Divx 5 vs Divx 3

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • De Joker
    Member
    Member
    • Aug 2002
    • 58

    Divx 5 vs Divx 3

    Is it normal for encoding with divx 5 to take longer than when encoding with divx 3. (Using GKnot)

    Reason why, i encoded a movie 114 minutes long for 2 cd's and it took about 3 hours and 37 minutes (using divx3), than i encoded a show 119 minutes long for 2 cd's with the same resolution (using divx5.02 with the pro settings) and it took 4 hours and 47 minutes.


    Also, does it make a difference in encoding speed if i set the processing level for virtualdub from "normal" to "higher" or "even higher"

    Thanks, Robert
  • Batman
    Lord of Digital Video
    Lord of Digital Video
    • Jan 2002
    • 2317

    #2
    Divx 5 is more resource intensive than divx 3.11 alpha.

    Also, does it make a difference in encoding speed if i set the processing level for virtualdub from "normal" to "higher" or "even higher"

    ---I think it would speed up encoding, however your system may become unstable.

    Comment

    • UncasMS
      Super Moderator
      • Nov 2001
      • 9047

      #3
      NO divx5 is not supposed to take longer!!

      you simply should NOT compare different material

      each and every film/dvd is different thus do not compare the time two different titles take, but use the same material for speed comparison or take it for granted, that A took longer than B

      different filter/resizer may be an additional factor
      or the use of for example psychovisual enhancement (crap anyway imho) may slow divx5 down.

      Comment

      • khp
        The Other
        • Nov 2001
        • 2161

        #4
        Enabling B-Frames and GMC does slowdown encoding a bit. And Q-pel slows the encoding alot.

        Originally posted by Batman

        Also, does it make a difference in encoding speed if i set the processing level for virtualdub from "normal" to "higher" or "even higher"
        No, this setting won't speedup encoding by more than 1-2% unless you got some other high priority CPU intensive task running.
        Donate your idle CPU time for something usefull.
        http://folding.stanford.edu/

        Comment

        • De Joker
          Member
          Member
          • Aug 2002
          • 58

          #5
          Well you guys were right, i did a 6 minute video clip and it took 13:32 with divx 5 (without psycho. vis. enh. and quart. pix.) and 14:47 with divx 3 so divx 5 is actually faster.

          But the strange thing is that the compressibilty check is alot faster in divx 3 than it is in divx5.

          Also it seems as if divx3 has become slower ever since i installed divx 5 and replaced the decomb.dll file with the newer version.


          Thanks, Robert

          Comment

          Working...