im still sure of that.

Just like i do when burning. I scan all my discs; if i see that the quality is not so good when burning max speed i wont burn max speed since i will get better results burning slower even though the difference many times isnt a big deal.

Its up to each individual how much time they want to use on quality, but no one can tell me that encoding more than 2-passes is useless cause its not.

@ Zachzi
No sarcasm intended. As I said, it all comes down to what each person sees as being acceptable to their eyes and the time (and money CCESP-$2000 vs CCE-Basic $50) that that have to spend on a particular project.

Besides, this is off topic anyway. The OP is concerned about DVDShrink and deep analysis/encode times with a new Benq 1650.

@HoAx
Are you comparing backup times for the same movie on the 1650 vs. 1633s? If you have the times for the same movie for both drives, that would tell you the real difference. If you are comparing different movies on the two drives, it is like comparing apples and oranges. If you are seeing a difference in times using the same movie (as stated earlier in the thread); I would check to ensure that DMA is enabled and that the Benq is assigned master not slave. I would also rip to hard disk first (you may get better times when encoding/transcoding) and then use DVDShrink or DVD-RB. If you are really concerned about time, you could try to use DVD-RB with ReJig (a transcoder) and see how that compares to DVDShrink.

Yes I was comparing the benQ 1650 (new one) with my old retired one Lite-On 1633s. I was reading from the drive its self with the old one and everytime was 15 minutes for both processes. DMA is enable, and I only do the movie only with both 5.1 and 2.0 sound and if there isnt any forced subtiles I do somtimes copy them but only the small ones that display subs for when the people speak in different language’s. oh and also the 15 minutes is when the movie its self is 4464mb and even if I have to compress 60-70% with DVDShrink

Do you have these setting selected for your backups? They will slow down the process quite a bit.

With those setting unselected it took me approx. 20 min to backup Gladiator. With those quality settings selected it took approx 1 hr 30 min for the same disc on a Benq 1655.

No I dont, That section is actually greyed out so I cant use it anyway

It should not be greyed out unless deep analysis has been run previously on the disc you are using. To “ungrey” them you can go into C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\DVD Shrink and clear the files. That will remove all the deep analysis files for any discs previously done though. If you do clear those files, deep analysis will need to be re-run to generate that data again. However, you will then have the option to see if unchecking those options solves your speed problem. It could be that previously those options were not selected and when you switched over your drive, DVD Shrink reset to the default settings and you have been using these quality settings ever since.

:iagree: :iagree:

Zachzi - Thanks for your gentle response to my rather grumpy post. Your reply is informative and interesting…

Thanks! :slight_smile: