I was doing some testing of both the older version (1.6.1.90) and the
newer version of mpeg2enc (1.6.1.92). First off, the .92 was somewhat
faster to begin with. However, in both cases, after multiple tests and
trying different things, I can't get the SMP modes to be fast at all. In
fact, they're s
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 21:08, Richard Ellis wrote:
> What program are you using to monitor CPU usage while mpeg2enc runs?
> Some versions of top (if you are using top) report percentages as a
> roll-up of the whole SMP machine, so that 3x33% usage really means
> 99% utilization of the machine, wher
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 20:27, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Slepp Lukwai wrote:
>
> > faster to begin with. However, in both cases, after multiple tests and
> > trying different things, I can't get the SMP modes to be fast at all. In
> > fact, th
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 22:44, Bernhard Praschinger wrote:
> Hallo
>
> > I was doing some testing of both the older version (1.6.1.90) and the
> > newer version of mpeg2enc (1.6.1.92). First off, the .92 was somewhat
> > faster to begin with. However, in both cases, after multiple tests and
> > tryi
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 12:57, Bernhard Praschinger wrote:
> Could you run a few test (please). Get some frames (100-1000) as yuv
> format. I gues that should be possible even with transcode. ;)
> (I do not use transcode so I can't help, or get the test streams on
> mjpeg.sf.net)
With about 1010 fr
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 12:33, Andrew Stevens wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> First off a bit of background to the multi-threading in the current stable
> branch. First off:
>
> - Parallelism is primarily frame-by-frame. This means that the final phases
> of the encoding lock on completion of the referenc
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 13:15, Richard Ellis wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 12:33:52AM -0700, Slepp Lukwai wrote:
> >.. It's a dual Athlon, which inherently means 266FSB (DDR 266),
> > though the memory is actually Hynix PC3200 w/ timings set as low as
> > they go on
Just a side note, I find it interesting your name is Andrew Stevens,
whereby mine is Stephen Andrew (middle name).
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 14:41, Andrew Stevens wrote:
> Yep. You should (in theory) get a lot closer to that with the current
> MPEG_DEVEL branch mpeg2enc. However, your scaling is
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 10:27, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Slepp Lukwai wrote:
>
> > Tried it without any options, same effect. I'm definitely seeing nowhere
> > near 40% speedup, which is what boggles me. I expected at least
> > reasonable gains of
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 23:17, Bernhard Praschinger wrote:
> > -M 0: 2m 11.9s
> > -M 1: 2m 10.6s, -1.3s
> > -M 2: 1m 27.7s, -44.2s
> > -M 3: 1m 26.5s, -45.4s
> That values look much better. :-)
> Now you have seen the mpeg2enc can go faster.
It's like it used to be. :> I'm going to try it on a full
10 matches
Mail list logo
