Does Conroe score VERY LOW in audio/video encoding benchmarks?!

Dance123

Senior member
Jun 10, 2003
387
0
0
Hi,

Tomshardware review says the Conroe is great and all, however please check out the benchmarks over here: http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/...2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/page17.html

Am I seeing it correctly that in the Lame MP3 (audio encoding) benchmark, Conroe is scoring ALOT less fps then X2 and Pentium D?! Same with Divx (video encoding) benchmark?

Also, why do they use fps (= frames per second) in mp3/Divx benchmarks?

Please check out those benchmarks and explain them cause I don't understand them! Thanks!!
 

Dance123

Senior member
Jun 10, 2003
387
0
0
How do you mean cause I still don't get it.. in some benchmarks it scores highest, in the others I mentioned very low?! What's up with that?!
 

Dance123

Senior member
Jun 10, 2003
387
0
0
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Lower times = faster performance correct?
But doesn't "FPS" mean frames per second and shouldn't that be as high as possible?! They don't mention time as far as I see in the mp3 and divx benchmarks?

Am I seeing things wrong or what???

 

GuitarDaddy

Lifer
Nov 9, 2004
11,465
1
0
Yep several of the graphs are labeled wrong. They all have FPS as the Y axis, and several should have minutes. All of them except serious sam should be labeled minutes
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
They labled "FPS" when it should be labled "Min/Sec". Its not going to be 9 FPS. Look at the times, 2:33 is not 2 1/2 FPS...its 2 minutes and 33 sec.
 

aldamon

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2000
3,280
0
76
Dance123, haven't you figured out by now that Conroe is good at everything? Hehe.