Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
29th March 2008, 05:27 | #181 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Beijing,China
Posts: 92
|
Quote:
I know it,but 4.4.0 is still in develope, maybe have some serious bug in it |
|
29th March 2008, 07:52 | #182 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,229
|
I was actually taking that in to consideration! Like I said above, just as a purely experimental build just to see whether gcc 4.4.0 performs as well or outperforms the older 3.4.6. It may even be the case it, in terms of comparing it to 4.3.0 or 4.2.2, more stable for the use of x264 since due to the crashes and slowdowns somethings not quite right with those two revisions!
Just thought it would be interesting to see, and compare to your 4.3.0 build. Its ok if its too much trouble, just thought it may be interesting! |
29th March 2008, 13:58 | #183 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 443
|
For those of us who have very fast octa-core machines it is. For those who don't have them, results have varied between minimal speed boost to nothing at all to even a slight decrease in speed. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find a diff for thread pool that will cleanly apply in a few months. The whole reason that it does still work for the higher speed machines is that our threads are completing and destroying themeslves faster then x264 is expecting them to so there is a lag time created. Its actually taking longer to create/destroy a thread then it is for the thread to do its job in some cases. Having the thread pool there makes it so that we don't have to wait. In tests I ran a while back, when I had the thread pool patch installed I was getting a pretty significant speed boost on SD content (HD content is large enough that it maxes the CPU out anyway).
If we could get a thread pool patch that applied cleanly to the current version that would be awesome. What would be even more awesome is just putting it into the git version in a way where under normal running it would do its normal process but where we could put like --threadpool on the cli and it would run in that mode. No idea how hard that would be to do but I think that would be optimal that way one can choose the threading method they want on the fly. |
29th March 2008, 18:50 | #184 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Beijing,China
Posts: 92
|
x264.798.modified.experimental.exe
General thread: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=130364 x264_aq_var.48.786.fixed.diff http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=132760 x264.gaussian.cplxblur.01.diff Dark Shikari: - gaussian cplxblur: gives a tiny improvement in 2pass ratecontrol x264_me-prepass_DeathTheSheep.01.diff http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1093523 x264_2pass_vbv.7.diff http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.v...093/focus=3748 x264_hrd_pulldown.04_interlace.diff - HRD and pulldown for HD compatibility, updated patch for interlacing http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...19#post1047919 Link to x264 patches collected: http://files.x264.nl/x264_patches/ make frofiled in GCC 4.4.0 20080328 experimental,totally for experiment & test To test the speed change, Please use this build and my beta2.fixed , and bob0r's build Last edited by MythCreator; 29th March 2008 at 18:54. |
29th March 2008, 19:54 | #185 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,229
|
The experimental version worked fine, no crashes or anything unexpected... with good results!
On the test clip I used, with 1000 frames (not much I know but good enough for this purpose), I did several runs of each and used the average of all the runs. I used each version after the other one, not do all the runs at the same time to ensure accurate results. With 798.modified.final (GCC 4.3.0): Speed: 37.11 fps With Bobor's 798 modified (GCC 3.4.6): Speed: 37.25 fps With 798.experimental (GCC 4.4.0): speed: 37.37 fps Of course on each run the speeds were slightly different, but in each run the slowest of Bobor's build run was still faster than the fastest for 798.modified and the slowest run of 798.experimental was still faster than the fastest for Bobor's build. GCC 4.4.0 looks promising to be faster and regain the speed lost so far with GCC 4.x.x! The final may even be slightly better again (although an assumption one would presume it will be optimised further). Thanks for the trial, it looks good! Maybe others with different CPU's could also test, the results may be different with AMD's for example?... |
29th March 2008, 21:45 | #186 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 57
|
Burfadel, thanks for the test
But, as MythCreator suggested, you should use the "beta2.fixed" instead of the ".final". The ".final" one contains the bssd patch which probably inserts some more computation load which is absend for the "bobor" and "experimental" versions. |
29th March 2008, 23:02 | #187 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 552
|
Quote:
As I know Dark Shikari's AQ patch slightly conflicts with thread-pool patch (in ratecontrol.c) so one of them need some modifications for compatibility. |
|
30th March 2008, 02:06 | #188 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 443
|
Quote:
|
|
31st March 2008, 05:55 | #189 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Beijing,China
Posts: 92
|
x264.805.modified.experimental.exe
General thread: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=130364 x264.gaussian.cplxblur.01.diff Dark Shikari: - gaussian cplxblur: gives a tiny improvement in 2pass ratecontrol x264_me-prepass_DeathTheSheep.01.diff http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1093523 x264_2pass_vbv.7.diff http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.v...093/focus=3748 x264_hrd_pulldown.04_interlace.diff - HRD and pulldown for HD compatibility, updated patch for interlacing http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...19#post1047919 Link to x264 patches collected: http://files.x264.nl/x264_patches/ make frofiled in GCC 4.4.0 20080328 experimental,totally for experiment & test |
31st March 2008, 06:40 | #190 | Link |
Pain and suffering
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,337
|
x264.805.modified.exe
General thread: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=130364 x264.gaussian.cplxblur.01.diff Dark Shikari: - gaussian cplxblur: gives a tiny improvement in 2pass ratecontrol x264_me-prepass_DeathTheSheep.01.diff http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1093523 x264_2pass_vbv.7.diff http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.v...093/focus=3748 x264_hrd_pulldown.04_interlace.diff - HRD and pulldown for HD compatibility, updated patch for interlacing http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...19#post1047919 Link to x264 patches collected: http://files.x264.nl/x264_patches/ Last edited by bob0r; 1st April 2008 at 06:33. Reason: x264_2pass_vbv.6.diff > x264_2pass_vbv.7.diff |
31st March 2008, 14:35 | #191 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,229
|
Another test with revision 805, the GCC 4.4.0 version was faster every time!
Bobor's normal and modified builds with GCC 3.4.6 for this test averaged 29.84 fps (they both averaged very close so I grouped them together, I believe the additional patches don't affect the settings I was using). The GCC 4.4.0 build averaged 30.32fps, and again on each test the slowest run was still faster than the fastest run with the GCC 3.4.6 builds. I used the exact same settings for both, run from the command line. It looks like GCC 4.4.0 will be a good option once finalised for Bobor's website, since its a significant improvement over 4.3.0 and lower! |
31st March 2008, 19:08 | #192 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 449
|
Quote:
why did you include vbv patch 7 ? |
|
31st March 2008, 19:22 | #193 | Link | ||
Silent Reader
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 295
|
Tested x264 bob0r's gcc 3.4.6 build 805 vs. MythCreator's gcc 4.4.0 build 805:
System: EVGA 780i, QX6700 (at 3.2GHz - Multi=12), 8GB DDR2-800 RAM, Vista64 Ultimate bob0r Quote:
MythCreator Quote:
maybe because of "x264_2pass_vbv.6.diff" instead of "x264_2pass_vbv.7.diff" both encoded at 2.41 fps: bob0r = 20min40sec; MythCreator = 20min38sec 2secs difference seems to be fault-tolerance Last edited by Wishbringer; 31st March 2008 at 19:26. Reason: typos |
||
31st March 2008, 22:24 | #196 | Link |
Silent Reader
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 295
|
Now I am a bit curios. I thought that same build with same patches should produce same bitcompatible encoded output of videostream, independend of used compiler...
See my previous post, where bob0r's build produced a slightly smaller encoded video. |
31st March 2008, 22:28 | #197 | Link |
Silent Reader
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 295
|
@tenkai:
I didn't said, that this is a useable clip on any standalone player. I used my PS3-SD profile on a HD clip, because I wanted to test how encoding speed is in compare with nearly all options maxed out. On the other hand, these settings work very well with my SD DVD conversions for my PS3. |
31st March 2008, 22:44 | #198 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14
|
oki.. SD with ref 8 etc shouldn´t be a prob, yea. so am i right? Its still the max for 1080p encoding to fit quality and full support on ps3 etc ref 4/5 but with maximal 3 bframes? I´m askin coz i want to have the maximum possible quality but having a compatible encode on the other hand.. and i have no idea if i can reach that with ref 5 and 3 bfr.. even with subme 7 etc
|
2nd April 2008, 07:56 | #200 | Link |
Pain and suffering
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,337
|
x264.808.modified.exe
General thread: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=130364 x264.gaussian.cplxblur.01.diff Dark Shikari: - gaussian cplxblur: gives a tiny improvement in 2pass ratecontrol x264_me-prepass_DeathTheSheep.01.diff http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1093523 x264_2pass_vbv.7.diff http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.v...093/focus=3748 x264_hrd_pulldown.04_interlace.diff - HRD and pulldown for HD compatibility, updated patch for interlacing http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...19#post1047919 Link to x264 patches collected: http://files.x264.nl/x264_patches/ |
Tags |
h.264, x264, x264 builds, x264 patches, x264 unofficial builds |
|
|