It appears you have not yet registered with our community. To register please click here...

 
Go Back [M] > Madshrimps > WebNews
x264 HD Benchmark Released x264 HD Benchmark Released
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


x264 HD Benchmark Released
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 15th March 2008, 15:41   #1
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,772
jmke has disabled reputation
Default x264 HD Benchmark Released

Simply put, it is a reproducible measure of fast your machine can encode a short, HD-quality video clip into a high quality x264 video file. It's nice because everyone running it will use the same video clip and software. The video encoder (x264.exe) reports a fairly accurate internal benchmark (in frames per second) for each pass of the video encode and it also uses multi-core processors very efficiently. All these factors make this an ideal benchmark to compare different processors and systems to each other.

What's x264? It's more or less the next generation Xvid/DivX codec for many people.

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=520
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2008, 15:48   #2
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,772
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

The original x264 benchmark encoded a 720x480 @ 1.823kbps clip
the x264 benchmark uses a HD source 1280x720 @ 3.963kbps

Stock Q6600 does it in ~2min
An Athlon XP 3200+ needs 13min
A P4 @ 3ghz needs 14+min
A P2 @ 450Mhz takes a while... 5hours12min

How fast can your PC decode the x264 HD sample?
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th March 2008, 10:01   #3
[M] Reviewer
 
thorgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,887
thorgal Freshly Registered
Default

Look for it in our next memory review(s) as well
__________________



thorgal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th March 2008, 18:18   #4
Faiakes
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I had a go with my laptop:

---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1442 frames, 22.40 fps, 3905.08 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1442 frames, 22.59 fps, 3905.08 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1442 frames, 22.51 fps, 3905.08 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1442 frames, 22.51 fps, 3905.08 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1442 frames, 5.61 fps, 3942.92 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1442 frames, 5.60 fps, 3942.92 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1442 frames, 5.61 fps, 3942.92 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1442 frames, 5.61 fps, 3942.92 kb/s


But it doesn't provide an overall time for completion ...
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th March 2008, 18:28   #5
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,772
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

ya, realized that too, I'm at 10fps for the RUN1PASS1, what CPU you got? ;
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th March 2008, 20:25   #6
[M] Reviewer
 
thorgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,887
thorgal Freshly Registered
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke View Post
ya, realized that too, I'm at 10fps for the RUN1PASS1, what CPU you got? ;
Testing Core 2 Quad at 3.2Ghz, figures in the high 60's for pass 1.
__________________



thorgal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th March 2008, 21:24   #7
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,772
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

A64+ 3000+ S754 is dated
E8300 ready for install!
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th March 2008, 20:04   #8
Liquid3D
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm still alittle confused by this as well. This is what I have running about ten different settings;

9x333FSB Q6600 P35C-DS3R Patriot DDR3-1600 running 1333MHz 7-7-7-20

---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 160.83 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 160.59 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 160.15 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 160.59 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 161.05 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.64 fps, 1829.42 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.77 fps, 1829.16 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.66 fps, 1829.24 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.56 fps, 1829.36 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.68 fps, 1829.15 kb/s


Next Q6600 7x400FSB Patriot DDR3-1600 running at 1600MHz 7-7-7-20

---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 154.82 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 155.25 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 155.26 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 155.47 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 155.47 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 40.24 fps, 1829.19 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 40.24 fps, 1829.31 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 40.32 fps, 1829.44 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 40.24 fps, 1829.45 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 40.19 fps, 1829.19 kb/s


Shouldn't the FPS be better in the latter benchamrk?
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th March 2008, 20:09   #9
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,772
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

3ghz vs 2.8Ghz, normal that the first run is faster, you got a 200mhz CPU advantage.

FSB/MEM hasn't been impacting performance for quite a while now...
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th March 2008, 20:15   #10
Liquid3D
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Here's a quick chart with all data.

The articloe is finished it's this I need help on. I deciced to forgo ViMArk until next (the DDR3 Round-Up).

Can you email / explain which figures you want me to use from this data?
Attached Thumbnails
x264-hd-benchmark-released-x264_all_figures.jpg

Last edited by Liquid3D : 18th March 2008 at 20:18.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat benchmark released - download mirrors jmke WebNews 0 19th November 2009 10:10
PhysX FluidMark Benchmark Released jmke WebNews 0 17th August 2008 16:27
HardwareOC Crysis Benchmark v1.3 Released jmke WebNews 0 22nd May 2008 13:49
3DMark Vantage DX10 Benchmark Released jmke WebNews 2 28th April 2008 23:51
SP2 for SiSoftware Sandra XII/2008 released jmke WebNews 0 8th April 2008 17:49
SP1 for SiSoftware Sandra XII released jmke WebNews 0 14th December 2007 10:11
Rydermark benchmark inches closer to release jmke WebNews 2 20th February 2007 18:30
RealStorm Global Illumination Benchmark 2006 Released jmke WebNews 0 6th March 2006 18:09
Futuremark Begins Development of New Vector Graphics Benchmark jmke WebNews 0 15th February 2006 10:42
Futuremark debuts smartphone benchmark jmke WebNews 0 11th July 2004 22:51

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:59.


Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO