Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have quite a slow PC with only 2GB of RAM, Intel Pentium Dual Core 2GHz, Windows 7. I'm using the latest version of handbrake to try and rip a 2 and a half hour DVD but it says it will take 11 hours! I have chosen the iPad preset (as I will later transfer the files to my iPad) which is a 720X576, H.264 (x264), 29.97 fps video but should it really take this long? I am using the Constant quality of RF:20. I'm not really sure what this means and if I am able to change it. There is an option to enter an average bitrate but i don't know what a good quality option would be. I want to have reasonable quality.

share|improve this question

I use MakeMKV to rip the individual titles from the disc. Next I use VidCoder which is Handbrake at the core but with a better UI. The advantage to doing it in two steps is that I can rip discs fairly quickly and then queue up the files in Vidcoder and just let it run.

The thing with Handbrake/Vidcoder is that it is multi-threaded. This means that the better your processor is, the faster it can process video. I bought a cheap $500 quad-core computer for the purpose of doing this. It can rip a disc in 20-30 minutes and it can transcode in less time than it takes to watch when using the default "Normal" profile. It was well worth the price considering the reduced amount of time it takes to process video.

share|improve this answer
I will try that tomorrow, once this disk is finished -.- lol. I will be getting a new PC soon, what is it that is actually used the most when encoding disks? I assume you just need a good CPU and RAM? Or are there other things as well? – Cameron Dec 23 '11 at 23:38
A fast DVD drive will shorten the time need to rip the disc. – Bob M Dec 28 '11 at 6:42

Personally I prefer DVD Decrypter for it's simplicity. It tends to be pretty quick, though I've not benchmarked it against other rippers like Handbrake. Although it's no longer actively developed, it works well and has a multitude of options.

share|improve this answer
DVD Decrypter will only give you a .iso or a folder of Video_TS files, if that format is acceptable (Thats what I do when I want to keep the extra features) then DVD Decrypter is the fastest. However if you want a .avi you can use that tool in conjunction with Handbreak to turn the .iso/folder in to a .avi. I recommend just using the pre-made rip profiles in handbreak. – Scott Chamberlain Dec 23 '11 at 15:26
Correct, though it gives you the flexibility to do what you want with the video when ripped. You can keep it in Video_TS for re-burning, or put it into Videora for conversion to iPod/iPad/iPhone format, or use Hardbrake to convert it to a normal AVI or MPEG-4. – Garrett Dec 23 '11 at 15:41
I keep my Video_TS files on my hard drive and just play it directly from VLC (with the occasional conversion using handbrake to put a video on my iPad). – Scott Chamberlain Dec 23 '11 at 15:42

I've tested the ripping speed of around a dozen different DVD drives. As others have hinted which drive you have can really make a difference. In my tests I found some interesting results: SATA vs. PATA doesn't seem to make as big a difference as you might think, neither does the date of manufacture (perhaps older than 1999). In fact the fastest rip was just over 4 1/2 minutes using a PATA DVD-ROM from 2001 (AOpen DVD1648). I've tested a variety of LG DVD writers and consistently find they perform poorly compared to other brands. Not sure about the rumours that certain drive manufacturers cripple the reading of their DVD-ROMs on purpose, but having tested half a dozen LG drives it certainly looks like this could be the case. One of the decent writers I tested was the Lite-ON SHW-1635S which came in a second shy from the fastest drive (but had a "so so" review elsewhere).

All tests were done on the exact same box, a Core 2 Duo based machine with 2GB of RAM, using the same DVD. In each case I erased anything that was cached and used a separate directory for caching. Times varied from 4.32 minutes to 14.46 minutes for a Hitachi-LG GDR-H30N.

share|improve this answer

It can be just bad drive or DVD (or chain). I had to say, when I ripped DVD with s system with spec near to yours, I spent ~40 min per DVD. I can't recall, which software was used.

Just to note: on really old box (Celeron 2.4 with IDE drives) I cloned DVD for 1h 40m, on fresher box (Quad 8300 with SATA drives) it took 25 minutes. JFYI

share|improve this answer
Actually, the drive may not be functioning completely because it no longer burns discs even though it was originally a DVD-RW drive and so maybe I just need a new one. – Cameron Dec 23 '11 at 17:08
Although I'm not sure if its the ripping or encoding which is slow. – Cameron Dec 23 '11 at 17:22
2ghz dual core, it is the encoding that is slow. – Moab Dec 23 '11 at 17:47
@Moab I'm not sure how to tell? – Cameron Dec 23 '11 at 18:12
ripping is the easy part, all it does is read the data from the disc (decode if needed), encoding to another format is very processor intensive. Only way to confirm this is to use the 2 step process Bob M suggested. – Moab Dec 23 '11 at 20:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .