Video Encoding how do i speed it up ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter We Live for the One we Die for the One
  • Start date Start date
W

We Live for the One we Die for the One

I just want to speed up my SVCD making, seems to take FOREVER on my Xp
2400 :( and at top quality settings takes 8 hours or more !

Can i buy a HArdware PCi card to do it faster ? and if so how much
faster ?

Or maybe updateing to an Amd 64 3400 will speed it up well it woudl
but by how much any estimates, 120minute movie converted to SVCD ?

Thanks for any help you maybe give and MErry Christmas, it aint that
far away.

Thanks.
 
We Live for the One we Die for the One said:
I just want to speed up my SVCD making, seems to take FOREVER on my Xp
2400 :( and at top quality settings takes 8 hours or more !

Can i buy a HArdware PCi card to do it faster ? and if so how much
faster ?

Or maybe updateing to an Amd 64 3400 will speed it up well it woudl
but by how much any estimates, 120minute movie converted to SVCD ?

Thanks for any help you maybe give and MErry Christmas, it aint that
far away.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
You could get a hardware based card if your converson application has
explicit support for it, but in general these are for speeding up editing
suites such as Adobe Premiere.

If you want speed for converting multimedia, you should look at a P4E 800FSB
with a large cache, but these run hot.
On the AMD side, look at the FX-51 and -53, anything above your 2400 will be
an improvement, remeber, 2500+ has 2x the L2 cache.

hamman
 
on my xp2600 it took me 8 hours to convert a dvd film to svcd, that was with
motion detection on high quality. It will be a couple of years before we see
a computer that can do this in an hour or less I'm thinking.
 
Robert <[email protected]> said:
on my xp2600 it took me 8 hours to convert a dvd film to svcd, that was with
motion detection on high quality. It will be a couple of years before we see
a computer that can do this in an hour or less I'm thinking.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm ..... long time since I did any SVCD stuff, I'm trying to think
what the differences are compared to re-encoding and re-compressing say
a 8GB DVD to fit on a DVDR, because that can now be done in between 10
and 20 min!
--
__________________________________________________
Personal email for Gareth Jones can be sent to:
'usenet4gareth' followed by an at symbol
followed by 'uk2' followed by a dot
followed by 'net'
__________________________________________________
 
Gareth said:
Hmmmm ..... long time since I did any SVCD stuff, I'm trying to think
what the differences are compared to re-encoding and re-compressing say
a 8GB DVD to fit on a DVDR, because that can now be done in between 10
and 20 min!
Click to expand...


One is encoding, the other is stripping extra bits. *Big* difference.


-WD
 
We said:
I just want to speed up my SVCD making, seems to take FOREVER on my Xp
2400 :( and at top quality settings takes 8 hours or more !

Can i buy a HArdware PCi card to do it faster ? and if so how much
faster ?
Click to expand...

You're using the wrong platform, a P4 would work much better for this
application. AFAIK there are no reasonable priced all hardware solutions.
 
I just want to speed up my SVCD making, seems to take FOREVER on my Xp
2400 :( and at top quality settings takes 8 hours or more !

Can i buy a HArdware PCi card to do it faster ? and if so how much
faster ?

Or maybe updateing to an Amd 64 3400 will speed it up well it woudl
but by how much any estimates, 120minute movie converted to SVCD ?

Thanks for any help you maybe give and MErry Christmas, it aint that
far away.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Thats what happens when you set motion search precision to high.
I generally have it set to CQ though that may not have much effect on
the speed at all compared VBR but just doing trial and error I ended
up on that and have been too lazy to try it another way. But the main
thing I do probably that has an effect on speed is set it to NORMAL.

Back when I first started testing TMPGEnc it would take me 6-8 hours
but then I saw some posts somewhere that said they couldnt tell the
difference between the Normal setting and high Q so I tried it and it
usually drops down quite a bit around 3 hours or less depending on the
length of the film of course. I havent noticed anything but Im sure an
expert may come up with reasons not to use NORMAL but just watching
the stuff I havent really noticed any obvious faults.

Im runiing my Barton 2500 at 3200 and I was using a 1700 before then.
I noticed a difference and any difference you can clearly tell is a
big one but if you really come down to it , big differences are
measured in fairly small increments. Its not like you move up to a
faster processor and it cuts anything down to 1/2 or 1/4 the time
usually its like 3-5% or 10% faster or something.

I do want to get AMD 64 later on maybe Xmas or early next year and
expect a big difference - faster processors really are noticeable in
compressing/encoding stuff but probably the real time difference wont
be astonishingly dramatic. Try the NORMAL setting.
 
Back when I first started testing TMPGEnc it would take me 6-8 hours
but then I saw some posts somewhere that said they couldnt tell the
difference between the Normal setting and high Q so I tried it and it
usually drops down quite a bit around 3 hours or less depending on the
length of the film of course.
Click to expand...

This is some really good advice. Play around with a small clip at different
settings (something that takes 2 minutes or so to compress) and see how the
quality/speed changes with different settings. People assume they need to
use the highest quality setting but you might not see any difference.
Especially as he said the motion controls.
 
(e-mail address removed) wrote:



This is some really good advice. Play around with a small clip at different
settings (something that takes 2 minutes or so to compress) and see how the
quality/speed changes with different settings. People assume they need to
use the highest quality setting but you might not see any difference.
Especially as he said the motion controls.
Click to expand...

And Ive done it many many times. Honest I cant tell any difference so
far, But then I dont scan every frame to see flaws. It looks fine to
me though maybe some expert may point out some flaws Im not aware of.
The time difference is dramatic.
 
Yes i have used Xmpeg but can it convert a Divx to Mpeg ?


Just tried nope it can't so it aint no help to me on this ocassion :(
 
Robert said:
on my xp2600 it took me 8 hours to convert a dvd film to svcd, that was with
motion detection on high quality. It will be a couple of years before we see
a computer that can do this in an hour or less I'm thinking.
Click to expand...

And what software are you doing your encoding with ?
I have an XP2600+ on one system and XMpeg took about
3.5 hours to convert a 2 hour DVD movie. Past experience
with crapware like TMpegEnc tells me that TMpegEnc would
have taken more than twice as long. (I tend to wind up
with 2250 kbps movies.)
 
Will Dormann said:
One is encoding, the other is stripping extra bits. *Big* difference.
Click to expand...

Could you define what you mean by 'stripping extra bits' ?

--
__________________________________________________
Personal email for Gareth Jones can be sent to:
'usenet4gareth' followed by an at symbol
followed by 'uk2' followed by a dot
followed by 'net'
__________________________________________________
 
And what software are you doing your encoding with ?
I have an XP2600+ on one system and XMpeg took about
3.5 hours to convert a 2 hour DVD movie. Past experience
with crapware like TMpegEnc tells me that TMpegEnc would
have taken more than twice as long. (I tend to wind up
with 2250 kbps movies.)
Click to expand...

Im kind of skeptical that XMPEG is that much faster. Its mentioned at
Videohelp and other main sites so they are familiar with that program
but TMPGEnc is still an overwhelming favorite.

I have a copy but I havent used it yet but Ill test it. The thing is
if a freedownload piece of software which everyone knows about is just
as good and over twice as fast and everyone is still using TMPGEnc
then theres more to the story there.

I do notice that in Europe they seem to use XMPEG more.
As I mention mentioned changing the motion search precision radically
shortens the time for TMPGEnc and I cant tell the difference offhand
when Ive compared though I didnt compare them frame by frame in a
detailed manner.

At videohelp the database XMPEG and TMPGEnc Plus are rated highly
but doing a search I dont see any threads claiming XMPEG is vastly
superior or faster. That doesnt mean it isnt of course but I havent
seen it. Ive tested the other well regarded and expensive encoder CCE
after some claims that it was faster but found it very similar. I then
found some sites that did actual speed tests and they didnt find big
differences either given the settings were comparable.
 
I canget it done in 1 hour 30 :), a SVCD decent quailty CBR or
2300bits :) thata rip of a Divx 650 megs :)

have not tried a DVD rip yet.
 
--

or
(e-mail address removed)12.pa.us
Stacey said:
You're using the wrong platform, a P4 would work much better for this
application. AFAIK there are no reasonable priced all hardware solutions.
--

Stacey

You're using the wrong platform, a P4 would work much better for this
application. AFAIK there are no reasonable priced all hardware solutions
Click to expand...

I've used both platforms for rendering and encoding and see little
difference in speed using comparable CPU's of both AMD and P4.

Jan Alter
 
Back
Top