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.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > MPEG-4 AVC / H.264

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 3rd November 2008, 19:26   #1  |  Link
puffpio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 176
x264 on Nehalem

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3448&p=18

These benchmarks cite "We're reporting results from the 0.59.819 version of x264."

I'm not familiar w/ that version numbering (i'm more familiar with the revision /commit numbers)

is this a recent build? this is w/o the Nehalem optimizations right?
puffpio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2008, 19:30   #2  |  Link
Sharktooth
Mr. Sandman
 
Sharktooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Haddonfield, IL
Posts: 11,768
r819. that was pre-production hardware. the final results may vary (expecially in a better way)...
look here: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...78#post1209478 and here: http://www.ntcompatible.com/Intel_Co...p_s121605.html

Last edited by Sharktooth; 3rd November 2008 at 20:26.
Sharktooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2008, 19:46   #3  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,667
I already have a Nehalem performance patch ready; I just can't commit it until official release
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2008, 21:54   #4  |  Link
mikeytown2
Resize Abuser
 
mikeytown2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 623
is this official enough?
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/03/1324208
mikeytown2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2008, 22:18   #5  |  Link
Sagekilla
x264aholic
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,752
By official, I believe he means a "hard launch" where it's actually available for consumers, not a paper launch like they just did. That, and he may be under a NDA where he wouldn't be allowed to release it until a specific date.
__________________
You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.
Sagekilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2008, 22:44   #6  |  Link
Blue_MiSfit
Derek Prestegard IRL
 
Blue_MiSfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,920
You're telling me that the massive performance increase that's being reported by hardware sites doesn't even include Core i7 optimizations?

I can't wait

I guess it's time to start thinking about new encoding servers /

~MiSfit
__________________
These are all my personal statements, not those of my employer :)

Last edited by Guest; 4th November 2008 at 02:50.
Blue_MiSfit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2008, 02:33   #7  |  Link
Sagekilla
x264aholic
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,752
Well, they used an x264 exe that's what, 200 revisions old? I'm sure by the time Nehalem rolls out proper we'll have some.. sizable gains in speed.
__________________
You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.
Sagekilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2008, 02:58   #8  |  Link
Snowknight26
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,426
Supposedly the NDA was lifted today. Hope its true. :\
Snowknight26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2008, 03:51   #9  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowknight26 View Post
Supposedly the NDA was lifted today. Hope its true. :\
It was? I have no idea when mine ends...
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2008, 11:58   #10  |  Link
tph
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowknight26 View Post
Supposedly the NDA was lifted today. Hope its true. :\
Yeah, it's lifted. There's a ton of Core i7 reviews up now as well.


*edit* Oh, and since the NDA is lifted, do you have any performace comparisons for us?

Last edited by tph; 4th November 2008 at 19:11.
tph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 12:51   #11  |  Link
hajj_3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,041
Yep, NDA ended around 36hrs ago, go submit the nehalm patches I wanna see some proper benchmarks with the new cpu's.
hajj_3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 12:52   #12  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by hajj_3 View Post
Yep, NDA ended around 36hrs ago, go submit the nehalm patches
Already done... I wanted to do the pminpos patch as well but there are still some issues with that one, like the fact that it doesn't actually work properly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hajj_3 View Post
I wanna see some proper benchmarks with the new cpu's.
How about this?
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 13:02   #13  |  Link
hajj_3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,041
not bad

Would be good to see benchmarks in fps of High Profile Level 4.1 with 2-pass unrestricted profile and do 1920*1080, 1280*720 and 640*352 resolutions to give a real impression how much faster it is for bluray and for 1080i mpeg2 and 1080i mpeg4 tv encodes.
hajj_3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 15:54   #14  |  Link
poisondeathray
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,966
Just curious about the mechanics of the new patch; does it use the new SSE4.2 instruction set, or some other aspect of the Nehalem architecture? or are the speed gains from 4 extra logical cores? or some combination of factors (probably) ?

Thanks
poisondeathray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 16:09   #15  |  Link
Sharktooth
Mr. Sandman
 
Sharktooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Haddonfield, IL
Posts: 11,768
SSE4.x = Pile Of Crap (at least for video encoding).
The speed advantages are almost all due to the improved architecture and maybe the new hyperthreading.
Sharktooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 17:06   #16  |  Link
saint-francis
too much lurking
 
saint-francis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Valhalla
Posts: 668
@DS:

Quote:
Overall speed improvement with Nehalem vs Penryn at the same clock speed is around 40%.
Are you still standing behind this statement? If this is the case these CPU's are going to essentially revolutionize the way we use X264. Could you post some more real world comparisons?
saint-francis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 17:13   #17  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by saint-francis View Post
Are you still standing behind this statement? If this is the case these CPU's are going to essentially revolutionize the way we use X264. Could you post some more real world comparisons?
Anandtech has some real benchmarks, if you want more.

I don't see how its that revolutionary; new CPUs are supposed to be faster, aren't they?
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 17:24   #18  |  Link
cogman
The Crazy Idahoan
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Idaho
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
Anandtech has some real benchmarks, if you want more.

I don't see how its that revolutionary; new CPUs are supposed to be faster, aren't they?
No Way!! New cpus are supposed to be hotter and more clunky. This Idea of faster and cooler is unheard of! (yes, im being sarcastic)

Whats amazing is the Size of the increase with nehelam (in the case of encoding) ~36% faster then the older penryn.

Though the speed increases aren't uniform through all applications (as they rarely are) But in some cases I do feel somewhat disappointed in the increase.
cogman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 17:35   #19  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,229
Look at the difference between a Pentium 4 D (dual core) and a Core 2 at the same clock speed, there is no comparison! I think at times Intel understated the performance benefit of the Core 2 just so the P4 wouldn't look so bad! Even in single core mode, the Core 2 is significantly faster. It was funny when they were first released, a Core 2 E6600 at 2.4ghz could out-compete the P4EE at 3.8ghz! So 40 percent is not an impossible feat
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 19:10   #20  |  Link
Sagekilla
x264aholic
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,752
It's all part of Intel's Tick-Tock they've been doing A Pentium D --> Core 2 provided close to 50% boost in performance, and now they've done it again for Pernyn --> Nehalem. That's even ignoring that Pernyn offered a speed bump over Core 2 as well.


I have to say, that's pretty amazing to pull off a close to 50% speed improvement generation after generation.
__________________
You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.
Sagekilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 23:19.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.