Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mr ChriZ]

Last week I bought a new Dell Dimension system
AMD X2 5000, 2GB, Vista.

Overall I've been fairly happy with it.
Last night I went to rip my first CD with it, expecting blistering
speeds, and hot CD's coming out of the drive. 

That was not the case, instead it leasurly picked up the CD
and started ripping at 1x.  It then slowly worked it's way up
to 6x through the CD.  I figured it must be a dodgy CD or something
however it wasn't.  The CD was perfect.

I tried the same CD in my Athlon 1700 and it achieved
an an average 8x (Starting at 4x and getting faster towards
the outside of the disc), and probably would have gone
faster if it weren't for the fact that it maxed out the processor.

I spent a few hours checking the system out, trying different
controller drivers, making sure a high DMA setting was selected...
but didn't make any difference... it would seem the systems
working optimally....

Tried WMP and got the same results.
Thinking now it might just be because it's got a cheap DVD writer in it,
where as my Athlon's got a decent NEC drive. 
I would try swapping them over, only the NEC is PATA.

What rip speeds do you guys get on modern machines?
I was ripping to APE normal compression.
(Edit Secure Rip)

[Magic_Randy]

Thinking now it might just be because it's got a cheap DVD writer in it,
where as my Athlon's got a decent NEC drive. 

I think you are correct in your assumption.  It's probably the DVD writer itself.  These PCs (not just Dell, but they fall into this category) have a very low price with a very low margin.  As a result, the OEM has to use lowest cost parts. 

The other variable you describe is Vista.  It could be that the DVD writer is OK, but the drivers are not yet optimal.

So I suggest trying to get benchmarks based on Vista and XP.

[benn600]

I remember getting 30x ripping speeds (for real) back when I ripped directly to MP3 with either the Real Jukebox program or iTunes.  Currently, I rip and encode to FLAC independently.  It starts ripping 1-end and encodes 1-end on its own.  It's in the settings somewhere.  But basically, the ripping is done much faster than encoding to FLAC at q=8.  I have an amazing Pioneer DVD burner in my computer and it has never failed me.  With DVD Decrypter, I got over 15x ripping of a DVD.  I rarely see that, though.  Home burnt DVDs are lucky to get 10x I'd say and most dvds don't go over 12x...but I saw over 15x ripping of that DVD (the same one) twice.  It is incredible.  It's also reasonably quiet.

But the 30x ripping was incredible.  It took my new computer at the time to do it.  I was getting 12x- 15x on an old 600 MHz Athlon, too.

Remember that now I use secure rip mode and that slows it way down.  But I don't care.  Back then I didn't use secure and I found problems with my ripped music.  Now, I haven't found hardly any problems.  The extra time requirement is worth it.

[Listener]

Overall I've been fairly happy with it.
Last night I went to rip my first CD with it, expecting blistering
speeds, and hot CD's coming out of the drive. 

That was not the case, instead it leasurly picked up the CD
and started ripping at 1x.  It then slowly worked it's way up
to 6x through the CD.  I figured it must be a dodgy CD or something
however it wasn't.  The CD was perfect.

I tried the same CD in my Athlon 1700 and it achieved
an an average 8x (Starting at 4x and getting faster towards
the outside of the disc), and probably would have gone
faster if it weren't for the fact that it maxed out the processor.

What rip speeds do you guys get on modern machines?
I was ripping to APE normal compression.

I recently got a Liteon SATA VD drive and used it to rip some audio CDs.  I see what you see: it starts at 1.n X or 2.n X and works up to 5.8-7X by the end of the CD.  This is on a Core2Duo PC with 2GB of RAM and Win XP.  Encoding at quality = 6 to FLAC doesn't seem to be the bottleneck.

Overall speed for MC 12 secure ripping is about 3X on that drive.  Results for other drivers: about 2.1X for a Toshiba laptop drive and about 3X-3.5X for a USB DVD Liteon drive.

I've seen tests of CD drives that show drives w/o DAE cache producing much faster rips using EAC than drives with cache.  This might make a difference for MC 12's ripping speed too. Newegg.com has more SATA drives now.  The Samsung one might not have DAE cache.

My Liteon drive also produces more unreliable results than my other drives.  In most cases, I can't see any scratches or imperfections but blowing on the CD and re-ripping it produces a reliable result.

I read about other people getting fast, secure rips.  Never happens for me.
 
Bill

[MadJewDisaster]

Mr ChriZ   You need to test ripping to WAV
Riping to any other format is not ripping
It is ripping AND encoding

If any prob with your drive concerning speed , rip to wav will allow you to test this part only , not adding the converting time to it .
And test first to non secure to check
There is a Nero toll you can get even if not using Nero who will tell you lot of things about your drive - It takes quite time to run all test .

I think name of the toll is Drive Speed or drive test.
I can find exact name if of any help to you .


~~~~~~~~~~~~    I read about other people getting fast, secure rips.  ~~~~~~~~~~           

Yes , with EAC and one or two settings not checked

BUT , you do not get a 100% secure rip
Let's say an 'almost 100% secure rip'

In MC , no settings like in EAC , means you get a real , 100% secure rip and it is as slow than EAC with the same settings .

[benn600]

In secure rip mode, I think they will all try to get a perfect rip.  I do have a cheap, low-end drive (CD burner) that will read many more discs than my other drives.  It seems to be more capable of reading scratched disks and giving me 100% quality.