Thought XMPEG was supposed to be -faster-

[a13antichrist]

Now getting 8-9fps on XMPEG with EXACTLY the same settings.

Whatsmore I can't use the YUY2 overlay because I get the message "Overlay surface not available. If you have a video program open, try closing it", or something like that; can't remember exactly.

Thirdly, is there a Thunder.mism plugin for xmpeg?

Fourth, is there a guide for XMpeg anywhere yet??

Cheers..

[niad]

its fas for me

what processor do you have? i have a 750 p3 and do a normal enocding i 4 hours fr over 12-13 its much faster than the ordinary flask mpeg i think

niad

[a13antichrist]

I have a T-Bird @1.5Ghz; FSB is 150 & my memory is at CAS2. I get 11-13fps with Flask & Divx 4.12, and that drops to 8-9 when I switch it to XMPEG with the same settings.

[Trancemaster]

I think it's because Flask and XMPEG (DivX as well) are optimized for Pentium, not Athlon. I have a similar problem on my Athlon 1Ghz, and have not noticed any speed increase from Flask to XMPEG. I usually get about 8-12 fps in both.

[UncasMS]

i tested xmpeg a little yesterday and got some ~20fps using divx 4.11 + bessenham on a tbird @1333.

nandub + avisynth, however gave me ~25fps

still i prefer the quality nandub gave me using dvd2avi + full processing mode (~10-15fps)!

[a13antichrist]

Are you encoding the audio at the same time Uncas?
And you think the fact that I'm using the BiCubic filter rather than the Bressenham could have anything to do with it?


What I don't get though is that even if it doens't improve the speed over Flask, there's no way in hell it should slow it down. Whether it's optimised for PIII or Athlon or Transmeta is irrelevant as we're comparing Flask to XMPEG on the same machine.

[UncasMS]

i did NOT process audio at the same time!
xmpeg is a flask derivat (which makes it inferior by default ) and flask is known for not being able to handle sound (downsampling) properly at all. thus id would never ever let flask handle sound!

and yes bessenham or the much better bicubic filter make a big difference.
since anyone is stating his fps with defaults (which are crap [blurry]) i testet bicubic and bessenham and posted my results with the bessenham resizing filter.

my 10-15 fps with nandubd/dvd2avi are a result of using the best resizing filter [precise bicubic (not nearest neighbor blurry-like-hell-crap)] and full processing mode instead of the inferior (imho) fast recompres mode, that avisynth makes possible!

[a13antichrist]

Tha'ts another thing I don't get - in Flask, you had nearest neighbour, BiCubic, & HQ Bicubic (can't remember what the 4th on was), but in XMPEG you've got Bicubic & Bressenham.. so what happened to the HQ Bicubic?

[UncasMS]

no idea about HQ bicubic.

maybe it was simply renamed, maybe it was removed; i wouldnt know.

make a comparison of both kind of resizing filters. maybe you will be able to spot a difference!?