Matrox RT2000...DV or MPEG-2?

I'm not even sure if you're using the card at the MPEG2 settings you describe.

If you went with the Matrox DV settings, it WILL be much faster.

MPEG2 rendering on the fly requires a completely different kind of hardware than what the RT2000 uses.

-Aaron

http://www.stopfcc.com/
Knock it off! I like my radio and television the way it is...

Yup, the Matrox site confirms that the card can either run with MPEG-2 files of DV but doesn't mention performance. Except that MPEG-2 and DV cannot be mixed on a timeline without rendering.

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media

You will have to remember when the RT2000 came out drives fast enough and large enough for DV work were more expennsive and HAD to be raided. the Mpeg2 option was reccommended for those who's drives were too slow for DV. When the RT2000 was introduced in 1999/2000 the ATA drives were ATA33, so a lower bandwidth soulution was needed to match all the 500mhz PIII's that were out there. By editing in the Mpeg2 mode you lost all the real time capabilities that the RT2000 offered, so as drives got better the option disappeared with the newer cards(RT2500/RTX100). The Mpeg 2 the RT2000 edits in is different than the Mpg2 required for creating DVD's so you will get no advantage and it will still have to transcode the saem as from the DV based files.

Mpeg actually is more compressed than DV,so it does take up less space on the hard drive and reqires less hard drive band width but since is more compressed it requires more work from the CPU to uncompress each frame when it comes time to render slowing things down.

For the most part the RT2000 was designed and optomized as a DV solution and works best that way, the Mpeg2 option was an add on to make it more attractive to the user and systems of its time for it's time (5 years past, an eon in computer time)

Michael Webb
Editor/Videographer
Post Squared
-----
Training / Support
Microsearch, Houston Texas
713-988-2818