born2ride
Getting the hang of it
I was wonder if anyone uses handbrake my pc runs at 100% when encoding. Wanted to see if this is normal.
Does anyone use handbrake?
- Thread starter born2ride
- Start date
icerabbit
Getting the hang of it
I've used it on & off for things. No expert on it by any means.
One could say it is normal, depending on the number of cores, threads, etc. It is trying to get the job done as fast as it can and has to crunch quite a bit of data.
There might be options to reduce the priority it has over other programs, if it is problematic and/or the system has to multi-task.
I've had the opposite with other software, where it is only working on one core, maxing that out, thus only 25% CPU overall, and not getting the job done any faster than a significantly slower machine. I'd be more than happy for that software to max my cpu out and get it done in 25% of the time.
One could say it is normal, depending on the number of cores, threads, etc. It is trying to get the job done as fast as it can and has to crunch quite a bit of data.
There might be options to reduce the priority it has over other programs, if it is problematic and/or the system has to multi-task.
I've had the opposite with other software, where it is only working on one core, maxing that out, thus only 25% CPU overall, and not getting the job done any faster than a significantly slower machine. I'd be more than happy for that software to max my cpu out and get it done in 25% of the time.
Last edited by a moderator:
nayr
IPCT Contributor
I used it all the time to RIP Netflix DVD's, and yes its taking MPEG2 video and re-encoding it to h264 (compressing 4-8GB of video to 1-2GB of video @ roughly same quality).. its going to be quite CPU Intensive, the only way you get out of 100% CPU usage is to have more CPU than is needed to encode real time as fast as your DVD-ROM can read; which would take a hell of a desktop computer..
Just wait til you try to rip a BluRay Movie hah; better not be planing on doing much on the computer for the next day.
This is why the ultra expensive high specced workstations are targeted for Audio/Video producers; they spend more time twiddling there thumbs waiting for videos to en/decode than programmers do waiting for code to compile... dual 6 core xeons anyone? Not for video gaming; there is real work to be done.
Just wait til you try to rip a BluRay Movie hah; better not be planing on doing much on the computer for the next day.
This is why the ultra expensive high specced workstations are targeted for Audio/Video producers; they spend more time twiddling there thumbs waiting for videos to en/decode than programmers do waiting for code to compile... dual 6 core xeons anyone? Not for video gaming; there is real work to be done.
Last edited by a moderator:
born2ride
Getting the hang of it
The pc i am using is has a AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Processor, 8gig ram ,window 7 64 bit . I put it together a few years back.. All six core pegged at 98-100% is that normal or this processor?.. Back when i was putting this one together I was thinking of doing bluray's but never moved to it yet. I miss playing around and learning how. Unfortunately due to limited time I just Download now. Its quicker and easier.
nayr
IPCT Contributor
yep it normal, handbrake is gona use everything it can to get the job done as quick as possible.. your getting what, 120fps encoding speed? thats 4x speed for a 30fps video source and your dvd player can read at probably 32x+.. your a long way off before the disk becomes the bottlekneck.. it requires a ton of processing to compress video without the aide of a specialized dedicated processor like our cameras use (and they only need to encode at 1x speed or less)
even the most expensive mac pro would be pegged trying to compress a DVD; it just comes down to how much quicker it finishes and how much your time costs... If you have a thousand disks to rip you might buy a couple used computers and let them churn away at the same time; then sell em when your finished.
even the most expensive mac pro would be pegged trying to compress a DVD; it just comes down to how much quicker it finishes and how much your time costs... If you have a thousand disks to rip you might buy a couple used computers and let them churn away at the same time; then sell em when your finished.
Last edited by a moderator:
born2ride
Getting the hang of it
Can you explain what you mean?
nayr
IPCT Contributor
Video Encoding is more CPU intensive than it is read/write intensive.. Alot of the time when you wait on your computer (aka hitting a bottlekneck) its probably at the disk level, so your CPU sits idle while something is being read/written off a disk.
this particular task your performing requires much more processing so your CPU will be pegged well before any read/write access is limited.. thus why your seeing 100% CPU usage on this job (processing bottleneck vs input/output bottleneck) which probably is quite abnormal for your use because you dont see it happen with other tasks.. which is a good thing; that means your computer is plenty adequate for your uses and dont really need an upgrade... you could throw a few thousand dollars at a faster computer and all it will do is make handbrake finish a few mins quicker.. if you feel the need to upgrade anything buy a SSD; it wont help handbrake but it will dramatically improve your normal bottleneck and allow you to flex those 6 cores more efficiently by feeding it data quicker.
this particular task your performing requires much more processing so your CPU will be pegged well before any read/write access is limited.. thus why your seeing 100% CPU usage on this job (processing bottleneck vs input/output bottleneck) which probably is quite abnormal for your use because you dont see it happen with other tasks.. which is a good thing; that means your computer is plenty adequate for your uses and dont really need an upgrade... you could throw a few thousand dollars at a faster computer and all it will do is make handbrake finish a few mins quicker.. if you feel the need to upgrade anything buy a SSD; it wont help handbrake but it will dramatically improve your normal bottleneck and allow you to flex those 6 cores more efficiently by feeding it data quicker.
Last edited by a moderator:
born2ride
Getting the hang of it
Would a SSD help with the encoding process? The pc did a 3.3gig movie to 1.58gig in about 10 mins.. I have about 100 movies or so todo . I am testing out the queue method now i just loaded up 3 movies to try. When encoding should i Not be doing other things on pc? netflix etc? I know when I started ripping and burning on my old xps410 while do other things it effected the end result. Does that apply here you think?
I would like to compare encodeing on the I7 3770 I picked up ..
I would like to compare encodeing on the I7 3770 I picked up ..
nayr
IPCT Contributor
A SSD wont help handbrake a single bit; A SSD is an IO device but if your normal bottleneck is I/O (and for vast majority of normal tasks it is) then it will let your CPU's process more efficiently as it will be waiting less for IO... I urge everyone to get a SSD; it makes things load much faster than having 200 cpu's and gigabytes of ram.
My desktop Quad Core i7 @ 4GHz w/16GB ram hits 100% CPU encoding video and I bet given the same job as yours is doing would finish in roughly the same time.. Movie studios have warehouses full of the fastest computers churning away at 100% for months to crank out the next Pixar/Transformer movie. Depending on details it can take a single computer several hours to fully render a single CGI frame x 24fps x 2h feature length movie and ouch... you can keep throwing more and more hardware at the problem but it will just hit another bottleneck sooner or later.
The more CPU you can give Handbrake the faster it'll work; so yeah if your trying to save time then dont be doing anything resource intensive while encoding.. watching netflix would be included.
10mins per DVD is good; the quickest way to knock that down to avg 5mins per DVD is to bring up your other computer and have em both encoding at the same time... scale it up as far as you can but you'll need 10 computers to get these done in 1 a min.
My desktop Quad Core i7 @ 4GHz w/16GB ram hits 100% CPU encoding video and I bet given the same job as yours is doing would finish in roughly the same time.. Movie studios have warehouses full of the fastest computers churning away at 100% for months to crank out the next Pixar/Transformer movie. Depending on details it can take a single computer several hours to fully render a single CGI frame x 24fps x 2h feature length movie and ouch... you can keep throwing more and more hardware at the problem but it will just hit another bottleneck sooner or later.
The more CPU you can give Handbrake the faster it'll work; so yeah if your trying to save time then dont be doing anything resource intensive while encoding.. watching netflix would be included.
10mins per DVD is good; the quickest way to knock that down to avg 5mins per DVD is to bring up your other computer and have em both encoding at the same time... scale it up as far as you can but you'll need 10 computers to get these done in 1 a min.
Last edited by a moderator:
born2ride
Getting the hang of it
Can I encode over network? Would that bottleneck the one pc that has all the movies stored on it? What do you mean scale it up In handbrake?
nayr
IPCT Contributor
yeah a Gigabit network would be adequate to encode quite a few movies at once off a file server.. At max were talking about 10-15 MB/s write speed (1.5GB in 10mins is avg of 2.5MB/s) and a GigE network peaks out ~110MB/s with good equipment... most good HDD's can hit 120MB/s+ write speed... SSD's now hit 600MB/s (see why it wouldent help)
Scale it up by running as many computers as you can get your hands on for the job, each can be saving the DVD to a network share as there encoding it.. the technical buzzword for such an operation is a "Rendering Farm"
Scale it up by running as many computers as you can get your hands on for the job, each can be saving the DVD to a network share as there encoding it.. the technical buzzword for such an operation is a "Rendering Farm"
Last edited by a moderator:
born2ride
Getting the hang of it
I think What you are saying is write speed is slow. Even know the gb network and hd can perform the operation faster they are limited. Is that correct?
That would be nice to have all 4 of my PC's encoding and writing back to drive .!! That would be time saving.
That would be nice to have all 4 of my PC's encoding and writing back to drive .!! That would be time saving.
nayr
IPCT Contributor
Yes that is correct; your read/write speeds are very slow.. everything is hung up in your 100% CPU usage... all 4 PCs should have no trouble writing to a single drive at once.
and you'd be cooking through those disks at almost 4x faster than just using one computer.. taking this from a ~16h job to a ~4h job... now just dont spend >12h trying to set it up
and you'd be cooking through those disks at almost 4x faster than just using one computer.. taking this from a ~16h job to a ~4h job... now just dont spend >12h trying to set it up
icerabbit
Getting the hang of it
When it comes to big movies, it may be advantageous with some software to rip a copy 1:1 to the hard drive first, then convert from the hard drive, vs hours of wear and tear on the optical drive.
By all means, if you can leave the computer alone for encoding, let it single task on encoding / converting.
I've scaled up reripping audio cds at higher quality in similar fashion by using several computers at once, flipping discs on two systems, couple hours a night, editing metadata in the mean time, scanning album art ... then bringing all their recordings together afterwards over the network. So if you have access to a second system you can cut your idle time down and get the whole job done sooner.
I guess nayr is suggesting distibuted encoding. I haven't tried that. Would be cool to try. How does one set that up with handbrake?
By all means, if you can leave the computer alone for encoding, let it single task on encoding / converting.
I've scaled up reripping audio cds at higher quality in similar fashion by using several computers at once, flipping discs on two systems, couple hours a night, editing metadata in the mean time, scanning album art ... then bringing all their recordings together afterwards over the network. So if you have access to a second system you can cut your idle time down and get the whole job done sooner.
I guess nayr is suggesting distibuted encoding. I haven't tried that. Would be cool to try. How does one set that up with handbrake?
born2ride
Getting the hang of it
@nayr when you are talking read/write speed where you referring to optical drive or HD? I did spend many hours setting up network only to loose it with power surge. I will get set up at later date again .
@ icerabbit I have used DVD fab over network to convert files . Will try hand brake when I set it up again. All my movies are ripped to hd already. I used to burn to DVD but have way too many now. Plus Hd are cheap now!
@ icerabbit I have used DVD fab over network to convert files . Will try hand brake when I set it up again. All my movies are ripped to hd already. I used to burn to DVD but have way too many now. Plus Hd are cheap now!
nayr
IPCT Contributor
both read speeds are lower than your maximum optical reads and write speeds are lower than your maximum hdd writes.. icerabbit's suggestion basically saves a disk image of the DVD then compresses it.. which lets your DVD read at maximum speed; thus has less operational hours in the end and wear/tear (moving parts and all that) when actually encoding the video the read/write will still be very low.
If one of your computers it too slow and takes forever to rip a DVD you might use it to make disk images and store to the network; once handbrake is done you delete the image to freeup space... it wont speed anything up but it will save your other computers DVD rom drives from abuse.. (dvd rom drives for desktops are cheap, if you need a new $30 DVD reader when done but you saved 5h of babysitting then I say its worth it for $6/hour)
If one of your computers it too slow and takes forever to rip a DVD you might use it to make disk images and store to the network; once handbrake is done you delete the image to freeup space... it wont speed anything up but it will save your other computers DVD rom drives from abuse.. (dvd rom drives for desktops are cheap, if you need a new $30 DVD reader when done but you saved 5h of babysitting then I say its worth it for $6/hour)
born2ride
Getting the hang of it
Some reason I just thought you were thinking I was reading off a DVD not already ripped files . I have all these large 3-6 gig video-vts.handbrake seems to be working nice to make them half size to free up space. Wether encoding from disc or hd it would be same CPU percentages ?
i think my days of ripping are over . They are others that can do it better and faster than I so Downloading is for me . Lol
if I get some free time maybe A blueray so I can say I did one . New hobby is ip cams and maybe ssd for all PC in house
i think my days of ripping are over . They are others that can do it better and faster than I so Downloading is for me . Lol
if I get some free time maybe A blueray so I can say I did one . New hobby is ip cams and maybe ssd for all PC in house
Last edited:
nayr
IPCT Contributor
Handbrake might be doing a full speed copy then encoding to save on wear and tear automatically; I am not 100% sure on that.. it would just create a temporary file and then work off it.
Regardless where the files are stored (optical disk/local hdd/network hdd) its not going to change your CPU load or overall encoding time at all.. even the slowest SD cards are faster than your CPU is at this specific task.
Regardless where the files are stored (optical disk/local hdd/network hdd) its not going to change your CPU load or overall encoding time at all.. even the slowest SD cards are faster than your CPU is at this specific task.