Hello to all. I know this was probably discussed somewhere already, but I have searched the forums, and still can't get the answer I need! I have just recently found out about aoTuV tuned, Ogg encoding, and I am very excited to rip my whole cd collection this way, but I am confused on which binary to download! I have an AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 Processor. I will be using aoTuv R1, and there are three different versions to choose from. I am pretty sure that I should be using the P4 one, but please let me know for sure, thanks!

I always download the generic version and have no problems.

Judging by Wikipedia the Athlon 64 FX-55 is available in two versions with the Clawhammer as well as the San Diego processor cores. SSE2 will work on both of these processors, though the latter also supports SSE3.

You can safely download the SSE2 version from this site, to make sure whether SSE3 works as well you need a tool that's able to identify the core.

Edit: This application might be able to do so: Central Brain Identifier. "Might" because I can't test it myself, my machine's equipped with an Intel Pentium 4 processor.

Besides, instead of aoTuV r1 [Lancer 20061013(Based on aotuv-r1_20051117)] you could also safely download the current beta 5 version [Lancer 20061110(Based on aotuv-b5_20061024)]. It has already proven being a very reliable build which I've used to encode thousands of files with no problems so far.


The optimized Lancer builds don't cause any problems as well and they're much faster than the generic ones. A serious downside of Vorbis is its annoyingly slow encoding speed, a problem which has been sorted out by Blacksword's work in the meantime.

CPU-Z Should be able to tell youthe necessary info about your processor, both the core and the instruction sets supported. Not that I'm advertising or anything, I just happen to find that little app quite useful.

Thanks for the info people, after I posted this thread, I read in the wiki about being safe when you use the generic version! I actually get pretty good speeds with it. Using EAC as my ripper, the extraction process is rather slow anyway, so I don't mind the encoder being of the slower nature that much, it still encodes faster than the ripping process!