A real CCE SpeedTest

[DDogg]

The point of this exercise is to create meaningful comparisons of CCE encoding speeds. Many of us are tired of the nonsense posts and waste of bandwidth. Although this test is primitive and will reflect a speed much slower than you will actually get using proper source, it should allow an exact comparison of speed on various platforms. In other words, two machines of the exact same configuration should return identical results.

This assumes I have thought it out correctly and did not screw up :) If everybody uses the same source and the same ecl to ensure the same settings, it seems to me this ought to work. Feedback welcome if I missed something.

Instructions (follow exactly):

1> Create directory on your HD as "CCESpeedTest01"
2> Copy and paste AVS file below into notepad. Save into the above directory as "CCESpeedTest01.avs"
3> Copy and paste the two ECL files into notepad one at a time. Save each as "CCESpeedTest01_CCE2.5.ecl" and "CCESpeedTest01_CCE267.ecl"
4> Edit the ecl files using the replace function of notepad. Search and replace "G:\" to the HD drive letter where you created the dir in step 1 above.
5> Run CCE and load the appropriate ECL file. Make NO changes. Press encode and note the speed after exactly 3 minutes of encoding.
6> Report that speed along with the information on your machine.

#start of CCESpeedTest01.avs
ColorBars (720,480)
ShowSMPTE(24)
converttoyuy2()
#end
CCE2.5x ECL
; Cinema Craft Encoder SP -- Encoder Control List

[item]
title=CCESpeedTest01.avs
vid_out=1
vaf_out=0
aud_out=0
vid_file0=G:\CCESpeedTest01\CCESpeedTest01_CCE2.5.mpv
vid_file1=
vaf_file=
aud_file=
file_focused=0
encode_mode=0
packet_size=4096
timecode=0x1000000
width=720
height=480
vmode=0
frame_rate_idx=4
cbr_brate=6000
opv_q_factor=32
opv_brate_min=300
opv_brate_max=8000
vbr_brate_avg=2257
vbr_brate_min=1194
vbr_brate_max=2565
vbr_bias=30
vbr_pass=3
quality_prec=17
use_filter=0
filter_val=6
seq_endcode=1
dvd=0
half_width=0
half_height=0
fast_mode=0
progressive=1
alternate_scan=0
non_linear=1
top_first=0
lum_level=1
intra_dc_prec=-1
aspect_ratio=2
gop_m=3
gop_nm=5
gop_hdr=15
seq_hdr=1
all_closed_gop=0
fix_gop_length=0
mpeg1=0
mpeg1_cps=0
samples_per_sec=48000
stereo=2
brate_idx=7
crc=1

[file]
name=G:\CCESpeedTest01\CCESpeedTest01.avs
type=0
frame_first=0
frame_last=107892
encode_first=0
encode_last=107892
CCE 2.67 ECL
; CCE SP Trial Version -- Encoder Control List

[item]
title=CCESpeedTest01.avs
vid_out=1
vaf_out=0
aud_out=0
aud_mode=0
vid_file0=G:\CCESpeedTest01\CCESpeedTest01_CCE267.mpv
vid_file1=
vaf_file=
aud_file=
file_focused=0
video_type=2
width=720
height=480
timecode=0x1000000
tc_ref_frm=0
drop_frame=0
cbr_brate=6000
opv_q_factor=32
opv_brate_min=300
opv_brate_max=8000
vbr_brate_avg=2230
vbr_brate_min=300
vbr_brate_max=2530
vbr_bias=30
vbr_pass=3
create_new_vaf=0
pulldown_detect=0
letter_box=0
panscan=0
aspect_ratio=2
credits_tweak=0
credits_start=0x00000
credits_brate=1000
h_filter=0
h_filter_idx=8
use_filter=0
filter_val=4
dither=0
dither_max=8
quality_prec=25
intra_dc_prec=2
alternate_scan=0
non_linear=1
progressive=1
gop_m=3
gop_nm=5
gop_hdr=15
seq_hdr=1
seq_endcode=1
dvd=0
all_closed_gop=0
fix_gop_length=0
fix_vbv_delay=0
offset_line=0
half_width=0
half_height=0
uscc=0
lum_level=1
packet_size=2048
frame_rate_idx=4
qmat_idx=0
mpeg1=0
mpeg1_cps=1
brate_idx=7
stereo=2
samples_per_sec=48000
crc=1

[file]
name=G:\CCESpeedTest01\CCESpeedTest01.avs
type=0
frame_first=0
frame_last=107892
encode_first=0
encode_last=107892

[DDogg]

My tests:

CCE 2.5x 1.50
CCE 2.67 1.41

[Edited - Better speed after reboot]

Biostar M7NCDP | XP1700 (AXDA1700DUT3C - JIUHB 0312VPMW) @2.1 Ghz (11*192) VCore 1.70 v - SiSoft PR 3064 (Est.)| GFrce 2 MX400 | 4 Maxtor 40g| Zlmn Flower w/ 120 fan @ 2000 rpm| Enermax 330 watt r82 tweak | (2) 256 meg PC3500 HYP_X (7-2-2-2 VDim 2.8 v| Enermax CS 307 Case

[KeyserSoze]

I'm getting the following error:

D:\CCESpeedTest01\CCESpeedTest01_CCE2.5.ecl is not a ECL for Cinema Craft Encoder SP."

I'm getting the same with CCESpeedTest01_CCE267.ecl file!!

[DDogg]

Sure thought they should load OK, crap. Well just set either of them up for One Pass VBR Q32 Min 300 Max 8000 and no VAF creation. Set Zigzag and Progressive on. No internal filters engaged of any kind. Make sure DVD compliant is not on. That should work, but without loading the ECL's we can't consider it apples to apples.

What exact version/s of CCE are you trying to use?

Has anybody else got them to work ok?

[coona]

Hi DDogg,

I really appreciate your work ;). Solution (as usual :D) is very simple - ECL file has to start with this line:

; Cinema Craft Encoder SP -- Encoder Control List

My result is:

CCE 2.5x 0.391

I´ll post my configuration later because I´m at work and I have to check what hardware I really use here, hehe.

***EDITED

Asus CUSL2-M, PIII 866, 512 MB SDRAM, Ati Rage XL AGP,1x IBM 60 GB, 1x IBM 75 GB, Toshiba SD-M1502

***EDITED

[DDogg]

jarvis1781, did you use the ECL above? That speed surprised me.

[KeyserSoze]

2.67.00.10---->1.42

2.50.01.00---->1.514


XP2400+ at 2000Mhz(12x166,harmless o/c :D,Vcore 1.65) Dual Channel Winbond CH-5 (5-2-2-2,VDim 2.6v)

CCE 2.67 is ofcourse optimised for P4 CPUs, and CCE 2.5 for Athlons .

(no background apps this time)

[DDogg]

KeyserSoze, were you able/how did you get the ecls to load? Note your speed and mine are nearly exact, so we can see the benchmark works and returns similar results on like machines.

[DDogg]

forgot to note that my CPU is OC'd to 3.5 yeah, that would make a bit of difference :rolleyes: :)

[KeyserSoze]

Originally posted by DDogg
KeyserSoze, were you able/how did you get the ecls to load? Note your speed and mine are nearly exact, so we can see the benchmark works and returns similar results on like machines.

Your old version of scripts had that extra line on the top.....
Those didn't work in CCE2.5 but worked in 2.67(EclCCE).
Now everything is ok on both scripts.
I just followed coona's advice:D

[DDogg]

OK, thanks. As you noticed I edited out those extra lines in the ECLs above. Now everybody should be able to just copy and paste them into notepad and save them. The only edit needed is to change "g:\" to the drive they use.

The benchmark seems to work well now. Let's see some more testing results, people! :)

[chipvideo]

Doesn't do smp very well with this test. I get 58% on my processors. While I do the dvd2dvd process with the highest bicubic resize method I get 72% on average usage.

[DDogg]

chipvideo, the data we are interested in was what speed you obtained. Once we get enough of that data we can then develop a factor to convert the result to one that more closely indicates real world encoding. Keep in mind that this method removes avisynth and mpeg2decX from the equation, as well as resolution/aspect ratio.

In your case, this shows CCEs processor usage alone. It may be that jarvis1781's single processor machine will actually encode faster than yours. If so, that is useful data to know (although not something you may particularly appreciate :) )

[chipvideo]

Well I doubt that he can encode 70% faster than my machine. He would have to encode a dvd with bicubic resize at around RT5.3 on Titanic.

I know that your machine isnt the same speed as mine for encoding. I have my procs OC'd to 2400mhz each. LIke I said this test shows CCE using only 58% processor while using the real method shows a CCE using 72%.

That is all I am saying. Based on this test one would assume that a dual processor system is a waste and doesnt perform any better than a single one when in fact a dual system enocdes much faster.

[DDogg]

That's interesting, but as before we don't have your speed on this test so as to put it into perspective.when in fact a dual system encodes much faster. I don't have experience with dual processor systems. However, I do wonder if what you said above is always so. My understanding was that a single instance of CCE would not use the capacity of both processors. Is that correct? If so, could not a single very fast processor like jarvis1781's potentially out perform your slower duals?

[chipvideo]

My speed was 1.51 using your test. If cce didnt utilize the both processors then I would get a max of 50% on cce. I get 58% with cce using your test and 72% when using the dvd2dvd method.

His single processor is not beating my dual encodes by 70% encoding a dvd material. You must be crazy to think that your system is as fast as mine as well. But it isn't. I think a better way to figure this out would be for a few of us to use the dvd2dvd method and use the same settings. Bicubic resize and use ntsc source. Maybe we could make a list of some movies that people have and then see if we can get some results.

I have Titanic, Saving Private Ryan and that other hanks movie on the Island. Those are good movies as they are long ones and would show that true power of the system. I mean I get 3.3RT with Titanic. I highly doubt your processor running at much lower than mine is goign to do as well. I know this is a early stage test and I am glad your willing to take the time, but we need to get more realife results.

[Kedirekin]

I feel compelled to comment, as I've spent a fair amount of time thinking about multiprocessor (MP) systems.

This test isn't just testing CCE encoding speed, it's also testing the speed of AviSynth.

On a single processor system, the script might be using something like 86% of processor cycles, leaving the other 14% for CCE.

On a dual processor system, all of one processor (100%) can be dedicated to the script. All of the left over processor could be dedicated to CCE, but the script is only capable of delivering data so fast, so CCE only ends up using 16%.

The apparent result is a 15% increase in CCE encoding speed, but the test is somewhat biased by a slow script. With a more efficient script, the ratios are completely different, and tend more and more in MP's favor.

Just a point of clarification, CCE is MP enabled. The reason you don't see 100% processor usage is that AviSynth is not MP enabled.

A more fair test of CCE sans frame server might be to use the script to create a Huffy (or raw) avi file, then encode from that. That would really show off the advantages of MP systems. Unfortunately that is misrepresentative of what you're really trying to test (frame server+encoder performance) in the other direction.

BTW: why is that script so slow? I wouldn't think ColorBars or ShowSMPTE would slow the script down so much.

[DDogg]

You must be crazy to think that your system is as fast as mine as well. My goodness, chipvideo :) I would never think that. What I am attempting here is a reliable method of comparing CPU platform to CPU platform that removes from the equation issues like NTSC/PAL, aspect ratio/total encoded pixels, variant of mpeg2dec and IDCT, color conversion, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum.

This is only the first stage of that process. Typically I normally have a bit of method in my madness. Over the years I've found that the only way to accomplish something on this board is to cause a challenge scenario. It is just the way people are. Its neither good nor bad, it just is. :) So thanks for the input.

Perhaps you and/or Kedirekin can make a major contribution so we can actually have an intelligent method of reportage instead of the silliness of "WoW, bubba, I got 9 x realtime!!!! er, 'course that was 160x120 resolution, but who cares cause 9x makes me feel like I have a big Johnson:rolleyes: I suspect this irritates you, and especially Kedirekin, who knows more about this stuff than most will ever learn.

I think you are completely correct about this particular test as it not only concerns multi processors, but the general full process itself. I would wholeheartedly concur with a more proper method as you suggested that uses real source. When I have suggested something similar (repeatedly over the years) the response has been underwhelming. As said, this is the first stage, and it does supply a legitimate method of comparing [single :)] CPU systems. In other words, a machine that returns 1.25 will be proportionately slower than a machine that returns 1.55. What that proportion is is still up in the air at the moment. For that reason alone I think this method is useful and serves a strong purpose.

Now we just need to work together and come up with the next iterations. However, that method must be transparent to NTSC and Pal, else it is a waste of time. Nobody wants a dual benchmark, IMO. This gets us into a easily downloadable common source and the required bandwidth which has always been one of the hangups.

So, you want to help or just bitch at me? :D (I really am grinning)

So nowBTW: why is that script so slow? That always puzzled me too. Maybe because it is so static. Once...it was either Dividee or Steady wrote this brilliant avs script for me that better mimicked a real video source. I don't know what came of it. I think that was on the old EZboard which kinda tells you how long I have wanted a decent benchmark.

[Kedirekin]

Actually I think your proposed test is perfectly valid for SP systems. I wasn't trying to denigrate it. It may not represent real-world performance, but as an apples-to-apples test is should be accurate. As you said, the relative performance differences should track into real-world circumstances.

It's probably valid for MP systems as well, but only for comparing to other MP systems.

Unfortunately things break down when trying to compare SP and MP systems, and it isn't really the fault of the test; the breakdown is present in real-world situations as well. For example, your MP setup could encode one project 40% faster than a comparable SP system, and the next project might only be 10% faster.

Taking that into account, I don't think it is possible to create a test that will ever allow apples-to-apples comparisons between SP and MP systems. It's kind-of sad really - if everything were MP enabled, the MP system would always be 85-95% faster than the comparable SP system.

BTW: chipvideo, if you want to see how much added oomph your MP system gives you, try setting your CCE processor affinity to only use one processor.

[DDogg]

When we get more data, that is, when we can get a few more people to get motivated, run the test and report the results, we can then pick a few folks to also run an encode on a common DVD source. [Hey, it only takes five minutes!]

That data should establish the proportion of this artificial benchmark to a real world encoding job. Ultimately I think (hope) we can end up with a multiplier to apply against the benchmark number that will yield a close approximation to real world speed using the common encoding method of mpeg2dec3/avisynth. Hopefully that would also use, as part of the factor, the amount of pixels to be encoded so we can take into account aspect ratio/res. I'm still fuzzy on that. Most folks know I am a math dropout.

There is something else tickling the back of my brain but I can't get a handle on it yet :confused: I think it is something to do with pixels and some way of a PAL or NTSC person computing equivalence. May be clueless.

[Kedirekin]

Interesting idea. In terms of analog bandwidth, I've heard that PAL and NTSC are nearly identical. The increased resolution of PAL is offset by the decreased field rate.

The math supports this conclusion:
720 x 480 x 60 = 20,736,000
720 x 576 x 50 = 20,736,000

This equivalence would translate into DVD encoding, but unfortunately (or fortunately) most NTSC DVDs are encoded at 24 fps which throws the equivalence out of balance. I'm not sure if the situation is as simple as this, but...

(720 x 480 x 24)/(720 x 576 x 25) = 0.8

I think that means NTSC encode speeds will be 25% faster than PAL speeds, all other things being equal (which of course they can't be - different resolutions implies different sources, if nothing else).

[Kedirekin]

PS. Sorry I can't run the test myself. I don't have all the latest software.


I just ran the test against what I have.
CCE 2.5: 2.898

I have a pretty generic 1½ year old Micron Millenia 2.26 GHz P4 with a propietary motherboard and everything (sound, graphics, enthernet) onboard. This speed looks suspicious to me, but I did check the script in VirtualDub and it is working fine. I am using an older version of AviSynth (2.08); perhaps the script isn't as slow in that version.



Sorry for the misinformation. I let the encode run to completion and found my error (had the avs file in the wrong directory - surprised CCE didn't throw an error). I re-ran the test and got much more pathetic results.
CCE 2.5: 0.82

As I mentioned, my PC is very generic. Even though it's 2.26 GHz, it's no speed demon.

This does bring up a point though; if people are reporting suspiciously high speeds, it might just mean they messed something up like I did.

[sh03z]

@ chipvideo: have you tried two instances of CCE???

[DDogg]

Does anybody know an online source of 720x480 4:3 video of at least 5-6 minutes length that is, and would probably remain, available?

[sh03z]

What exactly are you asking DDog???

LOL

[DDogg]

:stupid: Right. I should have mentioned the obvious, as well as the sample needs to be AVI if possible, although a VOB would work out nicely also. We can then use it as part of a readily available and replicatable benchmark.

[sh03z]

OK. maybe a small vob with a lot of action, or two merged vobs with action/still...

problem is finding the place to put it on.

[nuno]

Hi!
I made a test with cee 2.5 and everything went ok, but with 2.67.00.13, i get the error "Frame size is 1024x32 is not supported. Supported frame size is up to 720x576".
Speed in cee 2.5: 4.29. Work concluded in 13 min and 40 seconds

P4 2.60c GHZ, 800-MHZ System Bus, 512-KB L2 Advance Transfer Cache, Supporting Hyper-Threading
Board: Asus P4C800 Deluxe, Intel 875 Chipset, Fsb 800 MHZ, Dual DDR 400
Memory: 1 GB 400 MHZ

[DDogg]

nuno, I think if you look at the mpv created you will see no video, only a red on black error message. Read what Kedirekin said above. Try playing the avs script in media player. I think you must have an error, even though your machine looks very fast. Let us know.

[nuno]

Hi!
You're absolutly right.
After making a manual setting, i've obteined 1.143 in cee 2.5.
Ah, and avithyndt 2.5

[DDogg]

1.143 ... Was that a typo? That now sounds too slow ... Anybody else have a machine similar to nuno's? We need a comparison. His machine should be *way* faster than mine.

[atimoc]

Hi there!

I ain't got cce267 so here's cce250sp only:

speed: 0.383
machine: p3 800/133 @ 840/140
asus p3b
320 mb ram
avisynth 2.53
win2ksp4

... have a nice day ...

[auenf]

XP1800+
Asus nforce2
DTLA-307060 (75GXP)
rest doesnt really matter...

CCE 2.66: 1.02 (with a little bit of mozilla surfing in the forground ;)

Enf...

[KeyserSoze]

Originally posted by DDogg
1.143 ... Was that a typo? That now sounds too slow ... Anybody else have a machine similar to nuno's? We need a comparison. His machine should be *way* faster than mine.


P4 2.6Ghz------------Whetstone-FPU = 1971 /withSSE2=3603
Athlon 1.2Ghz--------Whetstone-FPU = 1890
My XP2400+@2.0Ghz-Whetstone-FPU = 3160

Without SSE2 support from a program, P4's raw FPU calculations are a joke;)
CCE 2.50 doesn't use SSE2(2.66+uses)..............

After all,what's the point of using anything else than CCE v2.50 (the best IQ & the fastest on AMD) :D IMHO

[Rock Hardy]

No 2.67 available to me...

2.50: 1.678

Athlon XP 2500@2200Mhz (11*200) (XP3200); 2*512MB 2-2-2-6 Hyper-X Ram; ABIT NF7-S

rh

p.s.:

did some more testing, but no big changes there:

2.50: 1.697 (10.5*210 (2205Mhz); 2-2-2-6 timings)
2.50: 1.677 (11*200 (2200Mhz); 2-2-2-5 timings))


Edit: values changed after rebooting, added fsb test

[coona]

I did some testing here at work :)

I have only CCE 2.50 avaible:

1.318

Athlon 2500+ (Barton) 1833 Mhz; Asus A7V8X-X nForce 2;Kingston KVR400X64C25 2 x 256 MB Single Channel;Seagate Barracuda 7200, 120 GB UltraATA 100

0.771

P4 2MHz; Asus P4B533VM I845G; 2 x 512 MB, IBM 7200, 40 GB, UltraATA 100

0.391

PIII 866, Asus CUSL2-M, 512 MB SDRAM,1x IBM 60 GB, 1x IBM 75 GB,

[DDogg]

Hmmm, this is getting interesting if I am reading the tests right. (Eventually we can get this data in a spreadsheet and start making better sense of it --- somebody? :) )

Rock Hardy's test results, and I assume he followed the instructions exactly and the results are accurate, would suggest the Barton's extra cache makes a fair amount of difference to CCE. I say that because I can't get that speed with the same timings and fsb with my tbred B xp1700 (yes, I can run 11x200). Just some conjecture on my part as we do not have enough data yet. I hope we can continue to get more results in. When compiled they may show us some trends we were missing.

At the moment, jarvis1781 results are the fastest. However, I think them suspect. Not doubting jarvis1781's integrity in any way, I am just not yet clear on whether the test was followed exactly. We need somebody else with a similar hopped up machine to verify those results.

To save folks hunting around for jarvis1781's results, "... CCE 2.67 on a 2.4C with PC3500 dual channel DDR with SATA Raptor is 2.58 - ... note that my CPU is OC'd to 3.5 and it has HT enabled"



Biostar M7NCDP | XP1700 (AXDA1700DUT3C - JIUHB 0312VPMW) @2.1 Ghz (11*192) VCore 1.725 v - SiSoft PR 3064 (Est.)| GFrce 2 MX400 | 4 Maxtor 40g| Zlmn Flower w/ 120 fan @ 2000 rpm| Enermax 330 watt r82 tweak | (2) 256 meg PC3500 HYP_X (7-2-2-2 VDim 2.8 v| Enermax CS 307 Case

[Rock Hardy]

Rock Hardy's test results, and I assume he followed the instructions exactly and the results are accurate, would suggest...

...well i hope so - checked them again and i think everything is fine.

Ran one more test: this time at stock speed of the xp 2500+ and got 1.389.
Compared to coona´s results this seems quite fast to me. Even tough I dont know if this is caused by 1GB ram, by dual channel or something else..?

However i was wondering if the difference in comparsion to DDog´s setup might also be influenced by the test itself.
I am no IT pro so this might as well be bs: but couldn´t the nature of the .avs (as the .avs mostly consists of non changing colour-bars) favour the barton´s cache?

[Kedirekin]

If there is any question about the encoding speed, you might want to check your results. I assume anyone using CCE will have a copy of DVD2AVI installed on their system.

Start the encode and let it process to completion. Open up DVD2AVI and drag the finished mpv file onto it. If you see color bars and time codes, you know CCE was indeed encoding correctly. If not, the encode would be one of: 1) an red error message on a black background, 2) blackness, or 3) noise (that's what I got).

If you don't want to encode an hours worth of color bars, add the following below the ColorBars command in your script:

Trim(0,3600)

This will trim ColorBars down to approximately 2 minutes of footage. Note that 2 minutes of ColorBars will not be enough to keep CCE going for the 3 minutes required for the speed test, but it's okay for checking that CCE is encoding what it's suppose to.

[KeyserSoze]

New testing(o/c this time):


2.50: 1.581 (Xp2400+ 11*200 (2200Mhz); 2-2-3-5 timings))

It seems that the extra 256kb of a Barton L2 gives some boost!

[nuno]

CCe 2.67.00.13 with ecl --- 1.18

I'm trying to make a different combination on the Hds configuration, because they are connected to work in raid, but only one of them is assigned.

P4 2.60c GHZ, 800-MHZ System Bus, 512-KB L2 Advance Transfer Cache, Supporting Hyper-Threading
Board: Asus P4C800 Deluxe, Intel 875 Chipset, Fsb 800 MHZ, Dual DDR 400
Memory: 1 GB 400 MHZ
Hds: 40gb and 80gb ata 100 ide
Geforce 2 MX400

[auenf]

Originally posted by coona
P4 2MHz

i think your FSB is broken there mate ;)

Enf...

[DDogg]

dragongodz was kind enough to point out this link (ftp://ftp.tek.com/tv/test/streams/Element/index.html) to some online test mpg files. I think the "Element/MPEG-Video/525" files would be perfect for a new test, however I will not have any time till the first of the year to even think about it much. Perhaps somebody else could figure something out? I think the 8 meg stream "525" files like this one (ftp://ftp.tek.com/tv/test/streams/Element/MPEG-Video/525/mobl_080.m2v) and this one (ftp://ftp.tek.com/tv/test/streams/Element/MPEG-Video/525/flwr_080.m2v) would be perfect.

Note they are completely legal and legitimate test files (see bottom of page)
Portions Copyright (1996) David Sarnoff Research Center, Inc. All Rights Reserved
TEKTRONIX grants to the web site viewer a royalty free, limited, non-exclusive license, without right to sublicense others, to download the bitstreams present on the TEKTRONIX web site and to use them for research and demonstration purposes only. No warranty is given or should be implied that the bitstreams are free from defects, are fit for any purpose, or are free from infringement of any intellectual property right of a third party.

[syzygytec]

I read through the topic and ran the test exactly as prescribed.

My speed after 3 minutes:

CCE 2.50.00.01SP = 0.570

EclCCE > CCE 2.67.00.23SP = 0.53

That's under normal conditions things running that are usually off when I encode.

Pentium III Taulatin 1.2GHZ on Intel Mobo D815 chipset

[MaXiMuS]

CCE 2.5
0.914
:confused:

http://www.lfchosting.com/divx/_cpu_speed3_CCE.png
http://www.lfchosting.com/divx/_cpu_speed2.png
http://www.lfchosting.com/divx/_cpu_speed.png

[coona]

To MaXiMuS

Posted by KeyserSoze
Without SSE2 support from a program, P4's raw FPU calculations are a joke...
CCE 2.50 doesn't use SSE2(2.66+uses)..............

I hope I will be able to make some tests with Ddogg´s testing mpegs today ;) .

[coona]

I did some quick tests with Ddogg´s files and CCE 2.5.0

I did following:

1) d2v project
2) avisynth script
import("C:\Program Files\DoItFast4U\new.avs\addaudio.avs")
LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files\DoItFast4U\new.avs\mpeg2dec3.dll")
Mpeg2Source("My path to d2v project\my_project.d2v")
AddAudio()
ConvertToYUY2()
3) run encode with 9 passes with:
"add end sequence code" and "zigzag scaning order" checked,
average bitrate 2500,
minimum bitrate 0,
maximum bitrate 9000,
bias 30
all other setting were the same as described in this guide (http://www.doom9.org/mpg/cce-roba.htm).
Here are results:

flwr_080.m2v - 14694 kB before encoding
flwr_080.m2v.mpv - 3648 kB after encoding

average encoding speed ±1.13

mobl_080.m2v - 14655 kB before encoding
mobl_080.m2v.mpv - 4560 kB after encoding

average encoding speed ±1.145

Tested on P4 2GHz (I repaired my FSB, Auenf ;)), 1GB RAM

[windtrader]

My tests went smoothly; did it twice after a clean reboot.

Speed 1.14

CCE 267 (via EcICCE)

Hardware: (as reported by SiSoftware)

CPU: AMD XP2400+ @1.99Ghz (L2 cache 256kb ECC Synch write back)
MOBO: ECS K7S5A
CHIP: SIS735
MEMORY: 512MB DDR-SDRAM (make unknown, PC2100)
FSB: 2x133Mhz (266Mhz data rate)
VIDEO: Matrox G450 Dual Head
HD: Seagate Barracuda 80gb
OS: WIN XP SP1

Dhrystone ALU 7331 MIPS
Whetstone FPU 2994 MFLOPS

[U149113]

Have 4 PC's that I ran the test on. Three are SMP Only have 2.67.x.x to test. All running 2000 SP 4.

PIII Dual 550 IBM Intellistation M Pro - .37
PIII Dual 733 IBM Intellistation M Pro - .39
PIII Dual 933 Tyan Tiger MB - .41
PIII 933 Tyan Tiger MB - .39

[jsoto]

My results, very similar to MaXiMuS (similar machine, similar results)

CCE 2.50.01.00 0.922
CCE 2.66.01.07 0.94
CCE 2.67.00.23 0.94

PC: P4@2,4 GHz (133 Ext clock) 512 MB RAM (333 DDR); MotherBoard: GA-8ST800
But I usually get a little bit more (1.1 or 1.2) during my encodes (PAL-DVDs)

jsoto

[kazam]

Personally I think it's better to use these free clips as opposed to an Avisynth script only for the fact that this situation more closely resembles what we're trying to do.

Let's just standardize the procedure.

I tried ConvertToYUY2(interlaced=true) and unchecked "Progressive frames" in CCE but it didn't (noticably) affect speed. So I'm keeping it simple.

mobl_080.m2v

Same settings as coona.

LoadPlugin("F:\Program\AviSynth 2.5\plugins\MPEG2Dec3dg.dll")
mpeg2source("F:\Rips\test\test.d2v")
ConvertToYUY2()
AddAudio()


P4 2.8C
2GB DDR RAM in Dual-Channel configuration
SATA RAID-0

CCE 2.50.01.00

Speed: 2.1

/kazam

[DSP8000]

Script Used:
#start of CCESpeedTest01.avs
ColorBars (720,480)
ShowSMPTE(24)
converttoyuy2()
#end
CCESpeedTest01.ecl (posted here)

Rig:
AMD Athlon XP 2800+ (Barton Core)@ 2405 MHz
ASUS A7N8X Deluxe Rev.2.0 (Bios v.1007Final)
1.5 GB DDR 2700 @ 200 MHz
60 GB Seagate (2MB cache)
120 GB Seagate (8MB cache)
Used CCE SP 2.50.01.00
Speed: 1.806 constant after 20 sec, peak 1.809.
DSP8000

[nuno]

To Kazam or Coona
Could you just put online the content of your ecl file?
Just to save time to every one.

Cheers !

[kazam]

Sure. Replace paths as necessary.

/kazam

; Cinema Craft Encoder SP -- Encoder Control List

[item]
title=Standard.avs
vid_out=1
vaf_out=1
aud_out=0
vid_file0=F:\Rips\test\Standard.m2v
vid_file1=F:\Rips\test\Standard.m2v
vaf_file=F:\Rips\test\Standard.vaf
aud_file=F:\Rips\test\Standard.mpa
file_focused=0
encode_mode=0
packet_size=4096
timecode=0x0
width=704
height=480
vmode=2
frame_rate_idx=4
cbr_brate=6000
opv_q_factor=60
opv_brate_min=2000
opv_brate_max=9000
vbr_brate_avg=2500
vbr_brate_min=0
vbr_brate_max=9000
vbr_bias=30
vbr_pass=9
quality_prec=15
use_filter=0
filter_val=6
seq_endcode=1
dvd=0
half_width=0
half_height=0
fast_mode=0
progressive=0
alternate_scan=0
non_linear=1
top_first=1
lum_level=0
intra_dc_prec=-1
aspect_ratio=2
gop_m=3
gop_nm=4
gop_hdr=12
seq_hdr=1
all_closed_gop=0
fix_gop_length=0
mpeg1=0
mpeg1_cps=0
samples_per_sec=44100
stereo=2
brate_idx=7
crc=1

[file]
name=F:\Rips\test\Standard.avs
type=0
frame_first=0
frame_last=450
encode_first=0
encode_last=450

[coona]

As I see kazam posted his ecl file so there is no need for double posting ;).

[DarkFear_DK]

I get a speed of 1.159 using CCE 2.5.

My computer is a AMD 1700+ @ 2000MHz (160x12.5 - cas 3-3-3)

Note that I'm still ( :( ) using plain old SD-RAM, so it is quite obvoius that memory also serves a great purpose when encoding.

Chipset: Via KT133A

-- DarkFear_DK

[chipvideo]

Closing program
CCE Max Speed: 100.000
Video Encoding finished.

I guess my plutonium upgrade is really fast. Can't figure that one out. LOL.

[Trimegisto]

Started using the sugested scripts and this is what I've got:

CCE 2.50.01.00 -> 1.11
CCC 2.67.00.23 -> 1.25 (with EclCCE)

I'm planning on buying a Dual Opteron system. Let's see how it will increase this values.

[Pfc Joker]

I got 2.24 with CCE 2.67

---------------------------------
Rig =
P2.4 C @ 250 fsb = 3.0
Gigabyte GA-8KNXP Canterwood
1 Gig Geil PC4000 (DDR 500)
Two Western Digital Raptors (Raid 0)
Two Western Digital JB250 (Raid 0) Thats right, half teribyte:D

[br408408]

CCE 2.5 Speed 1.392
CCE 2.67 Speed 1.44
Machine in sig

Seems a bit slow compared to some other posts as I run anywhere from 3.0 to 3.3 RT when encoding a movie to DVD specs using DVD2AVI, AVISynth 2.5 and CCE 2.67. Cut and paste the this link ( http://www.theforumisdown.com/uploadfiles/1203/CCE.JPG ) as it won't open if you just click on it. This is a screen shot of CCE 2.66 encoding the first three VOB's the movie Insomnia with the following AVI script:

LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files\AviSynth 2.5\plugins\MPEG2Dec3.dll")
MPEG2Source("C:\TwoTowers1.d2v")
YV12toYUY2(interlaced=false)
AddAudio()

Bill

[LB]

Hey man. Apologies for not replying back to your pm a loooong time ago. I was just really really really busy with work and had to put good ole doom9 on pause for a few months. Anyway, I got some time and saw your pic. Tell me a few things about that 3.0 speed. And two towers... Hmm... Tell you what. I'm gonna go rent it and try that script, and see what happens just for kicks. But tell me, why aren't you ivtcin'g that stuff? I mean seriously...

Those new speeds you got on this test seem more accurate of your system. Granted, 3ghz is fast, but it shouldn't produce 3.0RT speeds on a 720x480 full-screen video.

BTW guys, you're looking for some video source that is identical that we can use as a test? Simple. Look for a place on the net that houses free video. Here is an example:

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/sts-72/movies/movies.html

I doubt more than 100 people every will d/l the file for the test, and there is no reason why we can't use it for our test. We all pay taxes right? :D anyway, there is a 105second video on there which is 3.5mb. I think that would be an excellent candidate. And remember, who cares if it's not at 720x480. Just insert a bicubicresize into the script. Remember, it doesn't matter how crappy the source is, as long as (1) it is a source from some video; and (2) we all use the same script + source. Whacha think?

[LB]

Okay, I did the test on Two Towers. A buddy of mine had it. With that script, DUAL 3ghz (virtually) I get 1.78 MAX. And this is with CCE 100% maxed out on both processors. I guess going direct from the d2v without even IVTC'ing the file feeds CCE even more threads. In any event, I don't get that 3.0RT speed, so something you're doing is not reporting correctly. Granted, my bus is only at 533 and yours is at 1ghz, but that difference in bus speed shouldn't equal 2.2RT "jump" (remember for other readers, I'm dual and he's a single 3.0, so halve my 1.78).

But anyway, when I do things with my own filters and what not I can get around 2.4 which I'm happy at, so that's all that matters. You're 3.0 will continue to puzzle me. :p

[br408408]

Most DVD's are film...progressive...no need to ivtc. I use "Forced Film" in DVD2AVI and my CCE output file is 23.976. I then use Pulldown.exe to enable 3:2 pulldown. As far as speeds, I am getting those speeds and they are real...can someone with a P4 HT back me up here. And it is 720 X 480. With dual 3.0's I don't know why you are only getting 1.78. My old AMD XP2000 Palamino (1.66 GHz 133FSB- 266DDR) gave me speeds of 1.5 - 1.6. My XP2500 OC'ed to 2156 MHz (227FSBx9.5) gave speeds of 2.3 - 2.45. HELP!!! someone back me up here. All speeds stated in this post are for backing up a movie, and not the "Real CCE SpeedTest". LB, what do you get when you run the CCE Speedtest. Also, keep in mind that in the CCE Speed test, I get a Speed of 1.36, but DDog said in his first post that "Although this test is primitive and will reflect a speed MUCH SLOWER than you will actually get using proper source, it should allow an exact comparison of speed on various platforms." So, the 1.36 in this test would tend to back up my real video encoding speeds. BTW,this is for video ONLY...no audio as I am making DVD's and just use the original AC3.

Bill

[kazam]

Well, like I said in an earlier thread:

If you have a P4 with 800MHz FSB and are encoding progressive NTSC material the CCE 2.67 RT speed should be about equal to your CPU clock in GHz.

No special filters needed, just a 3 line avs script.

And actually I believe a 1GHz FSB as compared to a 533MHz one would make a tremendous difference.

I can get 3.0RT quite easily by overclocking my CPU to 3.0GHz.

That's for NTSC though. PAL is much slower and I get around 2.3RT.

/kazam

[Pfc Joker]

You know if you look at the numbers it seems like everyone running a P4C on a new chipset with raid get close to the same results. Kazam's statement about the CCE speed being about equal to CPU clock speed seems to hold water for me anyway.

[br408408]

Thanks kazam and Pfc Joker
I build a fair amount of computers, and test CCE on ones of interest to me. I have found that with P4c's CCE speed = 100% of CPU speed in GHz...more or less. With an AMD Barton or Thoroughbred with a high FSB (215 mhz or more) speed can get as high as 115% of CPU speed in GHz. Now if they only made a Barton that would o/c to 2.8 GHz or more.....thats an other story.

I am no newbe at this, I made my first VCD before Doom9 had this site. The "Video Squeezer" with the Panasonic plugin. Didn't like the quality so I went to SVCD, even though most info on the web at that time said don't even try SVCD, it just too hard.

No disrespect to you LB, (and I mean that) but just because your machine won't encode that fast dosen't mean that something is wrong with what I or kazam or Pfc Joker are doing. A P4c at 3.0 GHz on an 865/875 Chipset with a 1000 MHz FSB WILL run CCE at 3.0 or more with NTSC progressive video. Just doing a slight reduction in bit rate so I can go from DVD9 to DVD5, I see no need for filters. And since the source in progressive to start with, I don't know why you think I should ivtc.

Bill

[Pfc Joker]

A P4c at 3.0 GHz on an 865/875 Chipset with a 1000 MHz FSB WILL run CCE at 3.0 or more with NTSC progressive video

Agreed.....you got to have the memory also, by that I mean do your test right after the computer boots into windows. I notice a good drop in speed if I do the test after I've been playing with Photoshop CS, Nero, Acrobat or any other memory hog type of program. I havn't seen 3.0 but 2.0 average is not out of the question.

@LB
Granted, my bus is only at 533 and yours is at 1ghz

A 1ghz FSB with memory at 500mhz is in a different ballpark than a 533mhz FSB and 400mhz memory.

[LB]

Well, I ran the speedtest.

2.5 = ~1
2.67 = ~1

So... I guess it might just be the FSB. I also thought of another reason, or addition to the slow speeds. I use ECC Registered memory, so I'm obviously going to notice quite a bit of slowdown from that alone esp. in an encoding program... (sigh). Well I guess I need that upgrade right about now, but my wallet is looking kinda skimpy :p

Anyway, glad we got it figured it and I guess congrats on the good speed my friend :D

EDIT: Sh*t... my pc is only running on 1 cpu the moment. What the hell... I gotta reboot and check into this lol because umm.. yeah, I have two cpus. lol

[chipvideo]

What I don't understand is that with using this test I get around 1.35 and when I do the real life dvd encoding I get 3.14-3.35.

These people that are getting over 2 on the test get no higher than what I get durring the real dvd encoding. So the gap is much less durring the test and real dvd encoding for them.

[Kedirekin]

That's the problem when comparing a dually to a single processor machine. A slow script really biases things in favor of single processor machines, while fast scripts really let a dually shine.

I believe the bias lies in the throughput of AviSynth, which (I believe) only runs on one processor. Both slow and fast scripts will use 100% of one processor, but the slow script will limit throughput enough that CCE only uses 2% or 3% of the second processor. In this case, MP and SP effectively become the same (i.e. using 1 processor), in which case a 3 GHZ SP will outperform a 2.4 GHz MP.

With a faster script, you might get CCE using 50% of the second processor, in which case the 2.4 MP will outperform the 3 GHz SP. In effect, CCE gets 1.2 GHz on the 2.4 GHz MP (1/2 of 2.4), but only gets 1.0 GHz on the 3 GHz SP (1/3 of 3.0) [actually, that's an oversimplification, but it illustrates the point well]. And as the script gets faster, things grow more and more in favor of the dually.

[br408408]

I think there are many things going on with duallies. If you have an AMD dually your board has the AMD 761 chipst (SIS might have a dual chipset...not sure) and it is not the best performing chipset. Secondly, more then likely you must use ECC Registered memory....not the fastest memory. And I think when we all had 1 Ghz or less CPU's, the CPU was always the bottle neck with CCE. Now that we are running up around 3 GHz's, memory, bus speed, and chipset are coming into play, as that CPU must be feed. The other possible problem with an AMD dually is the CCE 2.5 runs best on an AMD, but I think I have read that 2.66 and 2.67 are better set up for SMP. And lastly, AVISynth (which most of us use with CCE) is not set up for SMP. BIOS options are very limited on most dually boards and AMD CPU's really shine when you get you FSB speed up well over 200 MHz. Most dually boards are more of a "work horse" than a performance machine. I am not trying to condemn duallies here. 18 month ago I was thinking of building one for use with CCE, and I had the funds to do it. It was the reasons stated above that made me think twice. I have however read of some Intel duallies getting speeds of close to 4.0 or better!!!

So if you take a dually encode speed and cut it in half and compare it to what some of us are getting with single CPU's, yes, our (single CPU's) speeds look "too fast...something must be wrong"

As far as the encode speeds on my AMD XP2500 @ 227 x 9.5 / Abit NF7-S, they are very much real. Markrb, the retired mod the the DVD2SVCD forum, built a water cooled AMD XP1700 o/c'ed to around 2.4 GHz and was seeing speeds of 2.6 - 2.8 if I remember correctly...I know that is close as it was his set up that prompted me to buy an Epox 8rda+ and an XP2400.

Bill

[floslap]

cce25--1.670

athlon xp 2500+ 11x205@2.26ghz

[PleXuS]

hi all

i did buy a AMD Barton XP2500!
And a new Soltek Dual Channel DDR400 motherboard!
1GB Dual channel DDR400mhz onboard!

When i run it at 400mhz fsb and memmory bus at 400mhz
Speed=2.1 (Maybe higher but it crashed not so good overclock board!)

When i set memmory bus at 333mhz and fsb400 get following results
Speed=1.95 (even running apps on background no problem :) )

seems to be pretty good but i want a better overclocking motherboard os i gonna sell it! and buy Abit one with SATA on andso..


Weard stuff is that when memmory set at 400mhz motherboard resets and cpu gets hotter.. maybe becoz the memmory controler gets to hot don't know.. or firmware bug..

[br408408]

Yes, the Abit NF7-S is a nice board, mine ran at 227 MHz no problem. Sounds like your memory might be holding you back though, not your board. My NF7-S and AMD XP2500 @ 227 X 9.5 with the memory at 227 gave me speeds of 2.3 - 2.45 with CCE 2.5. What are you running for memory?

Bill

[Amnon82]

guys I don't know what are you doing...

I use this script:

###### DRP 2.2 Script ######

## DLL Section ##
#
LoadPlugin("c:\Filters25\MPEG2Dec3.dll")
MPEG2Source("MPEG_Video_0xE0.d2v")

Subtitle(" DRP 2.2 ",480,460,90,180,"Arial",22,$FFFFFF)
Subtitle(" (C) 2004 DRP",480,480,90,180,"Arial",22,$FFFFFF)

Subtitle(" AVAMAT 4 ",480,460,200,290,"Arial",22,$FFFFFF)
Subtitle(" (C) 2004 DRP",480,480,200,290,"Arial",22,$FFFFFF)

and my DRP 2.2 Settings (http://www.dvdr-page.tk)

I got always 1.64 RT.
http://rj-elektronik.de/avideo/images/DRP22rocked.PNG

If I use nic's MPEGDecoder it will be 2.30 RT!

Download MPEG2Dec3 1.10 (http://nic.dnsalias.com/MPEG2Dec3v110.zip)

Download Nics MPEGDecoder 2.03a (http://nic.dnsalias.com/mpegdecoder.html) (don't use it if you use QCCE for encoding or for NTSC movies! It will only work with PAL. (Thx Ddogg for this. I hadn't known this.))

_____________________________________________________________________

My PC: AMD Athlon 2.8+, NVidia GF 5700 U, 2x Maxtor SATA 80 GB, 512 333 2.5 Infinion DDR, Epox KT600, Audigy2, WinXP Home SP1a, Pioneer A06, Toshiba 16x,

[br408408]

This is my script:

LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files\AviSynth 2.5\plugins\MPEG2Dec3.dll")
MPEG2Source("C:\DDC.d2v")
YV12toYUY2(interlaced=false)
AddAudio()

Simple, as I am encoding for DVD, I don't need to resize, and I don't use subtitles. Using this script on my old AMD machine (Abit NF7-S and XP2500 Barton @ 227 X 9.5 = 2156) I got speed of about 2.45...just slightly faster that your XP2800 thats runs at 2.08 GHz.

Amnon82's AMD machine follows my AMD rule of encoding time = about CPU speed in GHz X 110 - 115%

Bill

[LB]

I finally got it all working. On re-install, I didn't install the SMP HAL, I messed up and installed the single cpu HAL, so winxp was only using 1 cpu. But, the thing was, I didn't notice right away. Why? Because my speeds stayed pretty constant with what they were in CCE prior (when I had XP setup to recognize both cpus). So here is what I found out.

On a single XEON 3ghz, I do about 1.12 in the speed test. And on my regular encodes I get about 2.8. On a dual XEON 3ghz, I do about 1.34 on the speed test, and 3.2 during a regular encode.

So what gives?

Well, on a single cpu, I max the chip out at 100%; but on a dual setup, I get about 55% on each CPU. So, this actually explains why a br408408's 3ghz 1ghz bus chip can get 3.0 on a typical encode... lost yet? Well it gets 3.0 because the chip is 100% maxed out by CCE. Now that's my theory, so it could be wrong, so br408408 correct me if I am, but I think I'm right. So, CCE apparantly isn't programmed that well to use both chips to their fullest. If it was, then both would be maxed out.

Interesting eh?

[PleXuS]

At the moment i did get stable maximum speed of
2.10!

XP2500 running at XP3200 at fsb400 Dual Channel 1GbDDR400

I use DoitFast4u! so don't know how to change those scripts!
And the speed was done with CCE2.66.01.07!
CCE2.5 was faaster for my AMD but worked not so stable with my software here!

In the near future i get a Abit NF7S Revision2.0!!
And i hope to get higher specs out of it!
I have no multiplier lock so :)
13.5x200=2700
Running at 2,7ghz stable mode! or higher but that will we see in a couple of days! :)

-=PleXuS=-

[coona]

to PleXuS

There is no need of changing scripts. The only thing you should do is to save the code from Ddogg into *.ecl file and open and run it in CCE. We all have to perform the same tests on different machines. That is the purpose of this thread ;). Real encoding speed depends on many factors like source, used filters, different settings, etc...). So it couldn´t be compared as it is.

[Amnon82]

right coona, we need the same source, script and filters.

So I start a new speed test here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=70056) in the forum.:)

[LB]

Originally posted by Amnon82
right coona, we need the same source, script and filters.

So I start a new speed test here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=70056) in the forum.:)

... what wasn't clear about it? there is all that stuff if you follow the directions.

1. same script
2. same filters
3. same source

it's all there; just follow the directions, don't create a new thread. :angry:

[LB]

Originally posted by PleXuS
At the moment i did get stable maximum speed of
2.10!

XP2500 running at XP3200 at fsb400 Dual Channel 1GbDDR400

I use DoitFast4u! so don't know how to change those scripts!
And the speed was done with CCE2.66.01.07!
CCE2.5 was faaster for my AMD but worked not so stable with my software here!

In the near future i get a Abit NF7S Revision2.0!!
And i hope to get higher specs out of it!
I have no multiplier lock so :)
13.5x200=2700
Running at 2,7ghz stable mode! or higher but that will we see in a couple of days! :)

-=PleXuS=-

I don't wish to sound rude, but either delete or edit your post. The reason for the scripts is so that we all have the same setup. You disregarded the scripts. You can't do that. You also used your own source, which you can't do. FOLLOW DDog's directions. It's honestly not hard. He even numbered them.

As for the source? Follow the directions! His script AUTO-GENERATES a source. yes, it really does. so again, no new threads and if you can't get it working, ask one of us before posting useless numbers. :sly:

[Amnon82]

@LB: Sorry, if somebody of the admins don't like the new thread, delete it. I only wanted to help.

[Amnon82]

@LB: Sorry, if somebody of the admins don't like the new thread, delete it. I only wanted to help.

[Edit] Sorry my connection is crasy

[Fotis_Greece]

CCE SP 2.67.00.23

2.5 ecl test-->1.12
2.67 ecl test-->1.19
You can see my PC configuration in my signature

[Pfc Joker]

As for the source? Follow the directions! His script AUTO-GENERATES a source. yes, it really does

@LB - The way the script generates the Color Bars is pretty slick, and speaking of color bars and testing. I recommend Digital Video Essentials by Joe Cane. http://www.videoessentials.com/ I thought his previous release was cool but this ones even better. :)

@PleXuS and Amnon82 - Both you two, what happened, we had a good bit of information going on here from the same script at the beginning of the thread. Stop the madness.

@Fotis_Greece - Your speed seems low for your specs, you have the exact same motherboard, burner, video card, and probably the same Western Digital drives to get your 500GB. Same amout of memory but I'm running Geil DDR500. You not overclocking? The only thing left I can see to give me a speed boost would be the two 10k RPM Raptors I also have or overclocking. :confused:

[MaXiMuS]

Originally posted by MaXiMuS
CCE 2.5
0.914
:confused:

http://www.lfchosting.com/divx/_cpu_speed3_CCE.png
http://www.lfchosting.com/divx/_cpu_speed2.png
http://www.lfchosting.com/divx/_cpu_speed.png

lil UPDATE
tested CCE 2.66 & CCE 2.64 (later on will post Real life DVD transcoding test
http://www.lfchosting.com/divx/MaXiMuS_CCE_266_CCE_267.jpg

[Pfc Joker]

You know after looking at these specs it seems to me that all things being equal, RAM, hard drives and final FSB is what makes the difference.

[Stabmaster-Arson]

CCE 2.50 Speed 1.47
CCE 2.50 Speed (One cpu processor affinity) 1.142

Asus A7M266-D with dual Athlon MP 2600+
1280 MB Reg ECC DDR cas 2.5 by SPD (ECC is enabled)

This was with a newsgroup reader decoding binary files at the same time, 800 MB ram in use before I ran the CCE test, which spiked over a gig of ram usage)
I will do another test and edit to this post after a resh reboot later.

[shoarthing]

Hi - dunno whether anyone else has graphed results to date [removing the usual offscale clutter]: if you do, AMD & Intel 'speedtest' results fall fairly well along two distinct trendlines - so at least this test is consistent . . .

. . .but I don't think it relates well to CCE/AVISynth encoding speeds - especially for PIV's, which 'test' very poorly in relation to anecdotal encoding speeds.

IMHO the crude overall impression you might draw fom these trendlines [PIV at best does 2/3 work per tick of AMD] looks a fair enough reflection of known low-level CPU performance but fails to reflect the PIV family's optimisations for encoding work.

- some more results to add to the plot:

CCE Speedtest 2.67 - 1.24
CCE Speedtest 2.5x - 1.25

AVISynth 2.54
CCE-SP 2.67.00.23
CCE-SP 2.50.01.00

Iwill MPX2: 2x Palomino MP's @ 10.5 x 156MHz '2000+' - 1.64GHz
1GB Crucial ECC 2700, timings by SPD, ECC scrub enabled
SCSI 10K rpm RAID5 [plural arrays on plural 64-bit hosts]

NB: This test ran at 58%[2.5x] - 61%[2.67x] average CPU loadings: actual PAL ZZ Progressive encodes run at approx 77% average & at 2.1-2.2x realtime using CCE 2.67x.

[Karovaldas]

Interesting thread. I'll run the tests once I get home...

This thread has focused quite a bit on standardizing the procedure. A bit ahead of the procedure, there's a question of purpose to address. What I mean is this: in order to get answers we should spend some time on identifying the variables that affect the encoding speed--or the variables that are of interest to the users here.

Here's a quick preliminary list that I was able to derive from the posts (I am including things that may be totally irrelevant and also most likely omitting very important ones):

PROCESSOR
- Processor speed (GHz)
- Processor vendor (Pentium vs. AMD)
- FBS (Khz)
- not sure how to handle SP/MP issue--they don't seem to just add up do they?
- Operating Temperature

RAM MEMORY
- RAM size (MB)
- RAM speed (Khz)
- available size at the moment of running the test
- (not sure about this) RAM ECC?
- fragmentation status
- temperature

CHIPSET/MOTHERBOARD
- Manufacturer
- Chipset (what?)
- I don't know much about them--what are the variables that change?

HARD DRIVES
- ATA/SATA/RAID: ATA-66, -100, -133, -150, etc. Is there a way to quantify RAID setup into a number along this dimension?
- RPM (5400/7200/etc.)
- I think fragmentation status also matters (at least it does when we are talking about avoiding dropped frames during capturing)
- If we can't factor RAID into the first section under this heading, then RAID/No RAID.

GRAPHICS CARD
- I have no idea if it is relevant here--does the "AviSynth>CCE>MPEG Output" process involve the graphics card at all?

POWER SUPPLY
- Watts
- Voltage (120/240)
- Frequency (50/60 Hz)

CCE VERSION

AviSynth VERSION

OS

OTHER VARIABLES?



Then, there's more to it than just running an identical the same script. As much as possible has to be held constant while running it, which means all computers should be doing the same thing. Sure we could all run some binary procedures, but the best common denomenator I can think off is doing nothing. I see a number of people reporting that they run various other tasks while running this test. Do us all a favor and sit tight for 3 minutes while running the test (do we really need 3 minutes)?

I'd be willing to put the eventual data into a statistical package of some sort once we have enough data and clean enough design. Sure there will be "noise" variation due to humidity, amount of dust in your machine, usage of Photoshop immediately before the test, etc. That's why we need a lot of users to report their numbers so that the irrelevant variation not due to our agreed upon factors of interest can be factored out statistically.

So what I propose is standardizing the following:
1. Agree on a list of variables that everybody will report along with their test results
2. Run the tests exactly as the original author recommends.
3. Do not run anything else on the computer while the test is running

* Report the amount of RAM utilized by the computer before the test is run.

If we can do this and get somewhere in the neighborhood of 100+ data points, I could figure out what aspects matter most and least. With the present data it is kinda hard to do.

What do you guys think?

[coona]

Very nice post ;).

Does Power Suply and Graphic card really matter? And to the Prosessor section - system temperature doesn´t affect encoding speed, does it?

Anyway - I think we need to sumarize all relevant posts and sort the results with configurations into one table. Any volunteer :)?

[shoarthing]

Karovaldas - Hi - it's easy enough to graph the results to date to see if these are any trendlines: I took twenty minutes out to do this & there are two, showing [per GHz] AMD:Intel 'scores' to be very roughly 5:3

Finer granularity would require, as you say, standardisation of data & more data per report - but I don't think this interesting 'speedtest' proposal has proved itself more informative than anecdotal report - the whole point in proposing the thing.

IMHO the existing 'CCE Speedtest' has three obvious flaws:

1: 'score' cannot be tied by users to actual AVISynth/CCE encoding speed, by a correction-factor common across platforms. This tells us no more than a faster AMD is faster when encoding than a slower AMD in fairly clear ratio to their gross GHz; & similarly but separately with Intel-based systems. This we surely already know . . . .

2: SMP systems' 'scores' are comparable only with other SMP systems based on the same platform. As we all know, CCE is multithreading, AVISynth isn't: in actual encodes SMP platforms have aggregate CPU loadings from roughly 75% upwards [this is one of the times Intel's HT technology may actuallly be of some use]; but in this 'test' aggregate CPU loadings appear to be roughly in the 55-60% region. I suggest it's therefore a pretty fair assumption that what is mostly being tested here is AVISynth.

3: Intel:AMD 'scores' appear, as stated above, to fall roughly in a 3:5 ratio per Ghz. This understates the PIV family's known CCE encoding performance & again, I suggest, primarily reflects how these families of CPU's handle the [FPU specific?] demands of AVISynth.

[Karovaldas]

I did some tests of my own on the original script:

CPU 2.4GHz P4 HT, FSB 800
Soyo Dragon 2 Platinum MB with Pentium 875 chipset
1 GHz of DDR400 RAM
WD ATA-100 and SATA-150 Hard Drives, 7200 RPM, multiple partitions

TEST 1:
CCE 2.50 speed 1.04
CCE 2.67 Speed 1.08

TEST 2:
I ran both tests twice on two different hard drives and the speed did not differ between them--ATA-100 and SATA-150 (both 720 RPM).

CPU usage during encoding 59-63%

TEST 3:
I also turned off the Hyper Threading for two more tests.

CCE 2.50 speed .99
CCE 2.67 Speed 1.01

CPU usage jumped all the way up to 100%, though. While the speed difference might be negligible, the advantage of the HT technology in providing additional CPU resources is obvious! With just under 40% of unutilized CPU one can still do a lot of stuff on the computer while CCE is encoding at full speed.

QUESTION:
What about AMD? What's the processor utilization during your tests? I am curious if the 3:5 PIV:AMD ratio may not be reflecting the idle CPU for the Intels...

EXPLAIN THIS!
While I was running my first test on CCE 2.5, it was running at about 1.04 speed at the 2:30 marker. At about 2:45 it EXPLODED and the speed picked up dramatically. The CPU utilization went up to 100% (this is in HT mode) and at 5 minutes the encoding speed was 2.68. I terminated the test at that point because I thought that there was something wrong with the whole picture.
I repeated the test and the same thing happened again at around 2:44. This time I let it run up to about 4 minutes and the speed again was close to 2.65. I figured there may be something wrong with AviSynth feed. So I went and checked the the output .mpg. It was nice and shiny all the way to the end.
I did not get this effect after I switched the test to another hard drive (SATA). It only happened on the drive where the OS is located (different partition though). The drive is a slave on the IDE1.

Anybody has ideas about what happened? How can I do it again!!! I would love to double the speed of my encodings on the regular basis, but at this point, I don't know how.

TEST 4:
I then did a bit of overclocking--went from 200 CPU speed to 205. It was reflected in small speed gains on both CCE versions 1.08 and 1.11 respectively.

I must say I was rather disappointed with the results. I just built this new computer and after doing so discovered that AMD's are both cheeper and faster per CPU click. Hoping to find that HT has advantages in overhead space :-)

TEST 5:
Discovered that my CPU can be overclocked a lot so I turned it up to 3GH (that's 250 rather than 200 Hz and a multiplier of 12). RAM is run at a .8 ratio it is still running at the same PC3200 (400MHz) speed

CCE 2.67 = 1.36 Hey, that's 26% gain is speed for the 25% increase in the processor speed.

[Trimegisto]

Ok, brand new Opteron machine

CCE 2.50.01.00 -> 1.285
CCC 2.67.00.23 -> 1.33 (with EclCCE)

Not much increase over my previous values with the dual 1800MP

CCE 2.50.01.00 -> 1.11
CCC 2.67.00.23 -> 1.25 (with EclCCE)

I'll see what I can do to optimize this. And wait for a 64bit version of CCE :D

[six6]

WAIT!

This thread seems to have fallen into a state of disrepair. I hope (yet wonder if) someone can harvest all/most of these results reliably.

Who knows what people are encoding?! Some have read the whole thread and are zipping some random mpeg through CCE. Others read three responses off the first page, got excited, then followed those instructions. Unless (nearly) everyone edits their posts to specifically state _what_ they've encoded with their script, what are we comparing?

I feel bad about this whole thing! Even the thread author quit half way through the thread, probably disenchanted and put off by the overwhelming critiscm and disrespect for his method. He worked hard for some results, can we just do what he asks? If not, why the heck are you reading this thread? If you want (EDIT: to discuss) SP/MP distinctions (EDIT: concerning something other than this test), start a new thread. EDIT: Do not start a new thread comparing the two with this same test.

I'm _not_ saying suggestions for other methods are bad; I'm saying put a little commentary *with your results*.

I have a similar machine to everyone else it seems...then again, alot of us are on the AMD cheap-overclock bandwagon.

Anyway, my results:

Edit: I've encoded the original script in 2.5
After 3:12 mins of encoding (making dinner instead of paying attn): 1.416 * realtime with:
AMD 2100 @ 166x13.5 ~ 2250 mhz
Asus A7V8X (should have waited for nvidia chipset...)
DDR400 512 MB @ 2-2-2-6

P.S. To anyone upset/worried/flabbergasted over their results...be happy :), you've got an amazing top-of-the-line mpeg2 encoder at your _complete_ disposal, (if only for 30 days :)), free time to sit around and encode video, and the freedom of speech to start your own thread about why your computer is waaaaaaay better than mine. But, I'll bet the guy who makes one movie with his PIII could (and might!) be as satisfied as the guy cranking out 5 movies/day on his nearly-quantum computer.

Edit: bump->Karovaldas

[Karovaldas]

Six6,

Am I missing something, or did you not specify what you were encoding, after all... :)

Version might be important, although it does not seem to make much difference in results...

[six6]

You're right, I removed that when editing the message before! I've added it back, though. How could I be so foolish? :eek:

[insite]

All who are interested, please read my overview of optimizing SMP performance with CCE and AVISynth in this forum. Done some pretty cool research and testing, and the performance increases have been significant.

[Piaf]

cce 2.50 TEST
Hi,heres my 2.50 test

http://www.asdfhost.com/members/superpolm/CCESpeedTest01.png

cce 2.67 TEST
http://www.asdfhost.com/members/superpolm/CCESpeedTest267.jpg
system:
--------
P4 3.0 Ghz/800 MHz FSB
512 MB DDR400
ATI Radeon 9800 XL 128 MB SDRAM

*big edit* :o ;)

[LB]

Originally posted by Piaf
cce 2.50 TEST
Hi, heres my test for the 2.50 script,looks good it seems?!:)

http://people.zeelandnet.nl/rpjongepier/cce250_speedtest.jpg
system:
--------
Intel Pentium 4 3.0 Ghz met 800 MHz FSB
512 MB DDR400 dual channel geheugen
ATI Radeon 9800 XL 128 MB SDRAM
info:/http://www.hardware.info/reviews.php?id=435

greets piaf

Hmm, you did something wrong. Nothing goes that fast using this script. Even those with 3.2Ghz P4s are getting around 1.58... so I think you need to do your test again.

[Piaf]

lol :D my bad,updated my post,getting 1.265 now,damn that 4.xx fps :D

[GooglyBear]

I might as well contribute to this thread considering i just finished upgrading my pc

http://allwegot-is.us/imgz/funstuff/HomeTheatre/cce-speedtest1.jpg

configuration:
Athlon 64 3000+, 1GB DDR, Seagate SATA

oddly enough I swear it hit above 3 last night when I ran 5pass on 28days..

real life applications (using dvd-rb, cce5pass, i only have 267):
my old duron 800: 25+ hours
my old athlon 1ghz: 17+ hours
last night's run: 7+ hours to completion :)

[auenf]

Originally posted by GooglyBear
I might as well contribute to this thread considering i just finished upgrading my pc

[IMG]

configuration:
Athlon 64 3000+, 1GB DDR, Seagate SATA

oddly enough I swear it hit above 3 last night when I ran 5pass on 28days..

real life applications (using dvd-rb, cce5pass, i only have 267):
my old duron 800: 25+ hours
my old athlon 1ghz: 17+ hours
last night's run: 7+ hours to completion :)

this script is basically a torture test, so you probably were getting 3x on a real source.

Enf...

[MyNameIsNeo]

Originally posted by GooglyBear
I might as well contribute to this thread considering i just finished upgrading my pc

http://allwegot-is.us/imgz/funstuff/HomeTheatre/cce-speedtest1.jpg

configuration:
Athlon 64 3000+, 1GB DDR, Seagate SATA

oddly enough I swear it hit above 3 last night when I ran 5pass on 28days..

real life applications (using dvd-rb, cce5pass, i only have 267):
my old duron 800: 25+ hours
my old athlon 1ghz: 17+ hours
last night's run: 7+ hours to completion :)

Oh my f*cking god.
How the hell do you get 1.58? I'm confused. I believe mine is suppsed to be a bit faster. Is it the RAID Configuration that is making the difference.
I have an Athlon 64 3200+ and my CCE 2.67.00.23 is 1.32@3.00 minutes
and CCE 2.50 is 1.400@3.00 minutes

Athlon 64 3200+
Gigabyte K8npro (nforce3 150)
WD 80GB and WD 160GB HDD with 8mb buffer (no raid)
2x512MB GeiL DDR 400(Value series 2.5 6-3-3 with heatspreader)

Neo

[onesoul]

CCE 2.50.01.00: 1.568
CCE 2.67.00.27: 1.47

Motherboard: Asus A7N8X-Deluxe(rev1.04), Cpu : AMD Athlon xp2100+(AIHUB) @2070MHZ, FSB:180MHZ Synched with memory, HDD: 2*80GB WD IDE RAID0 with Rocket Raid100 PCI Card, Graphic Card : GeForce3 TI200 64MB, Monitor : Samtron 19" 96BDF, Memory : 2*256 DDR400 Corsair dual channel @180FSB timings:2,2,2,5, Mouse : Microsoft Intellimouse optical, Mousepad : Icemat Black Clanbase

Why do I see a tenuous vertical white line next to the yellow bar with cce 2.67 moving left-right? I don't see this happen with cce 2.5! Could be the reason of cce 2.67 being optimized for encoding motion? :confused:

Cheers

[shoarthing]

CCE-SP 2.67.00.23

1.58

Dual Barton Mobiles @ 15x 160MHz
1GB ECC unbuffered, set 'correct & scrub'

[br408408]

try 2.5, it runs faster on AMD's

[cypher_soundz]

CCE 2.5 : 0.831 (with loads of thing open)
CCE 2.5 : 0.848 (after reboot)
system spec below

[shoarthing]

cypher_soundz - Hi - is this at 13x 100 [presumably so]? . . . in my experience w/ the MPX chipset, CCE performance is overwhelmingly linked to FSB [then, to a lesser extent, DDR timings] . . . so perhaps interesting to try your hacked Durons at 9x 140 [say] & see how this 'speed test' measure compares: I'd be amazed if it didn't improve quite markedly

FWIW I've tried Palomino's, TBreds, Bartons, & Mobile Bartons in Iwill MPX2's at multipliers from 9-17x, FSB's from 133-167, & gross GHz from 1.2-2.5 . . . but never [alas] Durons . . . . the extra cache of Bartons appears to make no difference whatsoever to CCE encoding speeds.

[cypher_soundz]

Cool, thanks for the tip, i'm not really in tune with overclocking (or under clocking ) could you run through the process? i tried my bios settings but to no avail.
Regards
cyph

[shoarthing]

Hi - I don't know whether your Duron has 4x or 5x L1 bridges: if the former, this link

http://www.ocinside.de/go_e.html?/html/workshop/socketa/socketa_resistors.html - should be relevant;

if the latter [more probable],

http://www.ocinside.de/index_e.html?/html/workshop/socketa/xp_painting.html

- the idea is to set your default multiplier via the L3 bridges to some number lower than 12.5, & to have all the L1 bridges open so you can then adjust the multiplier via the K7D BIOS up to 12.5 [the K7D cannot soft-adjust higher multipliers than this].

Advise you read around on this procedure - but ocinside is a good place to start & info is solid.

BTW: have just run a few encodes [real ones: CBR 6000 PAL ZZ/P] including 2 at 2325MHz: one at 17x137; 'tother at 15x155: latter was faster by just under 8% despite slightly slower DDR timings

[McDo0m]

CCE 2.5: 1.481

Asus A7N8x Delux-Athlon 2800+XP-Dual 80GB Seagate SATA striped-1GB RAM Kingston-PC3200-Nvidia GeForceFX5200 128MB PersonalCinema AGP 8X

EDIT:
CCE 2.67 (Manual AVS load with prescribed values of DDogg's second post in this forum) : 1.21

Also my 2*512MB kingston PC3200 rams will not run in DUAL Channel mode[Machine hangs up]
EDIT/

[DD51]

This message has been edited with proper values!

I found this thread fascinating and decided to try this myself.


After 3 minutes I get:

With 41 processes running in the background
CCE 2.5 - 1.381
CCE 2.67 - 1.42

Reboot and with 28 processes running in the background
CCE 2.5 - 1.392
CCE 2.67 - 1.45


My specs:
Motherboard: P4C800-E-DX GigaLan 800mhz Intel-i875 rev 2.
CPU: Pent IV 3.0C 512K 800mhz FSB PPGA-478 Northwood.
Overclock: 5% to 3.15GHZ
Memory: 1GB: 2x Kingston #KVR400X64C3AK2/1G PC3200 512MB DIMM.
Video: GeForce Ti4600 4X W/62.11 drivers installed.
DVD-ROM: Lite-on JLMS XJ-HD166S.
DVD Writer: Pioneer DVD-RW DVR-105.
Floppy: Basic Panasonic.
HDD 1: Maxtor SATA 120.0 gig 7200 rpm 8MB Cache 6Y120M0.
HDD 2/3/4: None.
Sound: Audigy 1 with Audigy 2 drivers installed
Klipsch ProMedia 5.1
Monitor: Viewsonic P95f+ Black 19"[COLOR=royalblue][COLOR=royalblue]

[PleXuS]

CCE 2.67.00.23
Speed: 1.36

System Config:
Asus K8V Deluxe
Athlon64 3200 @PR3400 (2,2ghz)(FSB448)
1mb L2 Cache
1 x 512MB Corsair DDR466 (Cas2.5)
1 x 200Gb Sata Maxtor
1 x 120Gb Uata Maxtor
Asus Radeon 9200 128Mb

Temps:
Cpu stressed: 48°C
cpu idle: 36°C

Cpu Config:
Cool&Quiet switched On!

u want to know more? let me know..

-GreetZ-
PleXuS

[onesoul]

Originally posted by onesoul
Why do I see a tenuous vertical white line next to the yellow bar with cce 2.67 moving left-right? I don't see this happen with cce 2.5! Could be the reason of cce 2.67 being optimized for encoding motion? :confused: About this problem, I tried different settings and I noticed that quality precision isn't equivalent between cce 2.67 and 2.5. For the ecl of 2.5 is at 17 and 2.67 is at 25. The range for cce2.5 is 0-100 and cce2.67 is 0-64. So equivalent setting for cce 2.5 at 17 should be cce2.67 at 11. Or for cce2.67 at 16 should be cce2.5 at 25. Just do the math.

And I found that although cce2.67 does have some shimmering on the transition of white bar (at the given bitrate) it does a better job on the transition of other colors.

[buzzqw]

@DD51

wrong script or wrong avisynth version

open the avs in virtual dub and see the message

BHH

[DD51]

buzzqw,

Thank you.:) I had copied the "code:" into the AVS script. When I removed that line it worked well.
Thanks for helping out.
I have edited my message above (4 up) to reflect the true numbers.

Regards,

[br408408]

Computer:

Abit NF7-S
AMD XP2600 Mobile @ 204 x 12.5 = 2544mhz with L12 mod
Thermalright SLK900A with Panaflo 92x25mm High Speed Fan
2 X 256 Twinmos Winbond CH5 dual channel

CCE 2.5 speed after 3 min = 1.831......WOW:D

This motherboard and cpu may replace my P4 setup in my main rig...and this was at 1.75 vcore and prime95 stable! 1.8 vcore is safe so I think it has more in it. Will be doing more testing soon.

[laura_glow]

Can I run this tests wit CCE sp trial version? I try to open the ecl files but i cant, with the same message as when i try to save a configuration (option disabled in trial versions).

I really would like to run the test, can someone tell me how to configure exactly CCE sp trial from scratch? also, what version ov avisynth is needed would be great...

i will edit this post with the results as soon i have them.

Thanks!!

[cypher_soundz]

UPDATE:
So i just got 2GB of DDR ECC REGISTERED 2700 (running at 2100) RAM and im running a single 2400XP+ (untill i mod my other one) and my speed is below:
CCE 2.5: 1.054 (avs 2.05)
1.163 (avs 2.54)

I feel my speed is a little low compared to others with a 2400?

Regards
cyph

[sh03z]

wow, this is a loooong thread

[Dox]

0.79 on Cce 2.67

I have over year old computer with p4 2.0 ghz.

[cypher_soundz]

So who is going to make these results in to a readable format?:rolleyes: anyone?;)
Regards
cyph
I might have a go at it:cool:

[DDogg]

New machine -

Speed 1.740 - CCE 2.67.00.27
Speed 1.836 - CCE 2.50

ABit NF7-S Rev 2 | Mobile XP 2500 @2.43 Ghz (11.5*211) VCore 1.75 v - SiSoft PR 3528 (Est.)| GFrce 2 MX400 |(2) 256 meg PC3500 HYP_X (7-2-2-2 VDim 2.8 v Dual Channel)

[DDogg]

Oh yeah!

New machine - Water Cooled

Speed 1.800 - CCE 2.67.00.27
Speed 1.940 - CCE 2.50

ABit NF7-S Rev 2 | Mobile XP 2500 @2.59 Ghz (12*215) VCore 1.85 v - SiSoft PR 3750 (Est.)/Model XP-3612 (Est.)| GFrce 2 MX400 |(2) 256 meg PC3500 HYP_X (11-2-2-2 VDim 2.8 v Dual Channel @ 431 MHz)

[stidyup]

CCE 266 I can get upto 2.50 :D that's frameserving with Avisynth.

Before moving to SATA raid, I always found encoding from one drive to another was the quickest.

Enermax 465, Asus A7V8X-E Bios 1008
Coolermaster Aero7
Raid 0 chunk size 128 2x120gb SATA Samsumg
1xSATA 120 gb, Highpoint 1520 SATA, 1xIDE 180 gb, 4xAkasa hdd coolers
2800+ Athlon XP-M, 2x512mb PC3200 DDR Crucial
Sapphire Radeon 9600XT

[DDogg]

stidyup, try it with the test method outlined in the first posts of this thread. The test is not based upon a normal encode where I can get slightly over 3.0 RT on a fullscreen source.

[stidyup]

Ooops

I'll give it a go when I've got time.

[LB]

Tomorrow, I'll possibly get my new chips in... 3.7ghz @ 1000fsb
I'll be posting in here if all goes well :D

[YaoMing11]

CCE 2.50 - 1.801



Abit NF7-s 2.0

Athlon 3200+

1GB 400mhz Dual channel RAM

Seagate 160gb SATA

[Diable]

Damn, those old ass XP's are spanking everybody. Shouldn't the A64's be just as fast when using CCE 2.5?

I was gonna get a A64 3200+/MSI K8N Neo Platinum combo but after reading this thread I think I'll order a Abit NF7-S and moble 2500+ for my encoding box.

[br408408]

My XP beats my P4 in the speed test by quite a bit....but, when backinig up a movie using DVD2AVI (DGIndex), AVISynth 2.5 and CCE 2.5 my P4 still wins. Might be because of the Hyper Threading on the P4C. I have tested using the same movie and the same versions of all the software.

[LB]

2 x XEON 3.6ghz @ 848mhz (17x218) 2.5,3,3,6

CCE 2.67 1.80

[shoarthing]

2.16

Dual Opteron 250s [2.4GHz] on an Iwill DK8N

CCE-SP 2.67.00.27

IGB 2-3-2-6 Reg/ECC: HT link CPU<>CPU @ 1000

[Diable]

Motherboard: Gigabyte K8N Pro| CPU: Athlon64 3200+ @2.20 Ghz(10*220)| Memory: 1GB of PNY PC3500| Hard Drive: Seagate 160GB SATA|

v2.67.00.23 Speed: 2.18

I couldn't believe the speed so I ran it three different times and got the same speed.

[cypher_soundz]

Wow! Are you sure the script is working correctly? I'm very impressed!
Regards
Cyph

[DDogg]

Diable, if you have the chance, would you get the free version of SiSoft Sandra and do the memory benchmark test? I suspect the score will be very high and may be a big part of your excellent speeds. [Hmm, I read in reviews this may not be so]

To give you a comparison, my Nforce2 dual channel @420 shows 3200 MB/s. Your Nforce3 chipset should be much faster.

[shoarthing]

"I suspect the score will be very high and may be a big part of your excellent speeds" - well, this dual Opteron thing 'scoring' 2.16 has a SSSandra memory bandwidth of around 5400MB/s & is running at 2.4GHz, so mebbe there's another reason - like, say, a later/better AVISynth?

[DDogg]

shoarthing, I am sure glad you mentioned that. I checked speeds using the latest Avisynth Alpha build and there is a significant difference between 2.54 and alpha 255 AviSynth_200804.

The speed of encoding the simple test script is slower using 2.55 alpha (AviSynth_200804) than with 2.54 release. Using 2.55 gives 1.763 RT and using 2.54 shows 1.994 RT using the machine settings below. It may not apply to a real encoding source, but it certainly does mess up these tests. We should stick to 2.54 for them.

/Add: Note - The AviSynth_260804 RC3 build seems to bring speeds back to close to an equivalent to 2.54. Still, I think we should stay with 2.54 for consistency, IMO.


ABit NF7-S Rev 2 | Mobile XP 2600 @2.688 Ghz (12.5*215) VCore 1.85 v |(2) 256 meg PC3500 HYP_X (11-2-2-2 VDim 2.8 v Dual Channel)

[LB]

@DDOG

I'm having a problem. The script no longer works for me, even on a clean install. I'm trying it with 2.67.00.27

Regarding CCE 2.67.00.27. The people that have used that version had to have "modified" the script somehow. Why? It loads fine, but it tries to do a 1+3 pass; meaning it tries to encode the vaf first. I get a speed of 660 (yes, 660) and then when it tries to save the vaf I get an error obviously because vaf_out=0 is turned off and vaf_file= is blank. The error says:

vinfo_open() failed.
*** Could not open the file <> ***
The system cannot find the path specified.
[Windows error code: 0x3 3]


I was finally able to get it working on 2.67.00.23 though with a little help from eclcce and score a big 1.70 with dual 3.6ghz @ 920fsb using 2.55 and with 2.54 I get 1.73.

[DDogg]

LB, I have not heard of anybody having any problems. 2.67.00.27 works fine for me. No 'mods' should be required except maybe the path if you don't have an HD "D" drive. That was the whole point of the exercise. Just load and press encode. Just in case, here is my exact ECL and exact avisynth script again:

Save everything between the lines as "CCESpeedTest01_CCE267.ecl"
; CCE SP Trial Version -- Encoder Control List

[item]
title=CCESpeedTest01.avs
vid_out=1
vaf_out=0
aud_out=0
aud_mode=0
vid_file0=D:\CCESpeedTest01\CCESpeedTest01_CCE267.mpv
vid_file1=
vaf_file=
aud_file=
file_focused=0
video_type=2
width=720
height=480
timecode=0x1000000
tc_ref_frm=0
drop_frame=0
cbr_brate=6000
opv_q_factor=32
opv_brate_min=300
opv_brate_max=8000
vbr_brate_avg=2230
vbr_brate_min=300
vbr_brate_max=2530
vbr_bias=30
vbr_pass=3
create_new_vaf=0
pulldown_detect=0
letter_box=0
panscan=0
aspect_ratio=2
credits_tweak=0
credits_start=0x00000
credits_brate=1000
h_filter=0
h_filter_idx=8
use_filter=0
filter_val=4
dither=0
dither_max=8
quality_prec=25
intra_dc_prec=2
alternate_scan=0
non_linear=1
progressive=1
gop_m=3
gop_nm=5
gop_hdr=15
seq_hdr=1
seq_endcode=1
dvd=0
all_closed_gop=0
fix_gop_length=0
fix_vbv_delay=0
offset_line=0
half_width=0
half_height=0
uscc=0
lum_level=1
packet_size=2048
frame_rate_idx=4
qmat_idx=0
mpeg1=0
mpeg1_cps=1
brate_idx=7
stereo=2
samples_per_sec=48000
crc=1

[file]
name=D:\CCESpeedTest01\CCESpeedTest01.avs
type=0
frame_first=0
frame_last=107892
encode_first=0
encode_last=107892
Save everything between the lines as "CCESpeedTest01.avs"
#start of CCESpeedTest01.avs
ColorBars (720,480)
ShowSMPTE(24)
converttoyuy2()
#end

So long as you use the exact scripts above [mod the paths or use the exact ones that I did] you should have no problem. If you do, I would guess you have something wrong with your installation of avisynth or CCE? Let us know what you find. Btw, what happens when you 'play' the avs script above in WMP or VDub? You may be throwing an error.

[DDogg]

I got a little motivated, bumped VDIM, Vcore, and chipset voltage, and jacked up my speed settings up to 2.74 gigaherz. It seems pretty solid so far. Interesting though, I only just barely cracked 2.01 realtime using CCE 2.50. The speed I mentioned in a previous post of 1.994 RT was achieved at 2.688 Ghz (12.5*215), presently I am at 2.74 Ghz (13*210 Vcore @ 1.925, Chipset Vdd @ 1.70). The slower memory speed of 420 versus 430 for my older settings seemed to nearly counter the increased CPU speed.

/Add: 2.67.00.27 results were 1.85 RT [better after reboot]

Still, not too shabby at all to reach over 10,300 MIPS with a $95.00 CPU on homemade watercooling using a $15.00 '95 ford pickup heater core and an $19.00 fountain pump from Lowes.

http://img70.exs.cx/img70/9418/6801.jpg
http://img69.exs.cx/img69/4167/cpu.jpg
http://img69.exs.cx/img69/2262/cpu-mm.jpg


ABit NF7-S Rev 2 | Mobile XP 2600 @2.74 Ghz (13*210) VCore @1.925 volt, Chipset Vdd @ 1.70 volt - SiSoft PR 3974 (Est.)/Model XP-3848 (Est.)|(2) 256 meg PC3500 HYP_X (11-2-2-2 VDim 2.9 v Dual Channel @ 420 MHz)

[influenza]

Hi DDogg nice initiative!

It's not a very fast reply but here are my results for CCE 2.67:

Initial test: 1.62
Test with the mpg file : 1.77

Amd Xp-m (mobile processor, desktop pc) 2600+ @ 2,5 Ghz (12,5 X 200 IIRC). Just on air cooling
1 GB pc 3200 on an asus board
2 IDE 7200 maxtor drives (not in a raid configuration)

[coona]

Hi influenza,

Test with the mpg file : 1.77
what does it mean? Real encoding speed? It differs only a little from this DDogg´s torture test :confused:. I guess there should be much bigger difference between test´s and real encoding speed.

BTW - Can we find some volunteer for sorting these result into a table? This thread is becoming little bit useless...

[influenza]

Hmm sorry, Real time encoding yes.

Well honestly not a test with only CCE busy (mirc, IE and MSN), but indeed not too much difference.

(On a side note: Normally i get speeds around 2.2 on progressive PAL dvd material and 2,6 on progressive NTSC dvd material. Interlaced material around 0,3 lower than that)

[DDogg]

BTW - Can we find some volunteer for sorting these result into a table? This thread is becoming little bit useless... coona, I completely agree that the results need to be compiled so we can go to the next step. Thanks so much for volunteering! You are awesome! I know you will do a great job. :D

I really screwed up when I mentioned the true source test and then left on a 2 week vacation. That caused a lot of confusion. That should really have been the second step. Maybe after these results are compiled we can move to real source as a second iteration of these tests in a completely separate thread if folks are still interested.

IMO, the results using the test script have been useful, even if not indicative of real world encoding. They do seem to show clear and replicatable values that can be used to compare and identify how to optimize similar platforms. [think dual channel vs single channel ram, tweaked ram timings, fsb speeds, etc.]

However, as was mentioned, it may be that this test does not clearly show the clear speed winner between dissimilar platforms using real source, like Intel vs AMD or chipset vs chipset. That will take a separate test using real source. Maybe we can try to put out heads together on how best to do that.

I'm not so sure if using an AVI might not be an interesting way to go about it. That would then remove having to create a d2v. Making a d2v worries me as there are now so many versions of mpeg2dec floating around on peoples machines. Clearly that would render all the tests suspect.

I'm thinking maybe we could generate a huffy AVI of the test script used for these tests? Then that source could just be popped into CCE. The upside of that would be the removal of AviSynth and mpeg2dec from the equation so that the multi-CPU folks could be better involved and show their true results.

I'm also thinking to get this to work and make sure the source AVI was exactly the same would require a command line for VDub that would generate the AVI equally for all? Thoughts? I'm still not clear on the best way to do it so that the results are clearly fair and unbiased.

@Flu, I went back and edited in my 2.67.00.27 results above for comparison. Sorry I left that out. Oh, are you dual channel ram? What ram timings?

[influenza]

Yes I have dual channel ram, guess I have to reboot for the timings though

[Diable]

Originally posted by DDogg
Diable, if you have the chance, would you get the free version of SiSoft Sandra and do the memory benchmark test? I suspect the score will be very high and may be a big part of your excellent speeds. [Hmm, I read in reviews this may not be so]

To give you a comparison, my Nforce2 dual channel @420 shows 3200 MB/s. Your Nforce3 chipset should be much faster.

Sorry I didn't respond faster but the motherboard in box died four days after I ran the speed test. I'm back to a 2.2GHz P4 so I can't run Sandra :(

[vipera]

My results using the original script test:

CCE 2.5: 1.920
CCE 2.67: 1.88

A64 3000+ @ 2470mhz (247x10)

[DDogg]

Originally posted by vipera

My results using the original script test:

CCE 2.5: 1.920
CCE 2.67: 1.88

A64 3000+ @ 2470mhz (247x10)
That's interesting. Using CCE 2.67.00.27 I am at 1.85 RT running at 2.74 gigahertz (210x13) whereas you are at 1.88 RT running at a lower 2.47 gigahertz but with the much higher FSB of 247 megahertz.

Your CCE 2.5 speed is about where I would think it would be, but your very fast speed of 1.88 with 2.67 would seem to indicate that 2.67 better utilizes the faster ram speeds [or maybe it just likes AMD 64's, or both].

[vipera]

Originally posted by DDogg
That's interesting. Using CCE 2.67.00.27 I am at 1.85 RT running at 2.74 gigahertz (210x13) whereas you are at 1.88 RT running at a lower 2.47 gigahertz but with the much higher FSB of 247 megahertz.

Your CCE 2.5 speed is about where I would think it would be, but your very fast speed of 1.88 with 2.67 would seem to indicate that 2.67 better utilizes the faster ram speeds [or maybe it just likes AMD 64's, or both].

Athlon 64 has SSE2. Not sure if it helps the Athlon as much as it does the P4, or if CCE even uses it.

In most applications the A64 is much faster than an XP at the same clock. In CCE it seems that for the most part only raw mhz matters, or maybe it could be optimized even more for A64 in the future. ;)

[djan]

My results using the original script test:

CCE 2.5 : 1.350

Using AviSynth 2.5.5, ASUS A7N8X-X, Barton 2600+ @ 1.91 Ghz (11.5 * 166), 512 DDRAM.

Is it a correct score ?

[djan]

Nobody is interrested anymore ?

[coona]

Uff. I sorted all (relevant) posts into table. Unfortunatelly in some posts there are not enough info (such as size of RAM, Dual/single channel mode, FSB speed). I guess (as Karovaldas suggest) there should be some additional variables which can help to analyze whole issue properly (his post is on page 5 (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=66134&perpage=20&pagenumber=5)). I hope that this attachment will be processed quickly by mods of this forum ;).

[influenza]

I don't see any attachments to approve?

[Turd_Ferguson]

alright. using CCE 2.67.00.27 and Avisynth 2.54, i ran 2 tests to see the difference OCing my P4 2.5GHz 400FSB (no HT) makes...

0.99 @ 2.5GHz 100FSB x4
1.18 @ 3.0GHz 120FSB x4

i was planning on upgrading to a socket 939 AMD64, but so far it looks like the 800FSB P4's are doing better at this test when OCed. Anybody run this test in the 64-bit WinXP?

oh yeh, this is the rest of my system:
Gigabyte GA-8IEXP mobo (single channel memory)
512MB DDR400 (mobo will only run it at ddr266 though:mad: )
1x WD 80GB 7200 8MB cache (boot drive)
2x Maxtor 200GB 7200 8MB cache in RAID-0 (ran the test with these drives)

i ran the test on my old P3 733MHz just for a laugh using the same versions of CCE & Avisynth and it got 0.25

[coona]

I don't see any attachments to approve?

Me too :confused:. But when I want to edit my post attachment seems to be present. I´ll do some update because of Turd_Ferguson´s inputs and I´ll post it again...

Here (http://web.firma.cz/~sedlacek/Doom9/A_Real_CCE_SpeedTest_Results.zip) is a link to download it form other source.

[influenza]

Hopefully I'll be more succesful posting the attachment

[DDogg]

coona, thanks for putting those results in a spreadsheet. Great job! Here is another result.

Recently I tested one of the modded bios for the NF7s V2 which allowed me to run at a higher FSB with my HyperX bh5 PC-3500 ram. The results bear out how important ram speed is.

For those that have followed this thread, my previous best speed was obtained with a 210 fsb and a 13X multiplier which yielded a CPU speed of 2.74 gigahertz. With these settings I was just able to break 2.010 RT with CCE 2.5, and 1.85 RT with 2.67.00.27.

With this new bios I was able to increase the fsb to 222 with a 12X multiplier yielding 2.64 gigahertz. I expected slightly lower scores with the lower CPU speed, but speeds actually increased [very slightly]. The increased fsb seemed to be what made the difference. SiSoft showed: http://img25.exs.cx/img25/4300/222x12_final.jpg

Speed test results were 2.015 RT with CCE 2.50 and 1.89 RT with CCE 2.67.00.27.


ABit NF7-S Rev 2 | Mobile XP 2600 @2.64 Ghz (12*222) VCore @1.85 volt, Chipset Vdd @ 1.70 volt |(2) 256 meg PC3500 HYP_X (11-2-2-2 VDim 2.9 v Dual Channel @ 444 MHz)

[coona]

New testing machine

CCE 2.5x: 1,201

Intel Creede D865PCD | Celeron D325 2,53 GHz (256/533) | PQI 256MB DDR - single channel

P.S. I can´t add an attachment again :confused:

A_Real_CCE_SpeedTest_Results.zip (http://web.firma.cz/~sedlacek/Doom9/A_Real_CCE_SpeedTest_Results.zip) (FSB and Multiplier added)

[influenza]

The attachments need to be validated by a mod before they show up. More specifically by a mod of this particular forum, so that's why ;)

[Turd_Ferguson]

so i got bored and ran DDog's test on every boxed computer set that is sold at my workplace. the results are in the attachment. i used Avisynth 2.54 and CCE 2.67.00.27.

The suprise of this test was the Celeron D powered Emachine that scored a 1.22. it's a $600 complete system that beats out my own friggin' OCed P4, but not for long... i will post the score on my new OCed and watercooled 2.8E as soon as i get my parts from newegg.

[DDogg]

Bumped settings up again and it made a little difference.

New data point for 2775 MHz (12.5 X 222):

CCE 2.50 = 2.064 RT
CCE 2.67.00.27 = 1.94 RT



ABit NF7-S Rev 2 | Mobile XP 2600 @2775 MHz (12.5*222) VCore @2.00 volt (actual), Chipset Vdd @ 1.70 volt |(2) 256 meg PC3500 HYP_X (11-2-2-2 VDim 2.9 v Dual Channel @ 444 MHz)

[soujir0u]

I get 1.835 with CCE 2.50.

My system specs are:

Athlon XP-M 2600+ at 2.4GHz (218x11) [1.675V]
1GB Corsair PC3200 Value Select at dual-channel 218MHz, 2.5-3-3-11 timings [2.7V]
Abit NF7-S v2.0 [1.6V]
Samsung 160GB 7200RPM PATA 8MB Cache

I could probably bump up my overclock for higher results but this is the setting I run it at for everyday use.

[coona]

i´m getting

CCE 2.5 : 2.130 RT

with AviSynth 2.5.5 with the same settings like my first testing months ago in this same thread at default XP 2400+(2.0Ghz) speeds!!

Are you sure you can get 2.13 with XP 2400+ at 2200MHz. What did you change from your last testing? Only version of AviSynth?

[Turd_Ferguson]

new system is complete! here are the specs:

3.2 prescott @ 3.76GHz (235FSB, HT enabled, 46C max temp)
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe (Turbo and PAT enabled)
1GB (512x2)OCZ DDR550 (running 1:1 ratio w/ FSB)
WinXP Pro SP1

now i can get a test score of 2.15 (CCE 2.67, Avisynth 2.54) when i raise the FSB up to 245, but CCE is too unstable to do a full encode at that speed. i normally get a real time speed of about 4.30 (4.17 while i'm writing this).

something to note: when i was building this system, i tried to match some of the "record high" test scores set by the P4 2.4C northwood. i was able to reach a stable 280FSB with a 2.4C, and was still running 1:1 on my memory ratio. but the best test score i ever got out of it was 1.51. so i want to know how the scores on this processor got so high.

anybody?

[KeyserSoze]

Originally posted by coona
Are you sure you can get 2.13 with XP 2400+ at 2200MHz. What did you change from your last testing? Only version of AviSynth?

I deleted my post...i did a mistake :P

[DDogg]

Turd_Ferguson, I've wondered about some of those P4 2.4C scores. Memory timing does play a large part on AMDs and CCE. I assume also for P4's. What are your timings? Btw, thanks for posting some results that can be depended upon.

Well, I got a Swiftech 6002-A water block and boy did it make a difference.
http://img101.exs.cx/img101/2876/2860_12kB.th.jpg (http://img101.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img101&image=2860_12kB.jpg)

No, I can't run 2860 on a daily basis unless it is colder outside so that I can open a window and have ambient < 24c, but it is Prime stable and I could run the CCE tests with no problem. This thing is cooking now! (proud papa) :).

CCE 2.5 = 2.1 RT. Finally!
CCE 2.67.00.27 = 1.98 Grrr! I really wanted to hit 2.


ABit NF7-S Rev 2 | Mobile XP 2600 @2860 MHz (13*220) VCore @2.125 volt (bios) | Chipset Vdd @ 1.70 volt |(2) 256 meg PC3500 HYP_X (11-2-2-2 VDim 2.9 v Dual Channel @ 440 MHz) | DIY Water cooled - Swiftech 6002-A block, Fedco 2-342 rad < O'Reilley Auto part # 399090 < $20.00

[Turd_Ferguson]

DDogg, i use 3-4-4-8. i haven't played around with these timings much since my system is fast enough for me right now, and it is rock solid stable.

btw, it was my understanding that the higher the frequency you run your memory, the less latency timings matter. from the tests i have tried w/ CCE, the things that seem to matter the most are the attributes of 1)processor cache size, 2)processor GHz, 3)HyperThreading, and 4)memory bandwidth.

[br408408]

Turd_Ferguson, WOW...that Prescott is crankin'. With the Northwood in my sig I found that CCE speed in RT is about = to CPU speed in ghz going from DVD>DVD (bit rate reduction)

DDogg, Just picked up a Swiftech 6002-P myself. can't wait to give it a try...gotta get the rest of my water cooling setup finished...already modded my 77 b'ville heater core to single pass. See pic (http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?p=3073711#post3073711) I'm sure my 3.0 has more in it as it is running at the my sig at less than 1.5 vcore. You might want to give a P4 with HT a try...even though an oc'ed XP mobile might beat a P4 in the sped test, I think a fast P4 will win when doing a real encode with DVD2AVI AVISynth and CCE

Bill

Edit: Running speed test my AMD system shown below beats my P4. But doing a real encode the P4 wins by about 2.8 to 3.3~3.5 RT


Abit NF7-S
XP2600 Mobile @ 230 X 11 = 2530 1.8 vcore L12 mod
Thermalright SLK900A w/Panaflo 92x25mm High Speed Fan 48C prime95 load
2x256 Twinmos w/ Winbond CH-5

[DDogg]

@Turd_Ferguson - Regarding the timings I did an experiment the other day. I used 8rdavcore (www.hasw.net) to adjust Trcd from 2 to 3 while running the test. I don't remember off hand exactly what the difference was, but it was readily apparent. I'm sure there is a utility like that for your board. It might be fun for you to play around with it.

@r408408 - Hey, nice mod job on the rad. I think my 342 is already SP, not sure. You may be right about the real world performance. One thing for sure though, the comparison source needs to be 4:3 full screen for them to be meaningful. Let me know how the 6002 does on your Intel. I wonder if it is handling the Prescott's OK? I read they are real heat generators. Sounds like TF is not having any problems though.

TF, are you WC, or air?

[Turd_Ferguson]

@br408408
man, i like my black ice extreme 2 and all, but i wish i could say that "i have parts from a 70's GM muscle car in my computer". that is bitchin'. it's even cooler if it makes your system smell like gasoline and oil.

next watercooled system i build is definatly gonna use components from some american street classic... like the AMC javlin.

@DDogg
watercooled, but just the processor. the Asus P4C800-E Deluxe uses passive cooling and never breaks 30C. this is what i have:
Swiftech MCP600 waterpump
Swiftech MCW5000-P waterblock
Bay-Res 5-1/4" half height bay reservoir
Black Ice Extreme 2 Radiator
this is all tied together w/ 1/2" ID tubing and connectors to maximize flow. btw, the MCP600 is an awesome pump.

[br408408]

@DDogg I have a 16:9 HDTV so I don't own any 4:3 material to test. A few years back, I knew that everything in the future was going to be 16:9 so I always bought all my movies in the 16:9 format. Also, I have sold the memory that was in my AMD computer, so it is not up and running right now, so I can't run any tests on it. I had problems running the CH5 in dual channel and not having CCE crash (at any FSB), but in single channel it (CCE) would run fine. So I sold it to someone that I built an Intel system for that would never be overclocked and it is running fine for them. I have not replaced it yet so my AMD is down. Sometimes my AMD would make it through a 3 pass encode with CCE in dual channel so I could get through a movie to see how fast it would run.
So my question is this:
I have the the same software installed in both my AMD and my Intel system:
DGIndex, DGDecode, AVISynth 2.54 and CCE 2.5 (I like the image quality of 2.5 better, even though the new versions of CCE do run faster on my P4, I don't use them)
I use CCE to do bit rate reductions when going from DVD9 to one DVD-R....so I do not resize or add borders like I used to do when I made SVCD's
My P4 at the speed shown in my sig is faster that my XP2600 Mobile @ 230 X 11 = 2530 when backing up the same movie (2.65~2.7 vs 3.1~3.2 for the P4) but the AMD is faster in your speed test. I think this is because the P4 with Hyper-threading is better at multi tasking (and I don't go for all of Intel's marketing BS... "hyper-threading", quad-pumped FSB...I "like" AMD better and would build a dual Opteron system if I had the money)
My question is, why are my "real-world" tests not valid because they are not 4:3. I could see if I added borders or resized...but I don't. I am not asking you this in any kind of a smart-a** way...I would just like to know. I respect your knowledge

Bill

Edit: Thanks for the complements on the heater core...I modded that core besause two 120mm fans fit very nicely on it.

[DDogg]

As for what you mentioned, so long as the source used to compare machines is exactly the same, the comparison ought to be accurate.

As for my comments, I was unclearly speaking to the comparison of speeds between the test 'source' which is 720x480 fullscreen color-bars, to real world source. It should be of the same active resolution - meaning it should be full screen material without black bars. I see many smart people say some real dumb things like, "This test is slow, I get x.xx on "regular" source without mentioning the particulars of the source. If a person is going to compare the full screen color-bar test to a full screen active source then fine (to what purpose I have no idea). What you can't do is compare the speeds from the test fullscreen color-bars script to a 16:9 DVD source with blackbars.


TF, and here I thought I was the only guy that thought the AMC Javelin was a very cool car back when.

[br408408]

@DDogg - I sure your color-bar test is accurate and i think our Mobiles at high clock speed and high fsb's do beat "faster" P4's. I think it is just when you add two more pieces of software into the mix (DGIndex & DGDecode) the hyper-threading of the P4 helps out. I wish someone (like Nvidia) made a nice dual cpu (SMP) chipset that we could run 2 Mobiles on, with a high fsb....I know I only dreaming, it's not going to happen. I would like to see what that would do with a real-world encode.

Bill

[LB]

Well you know, it would be interesting to test the accuracy of the speed test script. What do I mean? Well, lets get a person with an AMD and a P4. Encode the same movie to Huffy avi. Then send feed the movie into CCE. If the speeds aren't very close to identical, then it means that the video generated by the speed script is somehow "better" on an AMD than a P4.

Would be interesting to test out, no?

Oh, and just for the record, when doing a real encode I average about 7RT for 720x480 and around 8RT for 480x480. Not too shabby.

[Turd_Ferguson]

@LB
no fair! you've got twice the processors i have!
no, seriously, WOW. i knew that duallies were faster, but how do you get that kind of speed? i could understand it running 2 sessions of CCE simultaneously at over 4RT, but i had no idea you could get that kind of efficiency on a single session. also, what processor is a 2.4_LV?

another general question: whenever i am encoding fullscreen video, i get about 2.25RT, half what i get on 16:9 video. is this common for anyone else?

[LB]

Originally posted by Turd_Ferguson
@LB
no fair! you've got twice the processors i have!
no, seriously, WOW. i knew that duallies were faster, but how do you get that kind of speed? i could understand it running 2 sessions of CCE simultaneously at over 4RT, but i had no idea you could get that kind of efficiency on a single session. also, what processor is a 2.4_LV?

another general question: whenever i am encoding fullscreen video, i get about 2.25RT, half what i get on 16:9 video. is this common for anyone else?

"LV" simply means they are low-voltage xeon chips; which only means they are better overclockers. What's your source video? I always encode my video using virtualdub into a huffy avi file. Then I send this into CCE. That is the fastest way to encode a video.

[TuRiSOft]

CCE 2.50 : 1.285

CCE 2.67 : 1.21


AMD Athlon XP 2600+ @1917(Barton) : Asus A7V8X-X : FSB 333MHz : 768 Mb DRAM pc2700 2.5-3-3-7.

Screenshoot attached if allowed!

[jwu42]

Dell Latitude D600 (P-m 1.8 - 512MB PC 2700RAM)

CCE 2.50 = 1.183

I couldn't get 2.67 to work :rolleyes:

[Bob01605]

I created and loaded and ran the TEST avs file - At 3 minutes I had a CCE 2.5 speed of 5.156 with this test. Did I do this right? This is a new computer built for me by my nephew. Components listed below..

AMD Athlon 64 3400 processor
1 gig of DDR 400 memory
MCI motherboard
200 gig Western Digital SATA drive

When I now convert a widescreen movie from DVD to SVCD and DVD2SVCD converts to FILM I get CCE 2.5 speeds of about 2.9. If its a 4:3 conversion from DVD to SVCD and again FILM I am getting a CCE 2.5 speed of about 3.35

What speeds do others get with their computers? Did I do the speed test right ?

Bob

[br408408]

Look at your output file...I bet you have encoded an error message. Your speed test should come out slower than a real encode

Bill

[XadoX]

AMD 3200XP
1GB DDR333
Nforce2 Driver V5.1

http://www.8ung.at/xadox/forum/CCE250.gif

http://www.8ung.at/xadox/forum/CCE267.gif

a little bit too slow for an AMD XP3200, I think :(

[SniperKilla]

http://sniperkilla.home.comcast.net/CCE.jpg

1.764 on CCE 2.50

Athlon 64 3000+ s754 overclocked to 2200mhz
DFI lanparty ut nforce 3 250Gb mobo
512mb corsair valueselect pc3200 @ 220mhz 2.5-3-3-8

[SniperKilla]

1.820 after moving processor to 2250mhz and ram to 225mhz

1.841 @ 2290mhz and ram @ 229mhz