• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

x264 video encoding benchmark

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
You might want to check the numbers on that table. For instance, one of the E6850's is actually 9x435 not 6x435. The reporter has Speedstep on and reported the idle frequency.
 
Some old stuff for ya?

FX60 @ 2.6GHz 1.37v Windows XP SP2 13x200 3-3-3-8


---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 70.18 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 70.31 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 70.31 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 70.62 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 70.58 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 17.22 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 17.30 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 17.20 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 17.01 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 17.23 fps, 1826.37 kb/s
 
@ ironic - thanks for the results... what chipset is your board using and what is the speed your memory is running at (400 MHz?) You can get both from CPU-Z.
 
Once more with better details..
E6400@2666MHz (8x333) 2MB L2, Gigabyte P35-DS3, 2*1GB DDR2-800@800 5-5-5-18, WinXP SP2 32-bit


---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 77.20 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 77.09 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 77.25 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 77.09 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 77.14 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.73 fps, 1826.27 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.73 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.69 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.74 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.73 fps, 1826.37 kb/s
 
interesting! 🙂
specs:
q6600 b3 @ 8 x 393 = 3.144ghz
gigabyte 965p-ds3 f12 bios
2 x 1gb corsair xms pc6400 5-5-5-15 (4-4-4-12 @ ddr2-786mhz)
xp pro sp2


---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 162.94 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 162.46 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 163.18 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 162.94 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 163.18 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 43.74 fps, 1829.09 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 43.66 fps, 1829.27 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 43.86 fps, 1829.20 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 43.83 fps, 1829.15 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 43.86 fps, 1829.54 kb/s
 
Originally posted by: graysky
@ ironic - thanks for the results... what chipset is your board using and what is the speed your memory is running at (400 MHz?) You can get both from CPU-Z.
Click to expand...
nforce 4 chipset, 400MHz on the memory.
 
Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 10.0 x 201.0 MHz, nForce4, 2GB 3-3-3-7, XP Pro SP2


---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 51.73 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 51.94 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 51.87 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 51.77 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 51.80 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 12.33 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 12.44 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 12.42 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 12.44 fps, 1826.20 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 12.23 fps, 1826.38 kb/s
 
Heres some new tests after I bumped my speed up to 3.4ghz.


---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 96.75 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 96.58 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 96.58 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 96.83 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 96.42 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 23.66 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 23.55 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 23.71 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 23.63 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 23.66 fps, 1826.37 kb/s


E6750 @ 3.4GHZ 425x8(Put 1.4v in bios but shows 1.36v in speedfan/cpuz?), 2gb Crucial Ballistix DD2 4-4-4-12 @ 850mhz, Windows xp sp2
 
Xeon 5150 (x2) Woodcrest, 8x332.5, 5000X, 4-4-4-12 @ 533 Mhz, Server2003 SP1


---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 112.83 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 121.01 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 120.88 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 120.10 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 120.88 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 35.21 fps, 1829.49 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 35.29 fps, 1829.44 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 33.17 fps, 1829.31 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 35.09 fps, 1829.40 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 29.95 fps, 1829.43 kb/s

It's a Dell PowerEdge 2950 with two Xeon 5150's running at 2.66GHz
with 4 sticks of 1024MB FB-DDR2 PC2-4300 (266MHz) made by Hyundai
CAS:4.0
RAS to CAS:4
RAS Precharge: 4
tRAS:12
tRC:16

Mobo Mfg: Dell
Model:0CW954 A00 Rev.12
Chipset: Intel 5000X
Southbridge: Intel 6321ESB

 
As of 20-Sep-2007, we have data on over 100 Intel-based systems and on over 40 AMD-based systems. There are a few trends I picked-up on while browsing through the database. I put them into a single table and color coded them to make them easier to see. If you see a trend I missed, lemme know and I'll add it to the table.

Request: we don't have a single example of a machine that has both WinXP and WinVista on it. If you have a dual-boot setup, it would be cool to see the difference the O/S makes. Another missing trend is a 32-bit O/S vs. the same O/S that's 64-bit.

On to the table:

Table

Yellow: Nearly 1:1 increase by adding an additional processor to a dual-chip MB
Orange: Some operating systems seem to handle x264 more efficiently than others
Red: Insignificant gain by upping the DRAM speed by 50 %
Blue: For the most part, these chips scale in a pretty linear fashion
Green: Tighter/looser memory timings have a pretty insignificant effect
Purple: Keeping the same over-all clock speed using a different combo of multiplier and FSB can give pretty insignificant gains

Again, I only gave this a once-over look; please point out any trends you see that I missed and also don't forgot about the O/S request!

Thanks again to all who contributed!
 

---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 190.34 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 190.67 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 193.62 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 193.64 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 193.64 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 52.61 fps, 1829.39 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 52.98 fps, 1829.02 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 52.88 fps, 1829.04 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 53.01 fps, 1829.47 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 52.93 fps, 1829.50 kb/s

Xeon X3220 @ 420x9 (not final OC, this is the latest prime stable)

Rest of info is in sig.
 

---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 195.31 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 194.66 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 194.66 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 197.03 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 197.38 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 53.26 fps, 1829.52 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 53.49 fps, 1829.31 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 53.46 fps, 1829.02 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 53.98 fps, 1829.39 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 53.95 fps, 1829.54 kb/s

425x9
 
Request: we don't have a single example of a machine that has both WinXP and WinVista on it. If you have a dual-boot setup, it would be cool to see the difference the O/S makes. Another missing trend is a 32-bit O/S vs. the same O/S that's 64-bit.
Click to expand...

Oh I can do that. Didn't realize you'd want something like that. I'll post a bench later.
 
Originally posted by: ChronoReverse
Request: we don't have a single example of a machine that has both WinXP and WinVista on it. If you have a dual-boot setup, it would be cool to see the difference the O/S makes. Another missing trend is a 32-bit O/S vs. the same O/S that's 64-bit.
Click to expand...

Oh I can do that. Didn't realize you'd want something like that. I'll post a bench later.
Click to expand...

The only way i can see that making a difference is if we have a 64 bit encoder to work with.

As it's using the same DLL either way, the only theoretical difference could be a slight amount of OS overhead.
 
That's probably the point: to see how much overhead difference there is between Vista and XP. I'd suspect it to be minscule but I'll see.
 
C2D E4300 @ 3.501GHz (9 x 389MHz FSB)
Abit IP35-E/P35 chipset
5-4-4-11-2T @ 486MHz RAM speed

average for Vista Business 32-bit in high performance mode:
99.98 fps @ 1850.89 kb/s (difference of 0.98 fps between high and low)
24.54 fps @ 1826.37 kb/s (difference of 0.46 fps between high and low)

average for XP Pro SP1 32-bit in desktop mode:
101.76 fps @ 1850.89 kb/s (difference of 0.46 fps between high and low)
24.73 fps @ 1826.38 kb/s (difference of 0.06 fps between high and low)

WXP SP1 is a little faster with much lower standard deviation between tests. This speed increase is equivalent to about 160MHz CPU core speed.

Tested with an as-loaded image file with drivers for MB and windows.
 
Cef from doom 9 has a 64 bit version of the x264 encoder available, would it be possible for some of you 64biters to get that and give us a report of some numbers? (You might need to get his 32 bit version for comparison as well as they have been modified)
 
Originally posted by: AcanthusThe only way i can see that making a difference is if we have a 64 bit encoder to work with.

As it's using the same DLL either way, the only theoretical difference could be a slight amount of OS overhead.
Click to expand...

You'd also need a 64-bit version of avisynth.
 
Windows XP Pro x64

Q6600 @ 3.0GHz (333*9)
eVGA 680i SLI
4 GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2-1066 PC2-8500 (533MHz)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 156.10 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 158.77 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

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

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 159.92 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 159.67 fps, 1850.94 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.40 fps, 1829.22 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.53 fps, 1829.17 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.58 fps, 1829.33 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.46 fps, 1829.10 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 42.43 fps, 1829.07 kb/s

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top