Your CPU Usage With Your 1640

What is your CPU Usage with you are ripping full D/L Video protected disk using DVD Shrink?. I have never got below %100 when I am using DVD Shrink ripping D/L disc.

CPU: AMD 64 3200+
M/B: ECS with nvida NForce3-250 chipst
RAM: Kingston 517 MB 3200
Video Card: ATI RADEON 9800 PRO with 128 MB RAM

Hi :slight_smile:
Don’t use it myself. This is with CloneDVD2. Will try DVDShrink later. (It’s here)

Why would this be dependent on the drive?

Yeah, I’m asking me the same question…

This 100% CPU usage can be reached with any setup (and any DVDRW) when you encode a DVD movie.
Not at all related to BenQ 1640.

Note. Topic poster is using word “ripping”, while he is in fact encoding a movie (at least from what we can see in attached pic).

You can set the program priorty to a lower level if you want to. Ripping and making a movie is a very intensive task. There is a lot of data moving around :slight_smile:

ripping is different from transcoding. if the movie fits in 4.4GB, it won’t be transcoded. If it’s bigger, then it will transcode and your CPU will obviously be needed 100%, that’s just common sense.
When I don’t transcode, the CPU usage barely even registers while using DVDshrink. If your drive is in DMA mode, it should do similarly.

I thought this is obvious to everyone when you are ripping a DVD Video, you are "Ripping, Enconding and may or may not also Shrinking. That is the intend of the thread topic.

  1. you can’t Shrink a DVD without Encoding. you either copy directly (if no shrinking needed), or transcode the video data. those are the things that DVDshrink will do for you.

  2. the CPU usage is unrelated to the drive model, so why include it in the thread title?

Maybe disable video preview during encodig can save some CPU power. Anyway, using shrink in low priority mode allow you to use your comp to do other works

That screen shot shows encoding, therefore the program is doing something in the background. If I just rip it with something like smart ripper then my CPU usage is usually around 20% (USB2 drive) BUT because you are running shrink with preview etc then it is having to decode the image at faster than normal speed.

Shrink is not reccomended if you are doing a 1:1 copy because it does split the streams and re-combine them again.

Yeah TCAS. You’re simply shrinking at the same time as you’re ripping. This will use 100% every time. If you only ripped, you’d only use 10-20%.


it’s normal when transcoding don’t worry

Hi :slight_smile:
When you say this (100%), I assume that’s with DVDShrink. I get lower when ripping/shrinking with other programs.
When simply ripping cpu usage appears to peak at 8%.

Are you trying to tell the people in this site what to write and what to avoid?, The main purpose of these thread is the exchange of ideas and experiences.

Zebadee; you are right, the DVD Shrink uses the maximum power of of CPU than any other software, meaning CPU usage of DVD Shrink is usally highier than others. But bear in mind that this maximum usage is at the highiest when you are trying to copy D/L protected DVD Video which DVD Shrink do (Ripping+Encoding +Shrinking).

The following is ripping process using DVD Shrink, this time the DVD Video is protected again but S/L and the size of video file is less than 4 GB, as you can see since the shrinking of the file is not necessary the CPU usage is very low that mean the biggest factor of high CPU usage is while shrinking the file which process occupy %100 of CPU.

I :iagree: 100% cpu usage is with any DVDRW which has no relation to the BENQ 1640 drive. As we all know transcoding and video encoding is CPU intensive. Ripping a DL disc will not have intensive CPU usage with any DVDRW/DVDROM. :wink:

Hi all,

I am considering upgrading mi rig to a “Hyper Theading” or “Dual Core” processor set-up.
Does anybody have experience with those new processors like the AMD X2 or Intel D series which are supposed to allow different applications to run independently.

Would be cool to do a smooth web surfing or printing task while transcoding .

I recently (a week ago) upgraded from AMD XP 3000+ to AMD 64 3200+ with Hyper Transport capability. This technology is the same as Intel Hyper Thread tech. But still no indication that processor can do multifunction simultaneously. Still if process is busy performing one function the next instruction would be delayed or freeze until the first one done. I have no experience with dual core processor yet and I can’t pass any judgment about it at this time.

Hyper Transport is NOT even near the same as Hyper Threading.
Hyper Transport = very fast system bus.
Hyper Threading = better thread efficiency by simulating 2 processors.

No. As I stated, 10-20% when shrinking only. :wink:

“If you only ripped, you’d only use 10-20%.”

Depending on the PC’s power, lower. Mine’s around 5%, I think. Heh