IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Using systems to speed up ripping multiple CD's, Parallel systems run quicker than series
Chimera1to1
post Jan 11 2013, 16:46
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 19-September 12
Member No.: 103267



I thought I would start a new thread as I have discovered, what to anyone that knows maths and systems is probably blindingly obvious.

Firstly I downloaded dB poweramp to a single PC. £29

I then bought a USB DVD writer at low cost. £20

I already have a USB 3 1Tb drive and a 500gig hard drive.

dBPoweramp seems to allow you to run multiple copies simultaneously on the same PC, allocating a CD drive and a hard drive to each piece of open software.

By seperating the CD's out into two piles, clean CD's and scratchy CD's you can ensure that when you put a scratchy CD in drive A, drive B continues to work at full speed processing good CD's. The throughput of drive B is thus not effected by the slow scratchy ones. Also non-ripping activities such as unboxing and changing CD's occur whilst the other drive is still ripping.

So for £20 my throughput of rips is at least 4x faster.

I also chose to save as FLAC 0, because it is quick. Presumably if I wanted to I could batch convert seperately overnight?

Any other tips for increasing speed for multiple rips?

This post has been edited by Chimera1to1: Jan 11 2013, 16:49
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Jan 11 2013, 17:20
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 3413
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



I wouldn't worry about using FLAC 0. I use the default FLAC 5, and on my system the encoding, done in parallel with ripping, finishes seconds after the last track has finished ripping.

I don't understand why adding a second drive quadruples your speed?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Chimera1to1
post Jan 11 2013, 17:52
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 19-September 12
Member No.: 103267



like resistors in parallel, 1/2 x a 1/2
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Jan 11 2013, 18:10
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 3413
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



QUOTE (Chimera1to1 @ Jan 11 2013, 11:52) *
like resistors in parallel, 1/2 x a 1/2

?

Two equal resistors in parallel have half the resistance, pass twice the current and dissipate twice the wattage.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jan 11 2013, 18:38
Post #5





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



Your throughput would be at best 2◊ faster, not 4◊ Ė and the former is probably hopelessly optimistic, even if you have two cores and fully allocate one to each ripping process, a condition that you didnít specify either way.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Chimera1to1
post Jan 11 2013, 19:26
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 19-September 12
Member No.: 103267



QUOTE (db1989 @ Jan 11 2013, 17:38) *
Your throughput would be at best 2◊ faster, not 4◊ Ė and the former is probably hopelessly optimistic, even if you have two cores and fully allocate one to each ripping process, a condition that you didnít specify either way.



No the minimum advantage to throughput is a factor of two. The process of taking a CD and transfering the data onto a PC involves other tasks than ripping, inserting and removing CD's, cleaning them, putting them back in their cases, clicking the mouse etc. that all adds up and multiplies by the time the drives aren't ripping to form the rate determining steps of the process when you are only ripping from one drive. By utilising another drive multiple serial tasks that get shifted into parallel tasks and the slow throughput of a certain CD doesn't overtly damage the speed of the whole process because the other drive is able to carry on working at 30x speed. It's a numbers game, there are many more good CD's than bad ones, so by only ever putting a bad CD into 1 drive at once the throughput remains much higher. I'm only trying to explain what I can see in front of me.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Jan 11 2013, 20:07
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 3413
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



I think you're deluding yourself, but whatever...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 2nd October 2014 - 16:56