aleks Posted May 15, 2002 Share Posted May 15, 2002 Greetings, Regarding the benchmark on the MPEG-4 Video Encoding:Xmpeg 4.2a w/ Divx 5.0 Pro (link below). The results show that they are receiving 24.34 FPS for an Athlon 850 -- How is this possible? I have used XMpeg 4.2a and 4.5 with Divx 3.11 to Divx 5.01 and never got such a high encoding rate with my current system. http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/0204...es/image012.gif My Current System: AMD Athlon Thunderbird 1.1ghz "b" Spectek PC133 RAM 256mb MSI K7T Turbo Seagate 40gb 7200rpm ATI All in Wonder Radeon 32mb DDR (6052) Operating System: Windows XP Professional My usual DVD Rips are : 720x576 (780kbit bit rate) -- PAL/25 FPS iDCT: DVD2AVI MMX -- Tried various others too (eg. AMD x87) Format: YUV2 Filtering: Bressenham -- Tried Bilinear too. No Audio DIVX 4.12 Codec With: XMPEG 4.2a -- 12-13 fps Virtual DUB (pre-processed with DVD2AVI): 16fps Does the benchmark only record one of the passes of a two pass encode? I really cant see the huge leap in fps due to YUV2. NOTE: I have talked about these statistics in #doom9 and in many other forums. Most believe the benchmarks they provide are just utter non-sense. Would Tom's Hardware provide us with false information on their part? In addition to this, Tom's Hardware even has a special article how enabling YUV2 in XMPEG will encode the movie faster than real-time. Link: http://www4.tomshardware.com/video/01q4/01...divx411-03.html If they are really receiving these statistics, a detailed tutorial or complete list of settings to achieve these results would be much appreciated. Aleks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twist Posted May 15, 2002 Share Posted May 15, 2002 what where the specs on their system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudlington Posted May 15, 2002 Share Posted May 15, 2002 Do you use any filters? have any other programs running in the background (their benches are probably done on clean installs), do you change any of the default codec settings? I always find benchmarks done professionally on sites like THG (for games, divx or anything else) get higher (or lower if lower is better) scores than I can with a similar setup. and I'd watch it throwing around serious accusations like that about a reputable site. Might set something on fire...:o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aleks Posted May 15, 2002 Author Share Posted May 15, 2002 Originally posted by GambitADSL Do you use any filters? have any other programs running in the background (their benches are probably done on clean installs), do you change any of the default codec settings? I always find benchmarks done professionally on sites like THG (for games, divx or anything else) get higher (or lower if lower is better) scores than I can with a similar setup. and I'd watch it throwing around serious accusations like that about a reputable site. Might set something on fire...:o Its not the first time they have provided incorrect information. The thing is 24fps on an athlon 850, that is just absurd... I tried every possible configuration. Professional "rippers" in #doom9 agree with me thats its virtually impossible to reach 24fps with an Athlon 850. Even some with new Athlon XP 2000+ machines just reach around 20-22fps. I have emailed them a week ago about this to all the staff and respectfully posted the question on their community board, and no response what so ever. Remember its not just the "benches", they did an article describing that using YUV2 color space encoding will boost encoding time to the movie's real-time (25fps PAL) or higher. Im not accusing Tom's Hardware of "DELIBERATELY" providing us with false results and not am not blaming the entire staff. There are a number of possible explainations which I am eager to find out. Aleks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MxxCon Posted May 15, 2002 Share Posted May 15, 2002 using YUV2 color space is indeed FASTER than RGB. don't really trust "professional" rippers in #doom9, rather read it's msgboard. much better source of info. read http://www4.tomshardware.com/video/02q1/02...0315/index.html you'll see all settings they used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aleks Posted May 15, 2002 Author Share Posted May 15, 2002 Originally posted by GambitADSL Do you use any filters? have any other programs running in the background (their benches are probably done on clean installs), do you change any of the default codec settings? I always find benchmarks done professionally on sites like THG (for games, divx or anything else) get higher (or lower if lower is better) scores than I can with a similar setup. and I'd watch it throwing around serious accusations like that about a reputable site. Might set something on fire...:o Well I am not accusing him of anything, just stating that the information provided in the benches is incorrect (stats displayed in XMpeg). I have posted this topic on various other boards like Rage3D & Divx.com and all I can say is that I get a general response of "TOM IS SO FULL OF ****". Clean installs or not, his article stated enabling YUV2 instead of RGB results in a real time encode. People from doom9.net and various other DVD RIPPING IRC CHANNELS would already be creating a big bruhaha of this were true. Unfortunately, its not. Sure there's a fair increase in performance, but not more than double as stated by Tom's Hardware. Going through the DIVX.COM Community, various people were asking the same question as I and got no response what so ever. If Tom's Hardware is right about this and I am causing a fuss over nothing, I would be very happy. Encoding a MPEG2 Video stream to MPEG4/DIVX in real time would be soooo sweet :p using YUV2 color space is indeed FASTER than RGB. don't really trust "professional" rippers in #doom9, rather read it's msgboard. much better source of info. read http://www4.tomshardware.com/video/...0315/index.html you'll see all settings they used. Yes, I am not disputing YUV2 color space is faster than RGB. Within XMPEG, I get an increase of 8fps to 13fps. In DVD2AVI, I receive 16fps. Regarding his "settings" in that DivX 5 article, I am quite well aware of that and have emulated the settings in his shots, but still I am not reaching 24fps+ Unless an athlon 850's performance is much superior to an Athlon 1.1ghz "b" Thunderbird. Regards, Aleks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts