MeGUI CPU Time Test - Compare different CPUs encoding the same file

[graysky]

I am interested in seeing how newer CPUs compare to my old Athlon XP 3200+. To participate in the test, just download the test file and follow the "instructions.txt" file that's included in the rar file and just post your results to this thread. I'll compile them and post them collectively here.

The rar file contains a small (43 meg) mpeg-2 clip with the an avs script file, d2v file, the jobs etc.

test files (null)
and
avisynth plugins if you need them (null)

(edit - links removed due to inactivity, if you want them, make a post in the thread and I'll add them back)

Remember to read the instructions.txt in the rar file and be sure to grab the older version of x264.exe (also in the instructions.txt).

UPDATE:The results to-date were using a pretty aggressive avs file. I have since updated the files and made a new test.rar -- if you participated in the test PLEASE DELETE YOUR C:\WORK AND WORK.RAR and download the new one from the same URL which uses a more realistic avs file. The new test doesn't require you to mess with the threads setting at all - it is automatic for everyone. I'll start populating a new table with your new results. I started with my own.

Thanks all!

Update: 07-Apr
Added new data comparing the mt.dll results from the standard results for some multicore machines.

-------------------------------------

http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/8972/resultsnewerrw1.gif

If you keep your CPU:Mem bus 1:1, you'll find that the data scales in a highly linear fashion albeit short of the theoretical maximum. Here is a little analysis on chantmak's data to this end.

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/8745/graphstw7.gif

Here is a subset of the data showing that, at least with MeGUI doing this avs, there is really no advantage to running with a higher FSB @ the same clockrate. Mem timing does seem to have an effect (last row). Have a look for yourself:

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/7766/fsbfl1.gif

Have a look at the post by aicjofs here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=975017#post975017) where he shows that using mt.dll (http://avisynth.org/mediawiki/MT) on the work.avs I provided can translate into an addition boost of ~14 % on his QX6700. Morph166955 also got a pretty hefty boost on his octacore machine you can read about here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=122318&page=14). I compiled their results in the table below. If you want to experiment with mt.dll yourself, please post your results in the thread and I'll add them to the table as well.

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/4425/resultsmultizu0.gif

[steve77]

I have an E6300 overclocked to 3.2GHz. Doesn't have the 4MB of L2 cache, but I get a boost from the higher memory speeds.

Post a link so everybody can download it, I'm sure you'll get some takers.

I don't really want to download a ton of plugins though....

Post your AVS file and upload your clip. Mediafire.com is apparently good.

[The Scientist]

Not quite what you asked for but I have a E6600 (Vista). It sounds like you are not quite getting the speed you expect from your encode?

[graysky]

Thanks to both of you guys. I'll put the clip and script together and hopefully later tonight get a friend to put it up on the web for you to d/l.

I have an old athlon xp and just wanted to see how much speed gain the 6600 or 6700 would offer doing an encode (2x speed gain, 4x speed gain, etc.) I'm thinking about building a new core 2 duo system to replace this one. I'll PM you guys with the link ASAP.

Thanks!

[jeffy]

Hi Graysky,

maybe there are more people willing to test, so I would like to suggest using some public upload site like rapidshare.de (see sticky http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=96362) if you haven't considered this already. Hopefully, then you might be able to compare the results between different PCs more objectively.

If you do this, it will make sense posting results like this:
time - CPU - frequency - RAM - frequency - OS
36 s - E6600 - 2.4 GHz - 1 GB DDR2-800 - WinXP Pro

[graysky]

Thanks jeffy... I agree with you that for a serious comparison and to draw meaningful conclusions we need to be more rigerous about this. My goal here is just to see ballpark numbers to help justify the cost of a new machine right now :)

I think for a real test like you're talking about, we'd need to do more than a 1 minute clip which is just what I got here and am about to put up on a friend's webspace. Are you interested in becoming a datapoint too?

[jeffy]

Thanks jeffy... I agree with you that for a serious comparison and to draw meaningful conclusions we need to be more rigerous about this. My goal here is just to see ballpark numbers to help justify the cost of a new machine right now :)

I think for a real test like you're talking about, we'd need to do more than a 1 minute clip which is just what I got here and am about to put up on a friend's webspace. Are you interested in becoming a datapoint too?
Yes, I might help. C2D - E6600 - 3.5 GHz overclocked - 533 DDR2 at 587 MHz.

[graysky]

Here are the results from the encode on an Athlon XP 3200+ with 1.0 gig of PC3200 (all at stock settings):

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/6322/resultsvt3.jpg

[jeffy]

As promised:
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/6404/resultszg9.jpg
4:42 - E6600 - 2.4 GHz - overclocked 3.5 GHz - 1 GB DDR2-533 - overclocked 587 MHz - WinXP Pro

final muxed size: 36,597,760 bytes

In three months' time there are price cuts expected for Core 2 Duo & Quad Cores:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=121978

[graysky]

Very cool. Thanks for doing the test. So it's ~2x boost in encoding time. Can you comment on your overclock. How different are the settings you're using from the stock settings? Also, which MB do you have and would you recommend it?

I'm thinking about either a 6600 or 6700. I also read about the planned cuts, thanks for the link. The other thing I'm thinking pretty hard about is waiting for the 6650 and 6750 to get released and run one on the newer chipset... decisions decisions!

Thanks.

[jeffy]

Very cool. Thanks for doing the test. So it's a little under a 2x boost in encoding time. Can you comment on your overclock. How different are the settings you're using from the stock settings? Also, which MB do you have and would you recommend it?

I'm thinking about either a 6600 or 6700. I also read about the planned cuts, thanks for the link. The other thing I'm thinking pretty hard about is waiting for the 6650 and 6750 to get released and run one on the newer chipset... decisions decisions!

Thanks.
Explained above: 3.5 GHz vs. stock 2.4 GHz
RAM 587 MHz vs. 533 MHz stock
Regarding the motherboard: ASUS P5W DH Deluxe,
http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=248&model=1198&modelmenu=1
I used Noctua NH-U12F for CPU cooling
http://www.noctua.at/main.php?show=productview&products_id=6&lng=en

I had some issues with this board, but unfortunately it proved that I had my RAM modules faulty so I had to RMA them (running with replacements now), therefore I am unable to comment on its stability.

[graysky]

Thanks for the info. Can I get you to repeat the test @ stock clock speeds? It'll be interesting to see if the increase is linear.

[jeffy]

Thanks for the info. Can I get you to repeat the test @ stock clock speeds? It'll be interesting to see if the increase is linear.
Probably after half a day :-)

[graysky]

Here is the same job on a PII-450 MHz w/ 512 meg of PC133.

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/2686/p2450mh0.jpg

About 34x slower than your machine and about 16x slower than mine :)

[jeffy]

Here is the same job on a PII-450 MHz w/ 512 meg of PC133.

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/2686/p2450mh0.jpg

About 34x slower than your machine and about 16x slower than mine :)

:eek: 2:34:20 :thanks:
PII-450/512 RAM.... it used to be ehm... mid-stream, some time ago.... memories :cool:

You have my sympathy for being able to wait 2,5 hrs for a 62-second clip!

[graysky]

Anyone else (someone with a faster Athlon 64 or FX maybe) willing to try it and post results?

[cbarroso]

Hey, I want to participate too! E6400@2.4Ghz (almost passive heatsink :p ), DDR2 @600MHz 4.4.4.12, Vista Utimate. Please, tell where the RAR file is.

[The Scientist]

Couldn't do the test as the first job required the neroAAC. I thought you would have done the test with the default stuff that comes/gets downloaded with meGUI.

[jeffy]

Well, I have to admit something happened the first time... the filesize is too LOW :confused:

So in the end I have decided to make the overclocked high priority comparison again. I have forgotten to make a note about filesize in some cases, sorry.

I have also tried changing the priority in job1-2.xml and job1-3.xml from IDLE to HIGH and NbThreads from 1 to 2, 3 and 4.

Stock, idle:
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/223/resultsstocktj0.jpg

Stock, high:
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/8434/resultsstockhighvs2.jpg

Overclocked, high, take 2:
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/6564/resultshightake2ht3.jpg

Overclocked, high, 2 threads:
http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/7286/results1ovhigh2tje1.jpg

Overclocked, high, 3 threads:
http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/1003/results1ovhigh3tgj9.jpg

Overclocked, high, 4 threads:
http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/7704/results1ovhigh4tcp1.jpg

Final comparison table:
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/8017/comparisonqh6.jpg

[graysky]

Couldn't do the test as the first job required the neroAAC. I thought you would have done the test with the default stuff that comes/gets downloaded with meGUI.

Sorry man, I thought most had that. It's a free d/l

ftp://ftp6.nero.com/tools/NeroDigitalAudio.zip

Just put neroAacEnc.exe in your MeGUI dir (not the /tools) and it should work.

[graysky]

Final comparison table:
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/8017/comparisonqh6.jpg

Very interesting data. Thanks for posting these. Your priority (low vs. high) findings are also interesting. I wonder if the odd result in the o/c example was due to some sort of instability? I just ran mine again on high priority and normal got results that are damn near the low priority results:

Priority: Low
FPS 1st Pass: 13.9
FPS 2nd Pass: 3.81

Priority: High
FPS 1st Pass: 14.0
FPS 2nd Pass: 3.72

Priority: Normal
FPS 1st Pass: 14.0
FPS 2nd Pass: 3.78

I have changed the jobs to all be NORMAL priority and re-uploaded the rar file.

[jeffy]

Very interesting data. Thanks for posting these. Your priority (low vs. high) findings are also interesting. I wonder if the odd result in the o/c example was due to some sort of instability?
Well, I think the reason was not overclocking, but the main system partition (C) probably became full during the mux. During the take 2, the filesize 81,617,462 bytes seemed okay.

EDIT: Almost full. The file needed about 80 MB, but less than 40 MB was available.

[graysky]

Since I don't have a dual core processor... how do you change the number of threads? That seems to make a very big difference. Also, can you repeat the results using stock level with different number of threads?

Also, I'm assuming your o/c settings are the same as before: 3.5 GHz RAM 587 MHz?

Thanks!

[jeffy]

Since I don't have a dual core processor... how do you change the number of threads? That seems to make a very big difference. Also, can you repeat the results using stock level with different number of threads?

Also, I'm assuming your o/c settings are the same as before: 3.5 GHz RAM 587 MHz?

Thanks!
I just changed the line in job1-2.xml and job1-3.xml.
<NbThreads>1</NbThreads>
The settings used for overclocking remained the same as before. I am sorry, but I will not repeat the test with stock settings. Anyway, I do hope that someone else will post their results soon.

[cbarroso]

Here is my test:
http://img293.imageshack.us/my.php?image=meguitestkw2.gif
Core 2 Duo E6400@2.4, DDR2@600 4.4.4.12, Windows Vista
Threads = 0 (auto)

[graysky]

Thanks... results added to first post.

[steve77]

This is the result 2 threads:

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/7691/2thread79705jk7.jpg

This is the result 4 threads:

http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/1350/4thread79702ci2.jpg

2Thread resulting file size: 79,705 KB

4Thread resulting file size: 79,702 KB

Core 2 Duo E6300 @ 3.205GHz, DDR2-916, 2x512MB of RAM. Gigabyte 965P-S3 motherboard, G.Skill HZ ram 4-4-4-12

[rack04]

Overclocked results:

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a199/rack04/untitled-3.jpg

AMD XP-M 2400+ @ 2.37 GHz
PDP PC3200LLK 2x512mb @ 215MHz

The final file (test-muxed.mp4) is 77.8 MB (81,622,374 bytes).

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a199/rack04/untitled1.jpg

[graysky]

Updated.

[steve77]

I'm actually pretty happy with my times... given that I have a lower clock speed than jeffy, and less L2 cache.

I suspect that memory performance has a big influence on the overall speed...

Great thread, I'll bench my D915 (stock) later on when I get a chance.

[graysky]

Sounds good, thanks for contributing.

...wish I could get you C2D guys to do the test with the optimal # of threads and at the stock levels -- wink wink ;)

[jeffy]

Sounds good, thanks for contributing.

...wish I could get you C2D guys to do the test with the optimal # of threads and at the stock levels -- wink wink ;)
What number is the optimal?? ;)

[graysky]

What number is the optimal?? ;)

Good questions... for you seems like 3 or 4. Wonder how that compares to a setting of 0 like cbarroso's run.

[jeffy]

Good questions... for you seems like 3 or 4. Wonder how that compares to a setting of 0 like cbarroso's run.
Well, I am reconsidering the stock speed test (after half a day) with threads 0 or maybe even threads 4 as well. I can't do that straight away, you have to interrupt all the work, switch to BIOS, reset all the switches necessary, reboot, patiently wait doing nothing and then another reset, setting the appropriate overclock... and getting back to your work, which isn't that :cool:

[graysky]

Whenever you can get to it would be great. Thanks. I'm leaning towards a e6600 and that asus board you have: a 3x increase would be nice. Is it stable at that level of O/C? Have you torture tested via prime95 for 12 hours or so? What are your settings (voltage, FSB, etc.)

Any complaints about the Asus board? I'm also looking at the MSI 975X Platinum Power Up.

[jeffy]

Whenever you can get to it would be great. Thanks. I'm leaning towards a e6600 and that asus board you have: a 3x increase would be nice. Is it stable at that level of O/C? Have you torture tested via prime95 for 12 hours or so? What are your settings (voltage, FSB, etc.)

Any complaints about the Asus board? I'm also looking at the MSI 975X Platinum Power Up.
I have torture tested it only shortly (Prime 95 - approx. 2 hours), it is stable at this level of OC. Regarding the MB, this thread is a don't-miss-it thing:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=110193

You should probably weight ins and outs of OC as it voids the CPU warranty. Many people do it, but you have to bear this in mind. It's good to watch CoreTemp temperature:
http://www.thecoolest.zerobrains.com/CoreTemp/
(Supported Intel and AMD CPUs:
http://www.thecoolest.zerobrains.com/CoreTemp/supportlist.html)
Mine are 53/51 degrees of Celsius as of now, CPU usage 87%.

[graysky]

Thanks for the info... how many watts is your PS rated? Also, what brand did you endup going with?

[graysky]

New data point from a dvdrhelp.com (http://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=322709&highlight=) user. Thanks!

[j4gg3r]

You should also provide links to DGIndex, LeakKernelDeInt, Undot and Decimate.
I'll have my unclocked XP2800+ results for you soon.
Well maybee not soon if you have set HQ x.264 output. :D

Edit:
And warn about DGIndex :scared:
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/8079/warndgyc8.jpg

So I'm guessing v1.48 yes?

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/2826/h264benchamd2800xpfx5.jpg

Specs:
ASUS A7N8X-X nForce2 400FSB
AMD XP2800+
512MB DDR 400MHz(CAS3) @ 333MHz(CAS2.5 Sync to CPU FSB Multiplier)
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/3164/cpuzchiphy7.jpg

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/1584/cpuzmemdw1.jpg

FileSize: 77.8 MB (81,622,555 bytes) every time

[jeffy]

stock, high, threads=0, auto, 81,615,286 bytes
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/4536/resultsstockhigh0tautoqs3.jpg

stock, high, threads=3, 81,613,746 bytes
http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/4931/stockhigh3tod8.jpg

overclocked, threads=0, auto, 81,615,159 bytes
EDIT: high
http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/2724/results1ovhigh0tautoax5.jpg

[jeffy]

Thanks for the info... how many watts is your PS rated? Also, what brand did you endup going with?
PSU is 350W, Fortron FSP350-60THN-P
http://www.fsp-group.com/english/1_product/2_detail.asp?mainid=1&fid=52&proid=213

[graysky]

You should also provide links to DGIndex, LeakKernelDeInt, Undot and Decimate.
I'll have my unclocked XP2800+ results for you soon.
Well maybee not soon if you have set HQ x.264 output. :D

Edit:
And warn about DGIndex :scared:

Something must have gone wrong with the MeGUI update... when you launch it, the app should automatically install those items for you (at least it did for my system) :confused:

In any case, thank you very much for the data points!

[graysky]

@jeffy: again, thanks for the information and the data! (By now you're sick and tired of resetting overclock settings!)

[jeffy]

@jeffy: again, thanks for the information and the data! (By now you're sick and tired of resetting overclock settings!)
:D :goodpost:
As I was explaining the outs of overclocking, I realized that the stock settings might be more useful for you, so... the results are here.

[rack04]

Overclocked results:

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a199/rack04/untitled2-1.jpg

AMD XP-M 2400+ @ 2.43GHz
PDP PC3200LLK 2x512mb @ 220 MHz

The final file (test-muxed.mp4) is 77.8 MB (81,622,374 bytes)

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a199/rack04/untitled1-1.jpg

[rack04]

Overclocked results:

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a199/rack04/untitled2-2.jpg

AMD XP-M 2400+ @ 2.48GHz
PDP PC3200LLK 2x512mb @ 225 MHz

The final file (test-muxed.mp4) is 77.8 MB (81,622,374 bytes)

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a199/rack04/untitled1-2.jpg

[graysky]

Cool man, updated the data. Thanks again for contributing.

[The Scientist]

I was messing around with some code and after reading this thread sort of came up with a little XVID encode test. I know the thread was aimed at a meGUI test but you may be interested in an XVID test.

Don't expect too much, just a silly little test. Download the zip file, sorry it's nearly 15MB, it's due to the data file needed for the conversion test. Just unzip and run the 'bench.NET' file, after a minute or two you should have:

http://www.dvduk.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/_files/c2d_xvid_112.png

DOWNLOAD LINK (http://www.dvduk.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/_files/xbench.NET.zip)

P.S. It's a '.NET' program so you know what.....

[Blue_MiSfit]

My Results:

http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/7071/misfitrz4.png (http://imageshack.us)

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/807/cpuzam3.png (http://imageshack.us)

[Nematocyst]

I have also tried changing the priority in job1-2.xml and job1-3.xml from IDLE to HIGH and NbThreads from 1 to 2, 3 and 4.


Why would you want to video encode at >= normal priority other than to convince yourself it confers no speedup?

It doesn't make sense to run processes that aren't time critical at a priority that allows them to usurp normal processes. (Unless you like turning your box into a paperweight during an encode)

[Now that I think about it, I guess it's because you're running a test and mostly interested in just the encoding performance irrespective of other factors. I guess it makes more sense for a test to use high priority than a real encode. Although, since my typical encodes are done at idle, results using idle priority would be most meaningful to me. Not that it matters... If you aren't using your computer, or just light browsing, you won't see any significant difference in the encode performance... just the performance of the other processes.]