Gaming Multitasking Scenario 2: DVD Shrink

For our next test, we wanted to do something a little less strenuous, so we only ran one background task: DVD Shrink.  We left DVD Shrink at its default low priority and went ahead with our benchmarks:

Gaming Multitasking Performance Scenario 2

Thanks to DVD Shrink behaving and running with a low priority, our gameplay was largely unaffected on the Athlon 64.  The performance dropped less than 3% in Doom 3. 

What's very interesting, however, is that the Pentium 4 630 takes a huge performance hit with DVD Shrink running in the background.  Despite being set to a low priority, since Hyper Threading allows both the DVD Shrink thread and Doom 3 thread to execute concurrently, they both contend for the same microprocessor execution resources.  This happens to be one case where Hyper Threading is actually very bad for performance, as the OS has no idea that its scheduling is actually hurting the CPU's performance severely. 

Gaming Multitasking Performance Scenario 2

Gaming Multitasking Performance Scenario 2

Gaming Multitasking Performance Scenario 2

The performance gap between the Pentium D and the Athlon 64 actually closes quite a bit under Splinter Cell.  The minimum frame rates are now identical, although the maximum frame rates are clearly higher on the AMD system. 

Once again, HT has a negative impact in this case on the Pentium 4 630. 

Just for kicks, we decided to turn off DVD Shrink's low priority setting to see what impact that would have on performance.  The low priority mode of DVD Shrink basically makes it transparent to gaming.  Unchecking this option definitely changes things, it wouldn't even start on the Athlon 64 system. 

It eventually ran on the Pentium D system after waiting several minutes for it to start, and even then, performance wasn't acceptable.  It just goes to show you that dual core isn't Superman; it does have its limits. 

Gaming Multitasking Scenario 1 w/ NCQ Final Words
Comments Locked

106 Comments

View All Comments

  • segagenesis - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    #45 - The Athlon 64 still lags behind on encoding cabability and its been shown over the past year. However some of the content tested was designed specifically for P4 optimization so its hard to get a reliable result. Who knows... until we see the new AMD64 core with SSE3 we cant really pass judgement.
  • Quanticles - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    AMD needs to send Anandtech one of their dual-cores with a DFI nForce4 SLI board.

    That'd shut a lot of people up.

    If AMD owns single thread, then why wouldnt they own dual core. People would be throwing money away buying intel's dual core.
  • Spearhawk - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    The first graph on the DVD Shrink/Game bench still seems a bit suspect. Why would the P4 outperform the PD and the A64 when under normal circumstances the A64 should be superior in singlethread and the PD in multithread?

    Anway, great article. I'm really looking forward to seeing what AMD has to offer since while I'd greatly like improved multitasking I'd also like a good gaming CPU.
  • Marlin1975 - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    What about overclocking the Dual core chip???
  • Regs - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    Ah, I mis read it. You used the Intel 955X.

    I have to ask then, is it because of AMD's onboard memory controller that they don't have to manufacture another motherboard for the dual core CPUs? If so, you think AMD was thinking about this scenero (dual cores) well before the first clawhammer came out?

    That would sound impressive. Compared to Intel's dual press hots.
  • segagenesis - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    #37 - Well im hard pressed to really want one when my current setup is still sufficient. That and I have my heart set on AMD64 for gaming. Even at DVD backup I can do a movie in about an hour even with full quality under DVD Shrink. And really, I would use DVD Rebuilder which is very much single threaded and in my book Quality > Speed. Takes about 6-7 hours but better results than DVD Shrink could have wished for.
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    Regs

    The nForce4 Intel Edition platform was unrelated to the Intel dual core platform, it was just something I was working on at the time.

    The platform arrived DOA, I'm guessing it's an error on NV's part.

    Take care,
    Anand
  • Jeff7181 - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    "AMD's dual core will be quite impressive, even more so than Intel's. Don't look at performance as the only vector to measure though... "

    You like to tease us, don't you? :)
  • Regs - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    Hey Anand, I noted that you said in Part one that the Intel Dual core was one of the most stable config's you ever had. However in part two and quote, "After recovering from Part I and realizing that my nForce4 Intel Edition platform had died, I was hard at work on Part II of the dual core story. "

    Was this human error or was it a manufacturing error?
  • michael2k - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    #26: Actually, encoding a DVD should be a multi-tasking event in of itself!

    Task1: DVD creation; menu's, transitions, etc
    Task2: DVD encoding; background rendering of menu's and transitions
    Task3: DVD encoding; background rendering of the actual menu
    Task4: Burning of DVD; you should be able to start burning the DVD before the encoding in task 2 or 3 is complete, as long as the burner is properly buffered

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now