[x264-devel] Re: Another CPU related question

[Pedro Tumusok]

On 5/11/06, Loren Merritt <lorenm at u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 5 May 2006, Jelle wrote:
> > Loren Merritt wrote:
> >>
> >> No, I don't know whether my videocard supports xvmc, but I certainly
> >> haven't enabled it in ffmpeg. This is cpu-time as measured by
> >> `time mplayer -benchmark -vo null -nosound -vc ffmpeg2`.
> >
> > Ok, I'll run that too then.
> >
> > Two different machines. I know for sure that neither machines have
> videocards
> > that support Xvmc.
> >
> > Athlon64 3200+ (2GHz/512kb cache)
> > MPEG2 video 480x576 at 25fps, 2.5Mbit/s (much less than DVD), 4688 seconds
> long.
> > 100 * 12*60+20/4688 =~ 16% CPU.
> >
> > P4/3GHz/1M cache
> > MPEG2 video 720x480 at 29.97fps, 4.5Mbit/s, 1886 seconds long
> > 100 * 4*60+12/1886 =~ 13% CPU.
> >
> > I don't know where you got 2%, but I can't reproduce anything even close
> to
> > it.
> >
> > 2% of a 2.2GHz CPU, or 44MHz, for DVD video? How can I get that?
>
> Ok, so it wasn't quite 2%.
>
>
>
> 100% * 244.856 / 3750 = 6.5% CPU
>
>
I guess that my real question was, do you think the Cell is the cpu beast
that IBM/Sony/Toshiba claims it to be? If so a PS3 with Linux and an
optimized x264 code to take care of the SPE's in the Cell might be a very
cheap encoder.

-- 
Best regards / Mvh
Jan Pedro Tumusok

Another fella told me, he had a sister who looked just fine.
Instead of bein' my deliv'rance, she had a strange resemblance
To a cat named Frankenstein
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/x264-devel/attachments/20060511/05bded1c/attachment.htm