MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 decoder comparison - Page 5

IgorC · 15th February 2006, 16:48

Core AVC decoder has very high average speed. Faster than average ffdshow Xvid decoding PP4.
But it may be usefull to invistigate speed of the decoders in function of time.

I obtain some result with high-motion video :
1. Xvid ffdshow PP4 - approx. 70% of CPU usage
2. Core AVC decoder decoding x264 HP - average CPU was approx 50-55%.
But for example due to large number of ref. frames there were peaks of CPU usage (100%)

However I'm happy with a new Core AVC decoder

As a conclusion. Xvid had 70% of CPU usage but without 100% peaks.
Core AVC had higher decoding speed than FFdshow-Xvid speed but has some peaks on high motion due to long prediction (ref, weightb etc.).

As a result Core AVC has drop frame and/or not smooth playback.

Manao · 15th February 2006, 17:46

Drop frame / speed low peaks are due to bitrate surge, and only to that. The decoding time spent in the picture processing ( interpolation, deblocking, weighted, mref ) is *roughly* constant, while decoding time for cabac is *totally* proportionnal to the bitrate, and the bitrate can vary a lot.

IgorC · 15th February 2006, 18:26

ups. I had my doubt about it when thought about buffering in the RAM to avoid high bitrate peaks.

Sharktooth · 15th February 2006, 18:31

CABAC eats CPU cycles almost proportionally to the bitrate...

IgorC · 15th February 2006, 18:36

Yes. But in this case CABAC's performance depends more on fastness,size of RAM and BUS speed than on CPU.

BetaBoy · 15th February 2006, 18:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by bond

actually i think i indeed will add an asp sample to the comparison, encoded with slowest settings possible and decoded with the fastest asp decoder (which is ffdshow afaik)

bond.... i'll see once Toff has time for him to do a CoreASP DS port (I changed it from CoreMP4, as per your suggestion)... But we still need to add QPEL and GMC. You will find (like we have) that our ASP decoder is faster then any other ASP decoder atm. But its not fair outside of TCPMP till we get a DS filter so everyone can compare it.

iceloki · 20th February 2006, 02:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by bond

my cpu is a pentium3 866mhz

I think in nowadays most of the commercial codecs are optimized for Pentium4 (SSE2 enabled), SSE2 does improve the perfomance in a degree... So I think benchmark on a pentium4 is relative 'fair' ...

bond · 20th February 2006, 13:03

devs have stated that sse2 is hardly useable for avc decoding (eg libavcodec doesnt use sse2 at all for avc decoding)

IgorC · 20th February 2006, 20:00

Not sse2. But maybe isse. On Ateme HP encoder turned off isse CPU-instructions slowed down speed twice. Yes encoder and decoder are different things, but who knows...

akupenguin · 20th February 2006, 23:13

isse = mmx2 = mmxext. And yes, ffmpeg and x264 make much use of it. Most dsp functions have only an mmx2 implementation, not mmx1. Because it's such a pain to write mmx without pavgb and pshufw...

Hans Ohlo · 3rd March 2006, 09:40

has anyone got the intervideo h264 decoder working?

i tried it in windvd and as an directshow filter, but i couldn't get a picture from it.

(plus is tried the new nvida drivers with h264 acceleration, but also nothing)

bond · 3rd March 2006, 10:41

the intervideo decoder is an old version of the videosoft decoder i have in my comparison already

the last windvd build i checked (7.0.27.172, i think from this feb) still had that old build from 2004, which surely doesnt support the nvidia gpu

so unless there is a new windvd version out with new decoder you cant use it with nvidia

robU*4 · 18th April 2006, 17:01

Bond, did you get a version of CoreAVC to test ? How does it compare to the rest of the test ?

bond · 18th April 2006, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by robU*4

Bond, did you get a version of CoreAVC to test ? How does it compare to the rest of the test ?

i havent found the time to do the comparison till now :B

also i am waiting for elecard, so i guess it will take some time till i update the comparison

BetaBoy · 18th April 2006, 18:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by BetaBoy

bond.... i'll see once Toff has time for him to do a CoreASP DS port (I changed it from CoreMP4, as per your suggestion)... But we still need to add QPEL and GMC. You will find (like we have) that our ASP decoder is faster then any other ASP decoder atm. But its not fair outside of TCPMP till we get a DS filter so everyone can compare it.

Not sure if I posted a followup... but QPEL and GMC were added to CoreASP in the TCPMP RC1 release... we however need to add Post Processing.

SeeMoreDigital · 18th April 2006, 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by BetaBoy

but QPEL and GMC were added to CoreASP in the TCPMP RC1 release... we however need to add Post Processing.

May I test this please?

Cheers

BetaBoy · 18th April 2006, 22:00

http://picard.exceed.hu/tcpmp/test/t...32.0.72RC1.zip

ChronoCross · 18th April 2006, 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by BetaBoy

http://picard.exceed.hu/tcpmp/test/t...32.0.72RC1.zip

Ihaveabugreport.thisversionseemstodisablethespacebarwhileitisopen

In case you couldn't read it: This version disables the spacebar while the program is open. Windows XP pro SP2.

siddharthagandhi · 19th April 2006, 02:35

I have a relatively high end system what benefits would I see with a good decoder?

I have watched a lot of AVC content, and the decoder is probably Nero AVC or something like that (because I have Nero suite installed), and I haven't had any problems with playback.

Would there be a really good quality benefit, so good that I should go out and purchase CoreAVC? Because decoding speed isn't a problem, even at high bitrates (I have encoded at 16 mbps and played it back just fine).

Avish · 19th April 2006, 07:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChronoCross

Ihaveabugreport.thisversionseemstodisablethespacebarwhileitisopen

In case you couldn't read it: This version disables the spacebar while the program is open. Windows XP pro SP2.

Its was there in previous version also, I reported this almost 2 weeks back http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...623#post810623

15th February 2006, 16:48	#81 \| Link
IgorC Registered User Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,315	Core AVC decoder has very high average speed. Faster than average ffdshow Xvid decoding PP4. But it may be usefull to invistigate speed of the decoders in function of time. I obtain some result with high-motion video : 1. Xvid ffdshow PP4 - approx. 70% of CPU usage 2. Core AVC decoder decoding x264 HP - average CPU was approx 50-55%. But for example due to large number of ref. frames there were peaks of CPU usage (100%) However I'm happy with a new Core AVC decoder As a conclusion. Xvid had 70% of CPU usage but without 100% peaks. Core AVC had higher decoding speed than FFdshow-Xvid speed but has some peaks on high motion due to long prediction (ref, weightb etc.). As a result Core AVC has drop frame and/or not smooth playback. Last edited by IgorC; 15th February 2006 at 16:50.

15th February 2006, 17:46	#82 \| Link
Manao Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: France Posts: 2,856	Drop frame / speed low peaks are due to bitrate surge, and only to that. The decoding time spent in the picture processing ( interpolation, deblocking, weighted, mref ) is roughly constant, while decoding time for cabac is totally proportionnal to the bitrate, and the bitrate can vary a lot. __________________ Masktools x86 & x64: Stable (2.0a48) AVCMatrices : Stable (1.3) Anisotool : Beta (1.0a5)

15th February 2006, 18:31	#84 \| Link
Sharktooth Mr. Sandman Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Haddonfield, IL Posts: 11,768	CABAC eats CPU cycles almost proportionally to the bitrate... __________________ MPEG-4 ASP Custom Matrices: EQM V1(old), EQM AutoGK Sharpmatrix (aka EQM V2), EQM V3HR (updated 01/10/2004), EQM V3LR, EQM V3ULR (updated 04/02/2005), EQM V3UHR (updated 17/12/2004) and EQM V3EHR (updated 05/10/2004) Info about my ASP matrices. MPEG-4 AVC Custom Matrices: EQM AVC-HR Info about my AVC matrices My x264 builds. Mooo!!!

15th February 2006, 18:36	#85 \| Link
IgorC Registered User Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,315	Yes. But in this case CABAC's performance depends more on fastness,size of RAM and BUS speed than on CPU. Last edited by IgorC; 15th February 2006 at 18:39.

20th February 2006, 13:03	#88 \| Link
bond Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 9,770	devs have stated that sse2 is hardly useable for avc decoding (eg libavcodec doesnt use sse2 at all for avc decoding) __________________ Between the weak and the strong one it is the freedom which oppresses and the law that liberates (Jean Jacques Rousseau) I know, that I know nothing (Socrates) MPEG-4 ASP FAQ \| AVC/H.264 FAQ \| AAC FAQ \| MP4 FAQ \| MP4Menu stores DVD Menus in MP4 (guide) Ogg Theora \| Ogg Vorbis use WM9 today and get Micro$oft controlling the A/V market tomorrow for free

15th February 2006, 18:26	#83 \| Link
IgorC Registered User Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,315	ups. I had my doubt about it when thought about buffering in the RAM to avoid high bitrate peaks.

20th February 2006, 20:00	#89 \| Link
IgorC Registered User Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,315	Not sse2. But maybe isse. On Ateme HP encoder turned off isse CPU-instructions slowed down speed twice. Yes encoder and decoder are different things, but who knows...

20th February 2006, 23:13	#90 \| Link
akupenguin x264 developer Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,392	isse = mmx2 = mmxext. And yes, ffmpeg and x264 make much use of it. Most dsp functions have only an mmx2 implementation, not mmx1. Because it's such a pain to write mmx without pavgb and pshufw...

3rd March 2006, 09:40	#91 \| Link
Hans Ohlo Registered User Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 123	has anyone got the intervideo h264 decoder working? i tried it in windvd and as an directshow filter, but i couldn't get a picture from it. (plus is tried the new nvida drivers with h264 acceleration, but also nothing)

3rd March 2006, 10:41	#92 \| Link
bond Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 9,770	the intervideo decoder is an old version of the videosoft decoder i have in my comparison already the last windvd build i checked (7.0.27.172, i think from this feb) still had that old build from 2004, which surely doesnt support the nvidia gpu so unless there is a new windvd version out with new decoder you cant use it with nvidia __________________ Between the weak and the strong one it is the freedom which oppresses and the law that liberates (Jean Jacques Rousseau) I know, that I know nothing (Socrates) MPEG-4 ASP FAQ \| AVC/H.264 FAQ \| AAC FAQ \| MP4 FAQ \| MP4Menu stores DVD Menus in MP4 (guide) Ogg Theora \| Ogg Vorbis use WM9 today and get Micro$oft controlling the A/V market tomorrow for free

18th April 2006, 17:01	#93 \| Link
robU*4 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 84	Bond, did you get a version of CoreAVC to test ? How does it compare to the rest of the test ? __________________ Matroska Founder / CoreCodec developer

18th April 2006, 22:00	#97 \| Link
BetaBoy CoreCodec Founder Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: San Francisco Posts: 1,421	http://picard.exceed.hu/tcpmp/test/t...32.0.72RC1.zip __________________ Dan "BetaBoy" Marlin Ubiquitous Multimedia Technologies and Developer Tools http://corecodec.com

19th April 2006, 02:35	#99 \| Link
siddharthagandhi Go Nero Digital Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 466	I have a relatively high end system what benefits would I see with a good decoder? I have watched a lot of AVC content, and the decoder is probably Nero AVC or something like that (because I have Nero suite installed), and I haven't had any problems with playback. Would there be a really good quality benefit, so good that I should go out and purchase CoreAVC? Because decoding speed isn't a problem, even at high bitrates (I have encoded at 16 mbps and played it back just fine).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode