AMD & Intel CPU Video Encoding Benchmarks

[nFury8]

FWIW, digit-life.com put up some video encoding benchmarks for Intel & AMD Cpu's (http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/intelamdcpuroundupvideo/index.html). Could be useful to some hardcore encoders.:)

[Doom9]

unfortunately, as usual the results are not reproducible because neither settings nor source have been indicated. And I wished they'd have included a lot more top of the line CPUs in the 2.8 - 3.2 GHz area.

[Herske]

A duron 1400 is faster then p4@ 2.4C when encoding with xvid? I think they made some mistakes configuring the codec. Big mistakes!

[vinkes]

Originally posted by Herske
A duron 1400 is faster then p4@ 2.4C when encoding with xvid? I think they made some mistakes configuring the codec. Big mistakes!

I don't think so, xvid is optimized for amd processors. Divx for intel processors. Although the difference is quite big, yeah.

[Koepi]

XviD is optimized for P4, P3 and AMD processors.

Please, inform yourself correctly before wrting such stuff. It seems true though that divx doesn't spend much time on AMD optimizations but prefers intel.

Regards
Koepi

[temporance]

Originally posted by Koepi
Please, inform yourself correctly before wrting such stuff. It seems true though that divx doesn't spend much time on AMD optimizations but prefers intel.FWIW, DivX, Real, WM9, VP6 all get help with optimizations from the engineers at Intel and at AMD. So all commercial codecs are pretty well optimized for both.

As I said in another thread, such comparisons are meaningless unless you intend to use the exact same codec version and settings as was used in the test. E.g. Intel might be better for VHQ1 and AMD might be better for VHQ2.

The differences mainly come down to how different codecs manage their dataflow and hence memory usage. This is an architectural thing and can change with settings.

[Doom9]

Maybe I should race my 2.8 GHz Intel Notebook against the Athlon XP 2800+ after all even though it isn't that fair. But if DivX is indeed "biased" towards P4s and XviD isn't, the old "Intel is better at video" coding has to be questioned. I wonder if those heavily intel optimized softwares actually recognize the Athlon 64 as SSE2 compatible and use the proper optimizations.. this wasn't the case when the Athlon XP first came out.

[vinkes]

Originally posted by Koepi
XviD is optimized for P4, P3 and AMD processors.

Please, inform yourself correctly before wrting such stuff. It seems true though that divx doesn't spend much time on AMD optimizations but prefers intel.

Regards
Koepi

Sorry for my post, I actually meant to say xvid prefers amd and divx prefers intel. It has offcourse nothing to do with optimizations.

[lexor]

for those who wanted their set ups:

XviD (http://www.digit-life.ru/cpu/method/misc/video-encoding/xvid.shtml)

DivX (http://www.digit-life.ru/cpu/method/misc/video-encoding/divx.shtml)

WMV9 (http://www.digit-life.ru/cpu/method/misc/video-encoding/wmv9.shtml)

MainConcept (http://www.digit-life.ru/cpu/method/misc/video-encoding/mainconcept.shtml)

Canopus ProCoder (http://www.digit-life.ru/cpu/method/misc/video-encoding/canopus.shtml)

[Teegedeck]

Could anyone tell me why the P4's MMX extensions should be switched off for that XviD benchmark?

[Solo]

Yes an interesting review there. I was just wondering how much the SSE3 instructions of the Prescott is going to affect encoding. Intel already claim the Prescott will be a much faster encoder. How will SSE3 work with current app's as I'm sure current app's are not optimised for it or will they be in future ?

[nFury8]

Originally posted by Doom9
I wonder if those heavily intel optimized softwares actually recognize the Athlon 64 as SSE2 compatible and use the proper optimizations.. this wasn't the case when the Athlon XP first came out.

Seems likely that A64's SSE2 capabilities are being recognized, though it still cannot outperform the P4's that it's squared against, which is understandable enough. But the Athlon 64 scales so well with every clock speed bump though. Some apps optimized for Intel and SSE2 are 3D rendering softwares, some figures bear this out: here (http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2004q1/athlon64-3400/index.x?pg=8),here (http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=a64fx51&page=6), and here. (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1426437,00.asp) And although I couldn't find any benchmark on Adobe's Premiere Pro, it would have been interesting to see the figures, since its known that Premiere Pro has been completely rewritten to favor Intel.