x264 encoding speed expectation

[madoka]

I've been encoding a movie using x264 (CLI version), and I'm getting a whopping 0.26 fps on my Athlon XP 2700+. It's been running for 3 days straight and it's still not done! I get about ~12 fps using XviD. I understand that x264 is still in early development, so I can reasonably expect that performance would improve as it matures. But a 45+ fold improvement? Or is H.264 encoding requires intrinsically more processor power?

[unmei]

H.264 _is_ more complex, but still ... i get in no way thosespeed difference sXvid vs x264 - when i use few avs filters (TomsMoComp/undot/aWarpSharp/crop) with full PAL resolution, i get ~4..6fps @ Q21 on my XP 2600+.
I quess x264 gets slower with higher quantizers and probably also with Npass encoding when it "moves around bits" tho. Maybe set bitrate constraints it finds very hard to achieve..

[Sagittaire]

you use certainely "esa" for "me" ... it's the best but it's too slow. "umh" make comparable quality with very better speed.

try this ... for very good quality ~ speed ~ final size

x264.exe --bframe 2 --ref 5 --filter -1:-1 --bitrate 447 --pass 1 --stats "x264_stat.log" --qcomp 0.75 --ipratio 1.10 --pbratio 1.40 --analyse "all" --weightb --me "dia" --subme 4 --progress -o NUL Encodage.avs
x264.exe --bframe 2 --ref 5 --filter -1:-1 --bitrate 447 --pass 3 --stats "x264_stat.log" --qcomp 0.75 --ipratio 1.10 --pbratio 1.40 --analyse "all" --weightb --me "hex" --subme 5 --progress -o NUL Encodage.avs
x264.exe --bframe 2 --ref 5 --filter -1:-1 --bitrate 447 --pass 2 --stats "x264_stat.log" --qcomp 0.75 --ipratio 1.10 --pbratio 1.40 --analyse "all" --weightb --me "umh" --subme 6 --progress -o x264MP-447.mp4 Encodage.avs

[Ishan]

I use : --ref 3 --subme 6 --bframe 2 --weightb --b-pyramid --8x8dct --analyse i4x4,p4x4,p8x8,b8x8,i8x8,
It gives HP h264 with very good quality (@2mbps anamorphic DVD source), without any processing in the avs (just cropping and a little brightness adjustment) I get 3fps on my sempron 2600+.

[bond]

x264 --bitrate 700 --ratetol 1 --threads 1 --bframe 3 --b-pyramid --ref 5 --filter -5:-5 --analyse all --8x8dct --weightb --progress -o output.mp4 input.avs

gives me 3.8fps on my pentium3 866mhz (but i also did other things while it encoded)

[yokem55]

Bond, what resolution is the video you are encoding there that netted you 3.8fps?

[bond]

Bond, what resolution is the video you are encoding there that netted you 3.8fps?
640x256

[yokem55]

Thanks Bond, I was worried that there was something wrong with my A64 setup. Correcting for resolution differences, your numbers fall in with mine....

[MeteorRain]

I've been encoding a movie using x264 (CLI version), and I'm getting a whopping 0.26 fps on my Athlon XP 2700+. It's been running for 3 days straight and it's still not done! I get about ~12 fps using XviD. I understand that x264 is still in early development, so I can reasonably expect that performance would improve as it matures. But a 45+ fold improvement? Or is H.264 encoding requires intrinsically more processor power?
well, it's unusual! seems that you may have some wrong setting in the configuration.
check if you have set subpixel refinement to 6-RDO (very slow)?
i use meGUI and it works well.
"H:\mp4\mplayer2005.06.09.Athlon-64\mencoder.exe" "W:\GOSHUJINSAMA_1\V2\v2.avs" -ovc x264 -o NUL: -passlogfile "H:\subgroup\master\v2.log" -x264encopts pass=1:bitrate=860:bframes=16:b_adapt:b_pyramid:subq=3:no8x8mv:nob8x8mv:4x4mv:i4x4:i8x8:
qp_min=15:qp_max=25:ip_factor=1.0:pb_factor=1.0:qcomp=1.0:threads=2

and encode speed is about 10fps at 1stpass(turbo) and 9fps at 2ndpass.
video resolution is 704*400 :rolleyes: :rolleyes: and the source is vob(dvd)
i am sempron 2800+, no overclock.

[madoka]

I figured out what's slowing me down: the --me esa flag I used. I know the help says that it's slow, I just didn't realize it'd be that slow. Omitting that flag gives me ~5 fps. Still slow, but acceptable.

[roror]

Hi all,

I usually encode using xvid, but, yesterday I thought I'll give x264 a try. I am using GKnot as a front end. I used all the default settings of x264. It took 8 and half hours for Gone with the wind first DVD. It usually takes 4-5 hours for xvid.

I have attached the GNot log file to this post.

Is it the expected time it should take? I wonder if it is worth the time it takes.

[Doom9]

A 50% decrease in FPS is all but abnormal. If you compare the results of XviD and ND HP of my last codec comparison, the AVC codec delivered half the FPS that XviD did.

I wonder if it is worth the time it takes.Only you can answer that by comparing the results you get...

[roror]

A 50% decrease in FPS is all but abnormal. If you compare the results of XviD and ND HP of my last codec comparison, the AVC codec delivered half the FPS that XviD did.
Cool. That means I am not the only one.
Only you can answer that by comparing the results you get...
right. i didn't mean that to be inflammatory.
Thanks