INTEL SSD vs Velociraptor(s)

A

aamsel

Gawd
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
940
If I do video encoding, like convertxtodvd, would I be faster "real world" with a Velociraptor or with an INTEL SSD (MLC)?

If I change that to (2) Velociraptors in RAID 0, how about the same encoding then?

I realize that CPU plays the largest role in most video conversion programs.

I currently have P5Q Deluxe with E6600, dual core.
Is this a bigger potential bottleneck than HDD? (not having quad-core)?

How many months until a X25-M SSDSA2MH160G1C5 is $499 or less?
 
Speed will be exactly the same. Encoding speed is 100% dictated by cpu at this time. Even if you had 4 core i7 965 cpu's (16 physical cores) working at 100% on a single encoding job, you would not be hard drive limited at all.
 
I thought most encoding systems working with large files cached to disk still... You know, unless you happen to have a spare 24 or 32 g RAM that is.
 
He is right though, any high performance desktop drive, SSD or magnetic platter, should keep up with those tasks fine.

For the price I would suggest getting 2 WD 640 Black drives and putting them in raid 0, They only 75 each.
 
unless you got money to burn for intels SSD ,get the samsung or falcon or vertex are far better price (performance is about the same as an intel drive now any way its only when you do random IO and i mean Server load IO you get your moneys worth from an Intel SSD) any SDD with cache on it will kill an hdd in the performance department

but for what your doing an fast dual core CPU or maybe an fast quad (depends on if the editing apps are dual or quad threded norm dual core 3ghz c2d norm does it and bit of ram)
 
drgnfang said:
I thought most encoding systems working with large files cached to disk still... You know, unless you happen to have a spare 24 or 32 g RAM that is.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter because the actual bandwidth being used is well within even a slow magnetic platter's reach. The CPU is never left idle waiting for data, and the writing speed to disk never exceeds a few MB/s. When CPU's can encode around 100-200 times faster than they do now, faster hard drives will make a difference. Now, real time manipulation and editing of video might benefit a great deal, but just encoding? Stick with a big honkin magnetic disk drive.
 
Last edited:
I have a 300GB Velociraptor now.
Have tried the Intel, and they are faster, no doubt.

Am waiting for the 160GB X25-M to be closer to $500.
Any guess on time frame for that,
doing as well as the Intel drives are?
 
Yoda4561 said:
It doesn't matter because the actual bandwidth being used is well within even a slow magnetic platter's reach. The CPU is never left idle waiting for data, and the writing speed to disk never exceeds a few mb/s. When CPU's can encode around 100-200 times faster than they do now, faster hard drives will make a difference. Now, real time manipulation and editing of video might benefit a great deal, but just encoding? Stick with a big honkin magnetic disk drive.
Click to expand...

Probably why a 5400rpm SATA is all that is needed for a Satellite TV recorder box to record the encoded HD video from it.
 
aamsel said:
I have a 300GB Velociraptor now.
Have tried the Intel, and they are faster, no doubt.

Am waiting for the 160GB X25-M to be closer to $500.
Any guess on time frame for that,
doing as well as the Intel drives are?
Click to expand...

Probably within a couple months. And I'd guess that before the end of the year we'll see Intel or competitive/better SSD's for half that price.
 
aamsel said:
I currently have P5Q Deluxe with E6600, dual core.
Is this a bigger potential bottleneck than HDD? (not having quad-core)?
Click to expand...

That CPU is the biggest bottlenecking factor in your system. A quad core will cut your encoding time in half right off the bat.
 
Yoda4561 said:
Probably within a couple months. And I'd guess that before the end of the year we'll see Intel or competitive/better SSD's for half that price.
Click to expand...

Nothing like being on the cutting edge for losing money! ;)

chrisman17 said:
That CPU is the biggest bottlenecking factor in your system. A quad core will cut your encoding time in half right off the bat.
Click to expand...

Time in half at close to twice the wattage, with more heat.
What comes after Nehalem again, and is anyone waiting for it? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top