Looking for a Intel Mobo to run my existing dual core Pentium D 3.4 Ghz processor.

[plainman007]

Hi, im looking at picking an Intel mobo to run a dual core 3.4 Ghz pentium D processor that i already have. The processor is currently on a 945GNT Mobo which seems to be performing erratically. So id like to go for a new board. The main purpose will be to play HD video. And to capture HDV on the spot. This will be a mission critical system and should be stable cause it would travel on the field. And should take a pci express graphics card, ieee, etc as usual. I need something thats a ATX form factor not micro ATX. Also shuldnt be too expensive. I have a solid server cabinet like a solid state amplifier case with 5 fans inbuilt and am looking at putting this mobo into that case. Can members here suggest some good options ? Thanks.

PS: I was looking at the intel site and saw the media series with Viiv technology. They have full atx form factor ones among those. Any ideas if these will do ?

[rachael24]

Hmm..I am pretty sure that will work. Dont make any decisions though until an expert comes in and answers this question LOL

[plainman007]

The question here is are you or not one of those experts ?

[Acid8000]

Intel® Desktop Board DG965WH Overview
If you check the supported processors list at the bottom of the page you might find that this is the motherboard you're looking for. Looks like the newer DP35DP does not support the Pentium D line of processors.

[plainman007]

Hi i checked and that board isnt available on the market in my side of the world. Any other board. Also i have a small doubt. Some boards advertise intel Matrix Raid solution. Is that basically onboard raid ? so i dont need an extra raid card or something ?

[zman88]

Yes that is what it means, but you don't need it for your application.

[plainman007]

Then where does Raid really make a difference ? what kind of application can use its benefit ? How about uncompressed 1280x720 video. Will that need raid. Because those videos choke and stutter on my current system.

[zman88]

First of all you'll need two hard drives. And if one fails you lose the whole array.

But heres some info, RAID - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[plainman007]

I know the basics. Raid 1, 0 or 5. Ive heard 5 is safer because it uses a recovery system. Now what i meant was what is the practical difference in speed that one would notice. Is raid blazingly fast compared to a normal SATA 7200 rpm. I mean is it "noticable" or merely mathematically or statistically superior ? For example a 512 mb ram based system when upgraded to 3 gb of ram will be 'noticably' faster. But there will be hardly a noticable difference between 3gb versus 4 gb of ram. The diference will be minimal. I hope you get what i mean.

[Rickwell]

Well I like to use RAID.You'll notice a difference.But it's not jaw dropping.But you'll still feel the speed.Some things will have no effect at all.It doesn't matter if you loose one drive or not.If you have only one and loose that,you still loose everything and one drive.The real big noticable thing is cost lol.

[plainman007]

Rickwell > liked the last statement. The most noticeable difference is the cost.
Now i have a system which plays uncompressed 720x576p avi without hassles.
But when i play a 1280x720p uncompressed avi it stutters in playback.
Might this be because of the HDD reading bottleneck or is it a processor thing ? Will raid help in this case ?

[ctal]

Originally Posted by plainman007

Rickwell > liked the last statement. The most noticeable difference is the cost.
Now i have a system which plays uncompressed 720x576p avi without hassles.
But when i play a 1280x720p uncompressed avi it stutters in playback.
Might this be because of the HDD reading bottleneck or is it a processor thing ? Will raid help in this case ?

To answer that, we need to know the data rate. Take the file size in megaBytes and divide by the length of the program in seconds, to get MB/sec.

Also, what program are you using to play it back? I assume that you are referring to directly playing back a built or captured file, rather than playing from the timeline in your NLE program (in which case stuttering is probably inevitable).

Regards,
-- Al

[zman88]

I'd say if you are going to buy 2 hd's , get one smaller fast one for OS and a large one for saving these large video files on.

[plainman007]

Ctal > hi, i think you mean you want the bitrate ? Or shall i actually give you the actual math based value as youve suggested ? Any way ill do it your way and let you know. I need it to playback in media player. Period. If media player handles it is enough for me. No playback from the nle timeline, id never ever do that.

zman > My workstation on which i edit is not just 2 but a 3 spindle system. Ive been in video editing forsome time and have done r&d on what sorta system i could build within my budget. I have 3 x 250gb satas. One for the OS & Proggys. 1 for my raw footage. And the third one which is the render to drive. Im even thinking of adding one more HDD to make it a scratch disk for windows to use. Like for minidump or as a page file disk .

[ctal]

Originally Posted by plainman007

Ctal > hi, i think you mean you want the bitrate ? Or shall i actually give you the actual math based value as youve suggested ? Any way ill do it your way and let you know. I need it to playback in media player. Period. If media player handles it is enough for me. No playback from the nle timeline, id never ever do that.

zman > My workstation on which i edit is not just 2 but a 3 spindle system. Ive been in video editing forsome time and have done r&d on what sorta system i could build within my budget. I have 3 x 250gb satas. One for the OS & Proggys. 1 for my raw footage. And the third one which is the render to drive. Im even thinking of adding one more HDD to make it a scratch disk for windows to use. Like for minidump or as a page file disk .

Either way would give us sufficient information, but it's probably best to divide file size by program length to derive megabytes/sec. That way there is no room for misinterpretation as to whether audio (and perhaps metadata as well, although that would probably be insignificant) is or is not included in the data rate.

That sounds like an excellent 3-hard drive arrangement you've got. Similar to mine. I use a 150 gB Raptor for my system drive, and two WD640's for the capture and render disks. I use Sony Vegas to edit a public access (non-profit) TV show my wife has on cable in my local area. I've only worked in standard definition DV though.

Regards,

-- Al