A benchmark I can understand, please!

audiopollution · January 28, 2002 8:41PM

Okay ... I don't play games, and I design with vector based graphics 99% of the time.

Obviously huge amounts of speed aren't too important for me, but there's one thing I like to be able to do quickly: Encode MP3's.

I'd love to pick up one of the new desktops, and dump my PC desktop. iTunes looks tempting, and I'd love to replace my Nomad with an iPod.

Here's where I need some help. I need to know encoding time for a typical mp3 file on the various PM G4 desktops (just released, and the ones they surpassed.)

Please encode a 4 or 5 minute long song at 192kbps/Stereo/CBR, and let me know how long it takes.

This will be the test to convince me to switch back to an all Apple set-up!

Illustrator's the same on both platforms ... sell me on using a Mac again.

anarchangel · January 29, 2002 9:32AM

I'm keeping my PC when my iMAC because my pc has a fast vorbis encoder and a fast cd-rom drive. I'm going to use that machine to rip my whole collection of cds un-interrupted, then burn the files into a more minimalist collection

fluffy · January 29, 2002 10:16AM

For a 4:57 song, 192K, stereo it took 14 seconds to rip using a Dual 800 G4. For the same song at 256K, stereo VBR it took 11 seconds to rip on the same machine. This is with the CDRW drive, not the superdrive or combo drive.

fluffy · January 29, 2002 10:19AM

[ 01-29-2002: Message edited by: Fluffy ]

kidred · January 29, 2002 12:19PM

Dual 1.0ghz.

Song length 6:58 at 160kbps took 15 sec. Hope this helps.

ender · January 29, 2002 2:15PM

a 4 minute song on my G4/500 DP took 14 seconds to encode.

256 kbps, VBR (highest quality), joint stereo

I cannot see how faster encoding could be anything to base the purchase of a tower on. Even my 2 year old system gets 15x encoding speeds at above average quality.

-Ender

cdhostage · January 29, 2002 4:01PM

Here's another useful benchmark - an SETI@Home work unit. I remember Apple demonstrate dthe power of the G4 at the beginning with a SETI WU.

audiopollution · January 29, 2002 5:43PM

Encoding speed is important enough to me to have it be the deal breaker/maker in my decision to return to an all Apple setup.

I'm not sure how many cd's everyone else has, but any increase in speed that I can realize over my current PIII 800 setup would be *very* appreciable vis-a-vis my time saved.

From the numbers posted so far, can I assume that iTunes rips and encodes concurrently? Will I be able to move over my current mp3's to iTunes, and if so, how does iTunes handle adding these mp3 albums?

fluffy · January 29, 2002 5:57PM

[quote]Originally posted by audiopollution:

From the numbers posted so far, can I assume that iTunes rips and encodes concurrently?<hr></blockquote>

Yes.

[quote]Will I be able to move over my current mp3's to iTunes, and if so, how does iTunes handle adding these mp3 albums?<hr></blockquote>

They will move over just fine. Simply drag the files into the iTunes window and they will be added to your library.

murbot · January 29, 2002 6:04PM

[quote]Originally posted by cdhostage:

Here's another useful benchmark - an SETI@Home work unit. I remember Apple demonstrate dthe power of the G4 at the beginning with a SETI WU.<hr></blockquote>

A little off topic - but how fast is fast when doing a SETI unit? I've been curious about this, but haven't bothered to ask anyone yet.

I have a PII 300 that's been choking down a SETI unit for 65 hours now, and it's only 48.5% done ONE UNIT.

That sounds so pathetic.... what would a dual gigger do - like one unit in 10 hours or something?

eskimo · January 30, 2002 11:58AM

[quote]Originally posted by murbot:



A little off topic - but how fast is fast when doing a SETI unit? I've been curious about this, but haven't bothered to ask anyone yet.

I have a PII 300 that's been choking down a SETI unit for 65 hours now, and it's only 48.5% done ONE UNIT.

That sounds so pathetic.... what would a dual gigger do - like one unit in 10 hours or something?<hr></blockquote>

You can check out lots of submitted SETI benchmarks at <a href="http://www.teamlambchop.com/bench/index.htm"; target="_blank">http://www.teamlambchop.com/bench/index.htm</a>;

The high end athlon and P4 systems are approaching 3 hours/unit on 3.03. Are you running the command line interface version of SETI on your PIII? If not you should, the graphical version takes much much longer to complete.

cosmo · January 30, 2002 4:06PM

To encode a 5:00 song at 192kbp on my 333 iMac it took 1:44...

...Must have g4...

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Cosmo ]

gee4orce · February 3, 2002 5:16PM

Encoding CDs with iTunes is a no-brainer. Configure your preferences, pop in a CD -- iTunes downloads the track names, encodes the lot, and spits out the CD ready for the next one. All you've got to do is keep feeding it.

junkyard dawg · February 3, 2002 7:29PM

The thing that sucks about the superdrive is that it only reads at 24x, and if I want a dual 1 GHz tower, I have no choice but to get it with the superdrive, and there is no external drive bay for me to add a 50x CD-rom drive for fast ripping. That is a big design oversight on Apple's part.

But for ripping mp3s, itunes does a good job and you can do it in the background while you work on other stuff, so is the speed all that important? I suppose for some people it is.

addison · February 4, 2002 12:14AM

I don't understand this thread. If you have that many CD's you would fill up your HD. In any event why not just rip the tunes as you play the cd.

:cool:

krassy · February 4, 2002 1:33AM

[quote]Originally posted by JW Pepper:

I don't understand this thread. If you have that many CD's you would fill up your HD. In any event why not just rip the tunes as you play the cd.

:cool: <hr></blockquote>

good idea pepper. but what if he wants to built up a personal juke-box where you can do a fast search and play?

greets,

krassy

A benchmark I can understand, please!

Comments