View Full Version : rev 391 x264 crashes for me
woah!
30th December 2005, 20:53
389 using the exact same avs and settings runs through with no issues, but 391 crashes within the first secs of the encoding.
what do i need to supply you with to trouble shoot this as there is no error it just stops:
-bitrate 800 --keyint 300 --no-cabac --ref 3 --bframes 3 --b-pyramid --filter -2,-2 --subme 3 --weightb --analyse all --qpmin 1 --qpmax 50 --qpstep 2 --me umh --progress --no-psnr --output
avis [info]: 624x352 @ 29.97 fps (901 frames)
x264 [info]: using cpu capabilities MMX MMXEXT SSE SSE2 3DNow!
mp4 [info]: initial delay 200 (scale 2997)
encoded frames: 3/901 (0.3%), 3.10 fps, eta 0:04:49
so it got to the 3rd frame and stopped. with 389 it ran the whole way through
bob0r
30th December 2005, 21:04
"," in the command line?
output to what?
If .mp4 output, this broken because of gpac.
Next revision on x264.nl (392) will use gpac 2005-12-24, which is working.
Sharktooth may update sooner.
woah!
30th December 2005, 21:28
here the same encode with 389:
--bitrate 800 --keyint 300 --no-cabac --ref 3 --bframes 3 --b-pyramid --filter -2,-2 --subme 3 --weightb --analyse all --qpmin 1 --qpmax 50 --qpstep 2 --me umh --progress --no-psnr --output
avis [info]: 624x352 @ 29.97 fps (901 frames)
x264 [info]: using cpu capabilities MMX MMXEXT SSE SSE2 3DNow!
mp4 [info]: initial delay 200 (scale 2997)
x264 [info]: slice I:5 Avg QP:27.40 size: 261800:00
x264 [info]: slice P:538 Avg QP:33.43 size: 4708
x264 [info]: slice B:358 Avg QP:35.37 size: 1103
x264 [info]: mb I I16..4: 38.3% 0.0% 61.7%
x264 [info]: mb P I16..4: 5.8% 0.0% 2.2% P16..4: 41.1% 9.0% 4.1% 0.9% 0
.4% skip:36.5%
x264 [info]: mb B I16..4: 0.4% 0.0% 0.1% B16..8: 15.0% 1.0% 3.6% direct:
3.0% skip:76.9%
x264 [info]: final ratefactor: 29.51
x264 [info]: ref P 82.3% 11.2% 6.5%
x264 [info]: ref B 85.0% 9.7% 5.4%
x264 [info]: kb/s:813.9
encoded 901 frames, 10.02 fps, 814.10 kb/s
===================
the "," is inbetween the filter settings -2,-2 output is mp4
havent had an issue like this in any of the rev's until this one.
woah!
30th December 2005, 21:35
ok my bad i didnt see that mp4 was borked sorry and thx for letting me know.
Sharktooth
30th December 2005, 22:21
what build did you use? coz i used gpac dated 29.12.2005
buzzqw
30th December 2005, 22:32
i got the same problem !
with Sharktooth build 389 is fine , with build 391 after very few frames the encoder quits
image:
http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/1429/3912ss.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Thanks to ImageShack for Free Image Hosting (http://imageshack.us)
even with x264.nl (391) build is broken
BHH
woah!
30th December 2005, 22:43
what build did you use? coz i used gpac dated 29.12.2005
i downloaded the 391 from http://x264.nl/ and its that build thats having an issue with the 3rd frame onwards by the looks of it.
i am going from 1920x1088i to 624x352 but i dont think that has anything to do with this problem
Sharktooth
30th December 2005, 22:49
r391A is coming, you will find it in the sticky thread (damn gpac...).
bob0r
31st December 2005, 00:00
New 391 online on http://x264.nl aswell, too much visitors, and no clue when next revision will come :D
And yes, new gpac is fucked.... again :(
I wonder what causes it: http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/gpac/gpac/Changelog?rev=1.26&view=auto :scared:
woah!
31st December 2005, 00:15
ok all is good with the repack:
--bitrate 750 --keyint 300 --no-cabac --ref 3 --bframes 3 --b-pyramid --filter -2,-2 --subme 3 --weightb --analyse all --qpmin 1 --qpmax 50 --qpstep 2 --me umh --progress --no-psnr --output
avis [info]: 624x352 @ 29.97 fps (901 frames)
x264 [info]: using cpu capabilities MMX MMXEXT SSE SSE2 3DNow!
mp4 [info]: initial delay 200 (scale 2997)
x264 [info]: slice I:5 Avg QP:27.40 size: 26180:00
x264 [info]: slice P:538 Avg QP:33.31 size: 4291
x264 [info]: slice B:358 Avg QP:35.27 size: 1206
x264 [info]: mb I I16..4: 38.3% 0.0% 61.7%
x264 [info]: mb P I16..4: 6.1% 0.0% 2.3% P16..4: 37.6% 9.1% 4.2% 0.9% 0
.4% skip:39.5%
x264 [info]: mb B I16..4: 0.4% 0.0% 0.1% B16..8: 16.2% 1.0% 3.6% direct:
3.8% skip:74.8%
x264 [info]: final ratefactor: 29.39
x264 [info]: ref P 80.8% 12.1% 7.0%
x264 [info]: ref B 84.3% 10.2% 5.5%
x264 [info]: kb/s:764.1
encoded 901 frames, 9.87 fps, 764.26 kb/s
buzzqw
31st December 2005, 08:03
it's ok even for me.
Thanks Sharktooth !
BHH
omion
31st December 2005, 09:45
A question to the builders of x264: Why even update GPAC?
it seems that all the features x264 needs from it (writing a file... I think that's all) have worked just fine in the past. All the changes in the site bob0r linked to have nothing to do with x264. The last one affects me - "attempt to fixe gpac compilation on 64 bits platforms" - but I output to MKV anyway. It has worked in the past and I see nothing which could be improved upon... so why bother?
I know nothing about how x264 actually uses GPAC internally though. It could be that GPAC currently outputs files with Fatal Container Leprosy, and all the files will fall apart after a year of use. In this case, patching is probably the right thing to do.
bond
31st December 2005, 12:38
just to avoid any myths: gpac outputs completely correct files
i wonder why some gpac cvs compiles suddenly dont work and a few days later they work again? i doubt jeanlf (gpac dev) is doing any x264-specific fixes, so what causes this?
a solution would be to use for the compiles only the stable releases of gpac, cause after all the cvs isnt meant to be stable...
Sharktooth
31st December 2005, 13:55
the gpac "stable" is less stable than CVS... and has more bugs:)
sometimes cvs doesnt work though...
bond
31st December 2005, 14:29
sometimes cvs doesnt work though...well i am wondering why
mp4box is basically a tool, like x264, that calls the gpac library. i have been using and testing mp4box cvs compiles for a long time now and i never had a problem, like "sometimes cvs doesnt work". so how come this isnt the case for x264 too?
Sharktooth
31st December 2005, 14:37
dunno... ask JLF.
Yong
12th January 2006, 21:47
Just tried compile x264 with lastest cvs version of gpac, mp4-out is working again. ;)
Sharktooth
13th January 2006, 15:21
good :)
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.