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

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?

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

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 ...

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.

A64+ 3000+ S754 is dated ;)
E8300 ready for install!

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?

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...

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?