Re: [Mjpeg-users] compiling options

2004-03-08 Thread Bernhard Praschinger
Hallo > > What was the summarize output when you run configure ? > > MJPEG tools 1.6.1.90 build configuration : > > - X86 Optimizations: > - MMX/3DNow!/SSE enabled : true > - cmov support enabled: true That lookes good. When mpeg2enc starts you should see something

Re: [Mjpeg-users] compiling options

2004-03-07 Thread Steven M. Schultz
On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, E.Chalaron wrote: > > That's a little slow - but only _slightly_ below what I'd expect for a > > ~900MHz P3. > > Even for a dual CPU ? Remember - one of those cpus is being used by yuvdenoise... The parallelism in mpeg2enc is fairly coarse too so u

Re: [Mjpeg-users] compiling options

2004-03-07 Thread E.Chalaron
> > 2.14 fps with > > Thanks for the info. > > That's a little slow - but only _slightly_ below what I'd expect for a > ~900MHz P3. Even for a dual CPU ? I might give a go to upgrade to new MDK versions then Mjpegtools then. Thanks again Edouard --

Re: [Mjpeg-users] compiling options

2004-03-07 Thread Steven M. Schultz
On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, E.Chalaron wrote: > 2.14 fps with Thanks for the info. That's a little slow - but only _slightly_ below what I'd expect for a ~900MHz P3. I think I get somewhere around 1.5 to 2 on a dual 800MHz P3 - been a while since I've encoded on that

Re: [Mjpeg-users] compiling options

2004-03-07 Thread E.Chalaron
> What was the summarize output when you run configure ? MJPEG tools 1.6.1.90 build configuration : - X86 Optimizations: - MMX/3DNow!/SSE enabled : true - cmov support enabled: true * NOTE:

Re: [Mjpeg-users] compiling options

2004-03-07 Thread E.Chalaron
> Can you quantify "slow slow slow"? ;) 2.14 fps with yuvdenoise -b x,y,L,H -f | mpeg2enc -q 6 -K kvcd -4 2 -2 1 -M 2 Machine is a dual 933 Mhz Intel. > Earlier versions of mpeg2enc had the wrong default for the -I option. > Yes, -I 0 is faster but it's also incorrect in many

Re: [Mjpeg-users] compiling options

2004-03-06 Thread Steven M. Schultz
On Sat, 6 Mar 2004, E.Chalaron wrote: > I just recompiled mjpegtools, and it is slow slow slow compared to a rpm > version I had before. Anything I should in the configure with. Can you quantify "slow slow slow"? ;) I'm seeing about 10 frames/sec for the DVD frame size. I s

Re: [Mjpeg-users] compiling options

2004-03-06 Thread Bernhard Praschinger
"E.Chalaron" wrote: > > I just recompiled mjpegtools, and it is slow slow slow compared to a rpm > version I had before. Anything I should in the configure with. > Thanks Do you have NASM installed ? What was the summarize output when you run configure ? auf hoffentlich bald, Berni the Chaos

[Mjpeg-users] compiling options

2004-03-06 Thread E.Chalaron
I just recompiled mjpegtools, and it is slow slow slow compared to a rpm version I had before. Anything I should in the configure with. Thanks Edouard --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented