Which processor config for toast

[bbadalucco]

I've read around but don't want to speculate too much on a large purchase like this.

I have a bunch of blu ray video files on a server which I'd like to convert so that I can watch them on my mac mini (HTPC). On average they are about 20gb. I want to convert them via Toast 10 Titanium to something which can be view on the mini.

Which processor config would you recommend? Ideally anyone have a clue how long the following would take:

2.93 quad
2.26 oct
2.66 oct

anyhelp would be appreciated

 

[cmaier]

I've read around but don't want to speculate too much on a large purchase like this.

I have a bunch of blu ray video files on a server which I'd like to convert so that I can watch them on my mac mini (HTPC). On average they are about 20gb. I want to convert them via Toast 10 Titanium to something which can be view on the mini.

Which processor config would you recommend? Ideally anyone have a clue how long the following would take:

2.93 quad
2.26 oct
2.66 oct

anyhelp would be appreciated

Search this forum. Someone has already posted at least one toast 10 benchmark.

 

[iMpathetic]

Toast? Intel Pentium 4 HT.

 

[bbadalucco]

Toast? Intel Pentium 4 HT.

Don't recall that being part of my question.

 

[t4cgirl]

Still, you might as well just have your mini handle the Toast jobs overnight, and spend the $3k on fresh produce for a year.

 

[vaderhater245]

if it's just for toast then a new mini should be fine. Have a external plugged into if you need more space.

 

[TrapOx]

The Mini would be more than capable of handling that job. Spending $3-4K on a computer for a single menial task is a huge waste.

 

[JesterJJZ]

Still, you might as well just have your mini handle the Toast jobs overnight, and spend the $3k on fresh produce for a year.

Or a kickass home theater system...to watch on instead of your mac mini...

 

[darrenscerri]

For the fastest encoding go for the 2.66GHz octa. But in my opinion the 2.26GHz has more bang-for-the-buck, the price difference is too much. Or as t4cgirl said, encode your movies overnight and save the $3000.

 

[iMpathetic]

Don't recall that being part of my question.

I apologize, I thought I was being funny.

Carry on.

 

[boogieman]

I can tell u that going from a 2.66 quad early 2007 to the new 2.26 octo that my time for a bluray encode and burn time using toast 10 went from nearly 9 hours to a little under a hour. And I tested it using the same movie on both machines so it was well worth the upgrade for me.

 

[UltraNEO*]

I've read around but don't want to speculate too much on a large purchase like this.

I have a bunch of blu ray video files on a server which I'd like to convert so that I can watch them on my mac mini (HTPC). On average they are about 20gb. I want to convert them via Toast 10 Titanium to something which can be view on the mini.

Which processor config would you recommend? Ideally anyone have a clue how long the following would take:

2.93 quad
2.26 oct
2.66 oct

anyhelp would be appreciated

Wait... hate to state the obvious. But the money you spend on a MP for the conversion of those 'media files' would be way more than buying the original Blu-Ray Discs and the state-of-the-arts Blu-ray player/recorder...

 

[cmaier]

Wait... hate to state the obvious. But the money you spend on a MP for the conversion of those 'media files' would be way more than buying the original Blu-Ray Discs and the state-of-the-arts Blu-ray player/recorder...

I have about 700 dvds and 100 blu-rays, and I'd love not to have to get up, go find the disk I want, carry it to the blu-ray player (which in my case could be on a different floor than the floor where the disks are stored), wait for the blu-ray player to power up and do its dance, then have to reverse the process when its done. Streaming everything from a central location to each TV so I can select the movie I want with a remote control seems pretty nice to me, and it's a heck of a lot cheaper than a Kaleidescape.

 

[bamf]

I have about 700 dvds and 100 blu-rays, and I'd love not to have to get up, go find the disk I want, carry it to the blu-ray player (which in my case could be on a different floor than the floor where the disks are stored), wait for the blu-ray player to power up and do its dance, then have to reverse the process when its done. Streaming everything from a central location to each TV so I can select the movie I want with a remote control seems pretty nice to me, and it's a heck of a lot cheaper than a Kaleidescape.

That's what I do as well. It sure is convenient to have the same files show up on my AppleTV and my Mac Mini HTPC - and all without me having to go find a disk...

 

[Tesselator]

I have about 3,000 DVDs and I'll bet 10% of them don't even work any longer. I've discovered that DVD recording is only good for temporary storage and backup. This is why I don't get the whole BlueRay thing. Why would I want slower, less stable, more expensive media recording? Isn't this what Steve Jobs said as well regarding Apple's official position on BlueRay? It is. Anyway, I guess I could understand it as a delivery format if you're working in an industry where your customers can accept it or want it. In that case any of the New Mac Pros (all of the new Mac Pros) are going to cut your times WAY down like boogieman was saying. 8-core will fair better than 4-core machines for the actual encoding part.