Multiple Encoder Processes-ProCoder faster?

[TatanScorp]

When I run DVDRB without Multiple Encoder Processes checked PtoCoder runs at 3x. Both cores are being used to achieve this rate and both at 100%. Now when I check Multiple Encoder Processes to on there are two instances of ProCoder running but each one is running at 1.3x or 1.5x. I don't understand how Multiple Encoder Processes is supposed to be faster. It just split the speed in half for both instances for encoding.

[Groucho2004]

When I run DVDRB without Multiple Encoder Processes checked PtoCoder runs at 3x. Both cores are being used to achieve this rate and both at 100%. Now when I check Multiple Encoder Processes to on there are two instances of ProCoder running but each one is running at 1.3x or 1.5x. I don't understand how Multiple Encoder Processes is supposed to be faster. It just split the speed in half for both instances for encoding.

First of all, what processor do you have?

Procoder doesn't really utilise more that 2 cores (it barely uses 2). With 2 cores or more it makes therefore sense to use "multiple encoder processes".

Do you have "heavy" filters in your script?

[TatanScorp]

I'm using a Intel Dual Core E7500 cpu. All I know when I use Procoder without Multiple Encoder Processes checked Procoder use both cores and encodes at 3x but when I check to use Multiple Encoder Prosesses there are two instance's of Procoder running but each at 1.3x and 1.4x or 1.5x so it's splitting the difference from just using Procoder without using Multiple Encoder Processes. I just don't understand if it's encoding faster with two processes over the one.
I'm not using any filters at all.

[Groucho2004]

I'm using a Intel Dual Core E7500 cpu. All I know when I use Procoder without Multiple Encoder Processes checked Procoder use both cores and encodes at 3x but when I check to use Multiple Encoder Prosesses there are two instance of Procoder running but each at 1.3x and 1.4x or 1.5x so it's splitting the difference from just using Procoder without using Multiple Encoder Processe. I hust don't understand if it's encoding faster with two processes over the one.
I'm not using any filters at all.

Well, in this case both cores are already fully utilised with one instance of Procoder and creating more threads does not increase the speed. Anyway, 3x is pretty good for a E7500.

[TatanScorp]

On my P4 that I'm using now for browsing I was getting .5x, for the last 5 years LOL

[A64]

Using Procoder 2.0 (only 5 instances allowed) on an Intel Core i7 975-Extreme Edition (stock speed and hyperthreading on), 6 Gb DDR3-1600, Windows 7 Pro 64-bit, encoding Curious Case of Benjamin Button movie only, it takes 12 minutes for the encode portion to take place. It takes a lot longer with the Multiple Encoder Processes shut off. After testing, I found that 5 instances was the sweet spot on my system.