x264 amd64 [Archive] - Doom9's Forum

View Full Version : x264 amd64

Sirber

28th April 2005, 12:23

Is that code 32bit or 64bit?

celtic_druid

28th April 2005, 13:22

64bit. It should be autodetected (X86 64 OS) when you run ./configure. Also it requires yasm instead of nasm.

At least that is my understanding.

Sirber

28th April 2005, 14:19

This is for cli only, since VFW is 32bit IIRC.

celtic_druid

28th April 2005, 14:52

For *nix only I would have thought which would rule out VfW anyway.

pogo stick

28th May 2005, 17:18

I'm sorry for clueless question, but I don't know much about cpu stuff. Do these changes bring anything for Athlon 64 and windows xp x64 user?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
r225 | pengvado | 2005-05-11 19:58:00 +0200 (Wed, 11 May 2005) | 3 lines

port recent MC asm changes to amd64.
patch by Josef Zlomek.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
r217 | pengvado | 2005-04-25 20:39:32 +0200 (Mon, 25 Apr 2005) | 4 lines

cosmetics.
silence some gcc warnings.
amd64 doesn't need a separate copy of the c/h files, only the asm.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
r213 | pengvado | 2005-04-19 20:44:42 +0200 (Tue, 19 Apr 2005) | 3 lines

amd64 asm patch, part2.
by Josef Zlomek ( josef dot zlomek at xeris dot cz )

------------------------------------------------------------------------
r212 | pengvado | 2005-04-19 20:35:45 +0200 (Tue, 19 Apr 2005) | 2 lines

amd64 asm patch, part1.

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

Did anyone try to compare 32 and 64 bit versions?
Is 64 bit version available for download anywhere?

Thanks in advance.

Sirber

28th May 2005, 17:33

Yes. Those change are for amd64 in 64bit mode. They can be used in CLI version, but no one compiled one.

pogo stick

28th May 2005, 17:40

Interesting, what will be the possible speed improvements?

Sharktooth

28th May 2005, 17:41

sorry, no. they're for *nix only.
windows x64 is not supported.

Sirber

28th May 2005, 17:47

my bad, sorry :)

Hans Ohlo

21st August 2006, 13:29

hi,
i dug this up to ask if the windows x64 build is now usable? and are there speed improvements over the x86 versions due to the 64bit architecture yet?

Audionut

21st August 2006, 16:14

There's a dirty great big thread started by the 64bit mut (aka KRP) somewhere. Use search.

Kostarum Rex Persia

21st August 2006, 17:01

Yes, you can find it here, http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=97531&highlight=x264+64bit

Hans Ohlo

22nd August 2006, 08:33

ok i see.

i got the source yesterday and dug a little into it to see if the 64bit asm is in place. but i think it is not windows compatible at this time. would have been great to use the spare power of the architecture for the encodes. so i think i have to wait, because i can't contribute much time to this as i would like :/. but keep up the good work so far, maybe a good win asm dev i coming around some time...

squid_80

22nd August 2006, 09:04

I updated last week: http://okejl.dk/dunstan/x264cli_x64.zip

Hans Ohlo

22nd August 2006, 13:37

cool, please keep these build up to date.

THX

Kostarum Rex Persia

23rd August 2006, 22:54

squid_80, can you, please, update VFW build of x264 64-bit codec to support dual-core machines and new optimizations.

Thank you.

ChronoCross

24th August 2006, 04:42

please don't squid_80

omion

24th August 2006, 06:33

I updated last week: http://okejl.dk/dunstan/x264cli_x64.zip
What version is that?

I remember when I was compiling some 64-bit builds, I had to add the SVN version to the help string manually to make it show up.

squid_80

24th August 2006, 06:37

I think it's r551 or r552. It might have some bugs, I found a few SSE2 functions I missed updating and they didn't trigger anything here because they only get used for intel cpus.

Kostarum Rex Persia

24th August 2006, 14:22

ChronoCross, please, don't be stupid. If you don't want updated x264 VFW for 64-bit machines, that doesn't mean that I, or anyone else don't want it.

squid_80, when you find some free time, please update VFW build. Thank you.

Sirber

24th August 2006, 14:37

@Kostarum Rex Persia

VFW is not updated anymore. It is really time you upgrade.

shon3i

24th August 2006, 15:11

@Kostarum Rex Persia

VFW is not updated anymore. It is really time you upgrade.
Why Sirber, most ppls don't think that, look only x264.nl votes

Current

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/5834/x264rc6.jpg

I use MeGUI for encoding, but sometimes i use WFV for direct capturing, now i have x64 windows installed and i wanna to capture to see speedup.

Sharktooth

24th August 2006, 15:37

Revgen

24th August 2006, 15:47

True, but there are several workarounds for captures.
For example you can capture with a lossless codec and then use megui or whatever to get your AVC encode... you will get a much much better quality.

Yep huge HDD drives are getting cheaper everyday now. Lossless works better for editing than using VFW lossy codecs now.

shon3i

24th August 2006, 16:04

True, but there are several workarounds for captures.
For example you can capture with a lossless codec and then use megui or whatever to get your AVC encode... you will get a much much better quality.
True, but crf 18-26 give me very good quality for tv capture indeed. Aslo i don't have so big HDD, to capture to Lossless, and i capture without b frames, to reduce b frame lag.

Newermind on that i give my vote to CLI.

Kostarum Rex Persia

24th August 2006, 17:06

Sharktooth

24th August 2006, 17:14

The poll on x264.nl doesnt say users want further development of VFW codec nor 32 bit or 64.
The poll says there are still about half of the x264.nl visitors (only a part of x264 users) that still use x264 VFW.
And since it's based on cookies (and they can be deleted on the client side) and they're set to expire (in 24h?), the vote can be issued multiple times... so it's not indicative at all (maybe the votes for VFW are all yours? :p).

ChronoCross

24th August 2006, 18:24

shon3i, thank you for supporting me. Yes, and I use very often x264 for capture, in 384x288 resolution.

And, votes on x264.nl shows that users WANT further development of VFW codec, 32 or 64-bit.

But, Doom9 is very strange forum, with some peoples who doesn't respect user wishes, so....

As for your don't be stupid comment I'm tired of people like you ruining gooid projects by wanting them to stick with something because your too lazy to put in the effort to use the new stuff. One day I hope akupenguin removes the damn vfw from svn entirely.

Sharktooth is right. A majority of the people who use x264 do so using the cli. The VFW fanboys are probably children and or people trying to work in the scene and don't want to bother changing their established encoding methods.

as for 64 bit I can't see anyone using windows XP x64 full time....there isn't alot of software for it and especially with avisynth you basically have to build everything from scratch. Once vista comes out and once avisynth 3.0 comes out there will be a definite shift to 64 bit in the encoding world but I don't see it coming anytime soon. Plus the speed benefits aren't as huge as one might think.

Sirber

24th August 2006, 18:37

:goodpost: :stupid:

XP64 makes no sense for workstation. Too many missing things. Best keep good old 32bit and upgrade CPUs :D

squid_80

25th August 2006, 01:17

squid_80, when you find some free time, please update VFW build. Thank you.
It's hard enough for me to keep the CLI up to date without worrying about the VFW interface as well. I suggest you use a 64-bit build of ffdshow for x264 vfw encoding.

Kostarum Rex Persia

25th August 2006, 19:58

Ok, but I want to use x264 vfw for capture from my TV card.

Sirber

25th August 2006, 20:11

Ok, but I want to use x264 vfw for capture from my TV card.
squid_80 has nothing to do with that

Audionut

25th August 2006, 22:07

I suggest you use a 64-bit build of ffdshow for x264 vfw encoding.
Ok, but I want to use x264 vfw for capture from my TV card.

Unreal. :(

You remind me of most children I know.

The only thing that comes out of there mouth also is, "I Want".

LoRd_MuldeR

25th August 2006, 23:01

Kostarum Rex Persia

26th August 2006, 02:43

This Flame-War about VfW is going on at this forum since I first came here :rolleyes:

But if you like VirtualDub, you will love Avidemux! And no need of VfW :D

Yes, that's true. I already use Avidemux 2.3 beta builds, but not that often. Do you know, LoRd_MuldeR, what mean plan to do with Avidemux? Can he, in the future, implement capture support in Avi Demux, like VirtualDub did long ago?

@ Audioknot

On my Windows XP 32-bit I already capture TV program from my TV card directly in x264 codec, but with lower settings and 384x288 resolution.

Sirber

26th August 2006, 04:17

you need a better CPU, or a better card, XP64 don't make things much faster...

LoRd_MuldeR

27th August 2006, 23:43

Yes, that's true. I already use Avidemux 2.3 beta builds, but not that often. Do you know, LoRd_MuldeR, what mean plan to do with Avidemux? Can he, in the future, implement capture support in Avi Demux, like VirtualDub did long ago?

Well, best thing is you ask mean himself. But I think Captureing is a very platform specific task! Under Windows we use either DirectShow or Video for Windows interface for captureing. Since Avidemux is completely cross-platform, I highly doubt it will ever support captureing via DShow/VfW. Got no idea if there's a way to capture with direct hardware access or if there's a cross-platform Capture-Lib available. Maybe they never planned to make Avidemux a capture application. Really not sure about that.

I personally capture with my MPEG-2 encoder card. So I use that app that came with the board (WinTV) to capture. That app is anything but good, but it does it's job. And once the MPEG-2 files is on my HDD, I can use Avidemux for postprocessing and encoding :)

//EDIT

Getting off topic. Srry.