Differens between XviD codecs?

Aqua · 17th January 2003, 19:58

Hi! I am sorry if this question has been answered before, but I couldn't find it so I will ask it anyway.

I want to know what the differens is between the different XviD codecs? (Nic's binary, Koepi's stable binary and Koepi's unstable binary).

Question nr 2: What is the differens between the two Koepi binaries?

Thanks in advance.

NuclearFusi0n · 17th January 2003, 20:05

Koepi stable = october 4, no chroma ME, no GMC, no bframes, no qpel...but it's totally stable

Koepi developer = all the cutting edge features, but it's not always stable, not always MPEG-4 compliant, might have bugs, etc.

17th January 2003, 20:55

another question (don't need a new thread i think)

is the reference's divx new lumimasking code will be submit to the XviD CVS, because it's very powerfull and Koepi doesn't build enough fast

( the evolution of Qpel & GMC features are increasing ^^ and i want the both

)

Koepi · 17th January 2003, 20:56

Nic = some devel snapshots which should be at least reliable in enocding, run on <pII/duron/athlon
uManiac: always the latest CVS, not speed optimized via compiler, always the cutting edge bugs - but as well the bugfixes some hours later as well

My builds usually include some extra code which isn't in CVS.

Koepi

17th January 2003, 21:15

yep! your build is the fastest on my xp2000+ (and have the new lumimasking code

)

but with a recent test, umaniacs build b-frames+qpel provides more details than umaniacs (or yours) b-frames only (on monster&cie) and no artefact

chilledinsanity · 20th January 2003, 05:53

Maybe it's just me, but I downloaded the latest stable Koepi build a couple of weeks ago and it made my encoded Xvid movies look like crap. The color was bleeding, trailing behind the people, it was painfully obvious where the keyframes were and the compression overall was pretty obvious. I've been using the other one (nic's?) and at the bitrates I'm encoding at, it's indistinguishable from the actual DVD. Oh by the way, this is in no offense to the actual author, just stating my experience with it.

Koepi · 20th January 2003, 07:30

ALWAYS hit "load defaults" after installing a new/different build.

Cheers.

chilledinsanity · 20th January 2003, 10:35

I'll do that and let you know what happens. I kind of suspected there was something fishy going seeing how this was a major build in the world of Xvid

17th January 2003, 19:58	#1 \| Link
Aqua Registered User Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 1	Differens between XviD codecs? Hi! I am sorry if this question has been answered before, but I couldn't find it so I will ask it anyway. I want to know what the differens is between the different XviD codecs? (Nic's binary, Koepi's stable binary and Koepi's unstable binary). Question nr 2: What is the differens between the two Koepi binaries? Thanks in advance.

17th January 2003, 20:56	#4 \| Link
Koepi Moderator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Germany Posts: 4,454	Nic = some devel snapshots which should be at least reliable in enocding, run on <pII/duron/athlon uManiac: always the latest CVS, not speed optimized via compiler, always the cutting edge bugs - but as well the bugfixes some hours later as well My builds usually include some extra code which isn't in CVS. Koepi __________________ Koepi's new media development site

20th January 2003, 07:30	#7 \| Link
Koepi Moderator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Germany Posts: 4,454	ALWAYS hit "load defaults" after installing a new/different build. Cheers. __________________ Koepi's new media development site

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

17th January 2003, 20:05	#2 \| Link
NuclearFusi0n Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 104	Koepi stable = october 4, no chroma ME, no GMC, no bframes, no qpel...but it's totally stable Koepi developer = all the cutting edge features, but it's not always stable, not always MPEG-4 compliant, might have bugs, etc.

17th January 2003, 20:55	#3 \| Link
Sigmatador Guest Posts: n/a	another question (don't need a new thread i think) is the reference's divx new lumimasking code will be submit to the XviD CVS, because it's very powerfull and Koepi doesn't build enough fast ( the evolution of Qpel & GMC features are increasing ^^ and i want the both )

17th January 2003, 21:15	#5 \| Link
Sigmatador Guest Posts: n/a	yep! your build is the fastest on my xp2000+ (and have the new lumimasking code ) but with a recent test, umaniacs build b-frames+qpel provides more details than umaniacs (or yours) b-frames only (on monster&cie) and no artefact

20th January 2003, 05:53	#6 \| Link
chilledinsanity Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 226	Maybe it's just me, but I downloaded the latest stable Koepi build a couple of weeks ago and it made my encoded Xvid movies look like crap. The color was bleeding, trailing behind the people, it was painfully obvious where the keyframes were and the compression overall was pretty obvious. I've been using the other one (nic's?) and at the bitrates I'm encoding at, it's indistinguishable from the actual DVD. Oh by the way, this is in no offense to the actual author, just stating my experience with it.

20th January 2003, 10:35	#8 \| Link
chilledinsanity Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 226	I'll do that and let you know what happens. I kind of suspected there was something fishy going seeing how this was a major build in the world of Xvid