On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 23:13:13 +0100, Mark Thompson wrote: > > The test video was captured from a 3MP(2048x1536) camera. The commands I > > used: > > - ffmpeg -c:v h264_qsv -async_depth 10 -i test.h264 -c:v rawvideo -f null > > /dev/null > > - sample_decode h264 -i test.h264 > > Both uses 100% cpu (a full core). ffmpeg got 170FPS. sample_decode got > > 370FPS.
> I think in both cases your speed bound must be on something other > than the decode, because the hardware goes a lot faster than either > of those for me. Don't explicitly convert to rawvideo, the null muxer recently defaults to wrapped_avframe, which is a tad bit faster: $ ffmpeg -c:v h264_qsv -async_depth 10 -i test.h264 -f null /dev/null Actually, you may want to rule out too much influence from the output section of the chain by using "-c copy", if possible: $ ffmpeg -c:v h264_qsv -async_depth 10 -i test.h264 -c copy -f null /dev/null In addition to this, do benchmark the demuxing/muxing overhead for comparison, without HW decoding. (Yes this is a different demuxer, but just in order to see.): $ ffmpeg -i test.h264 -c copy -f null /dev/null (And drop audio processing using "-an". Not applicable in this case.) Moritz _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
