Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
graysky

x264 video encoding benchmark

Recommended Posts

CPU: E6600 @ 8x445=3560

Chipset: nVidia 680i

RAM: 2x1GB @ 445, 4-3-3-10-2T

OS: XP Pro SP2

 

---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 103.36 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 103.84 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 103.64 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 103.64 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 103.55 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 25.00 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 25.02 fps, 1826.36 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 25.03 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 25.06 fps, 1826.26 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 25.06 fps, 1826.36 kb/s

 

 

nice, from a 68.90, 16.59 on my Opteron 170 to a 103.71, 25.05 on my E6600, a 51% increase in x264 encoding power :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

E6400 @ 3.2GHz

Gigabyte GA-965P-DS4 (Intel P965 Express)

2x1GB Mushkin HP2-6400 @ 400MHz @ 4-4-4-11-2T

Gigabyte HD2900XT 512MB

Windows XP Pro SP2

---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 87.93 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 87.86 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 88.21 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 88.14 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 88.14 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 21.69 fps, 1826.26 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 21.65 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 21.68 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 21.68 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 21.71 fps, 1826.21 kb/s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated the tables with another 45 nm chip: the QX9650 -- both at stock levels and @ overclocked to 4.2 GHz! With it, and the others (Xeon E5330 (Dual board), Q9550, and Q9350) there is now data on 4 different 45 nm chips.

 

One thing that I found striking about these new chips is that they are only marginally faster than their 65 nm counterparts when encoding x264 (about 5-6 % faster with all other factors being equal or close to equal). Have a look at the general trends table for the Kentsfield vs. Yorkfield comparison at the official host.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I put together a self-contained x264 video encoding benchmark. Techarp kindly agreed to host the file and results at this URL.

 

Basically, you run the test encode and it will report back frames-per-second values for your machine @ it's clock/overclock level. You can run it at your stock settings and at your overclock settings to see how your machine compares to others in the database.

 

The database is small right now (as of 08-sep), but as you guys report in results, I will populate it. My goal is to have a representative set of data for many different chips and chipsets. Hopefully, we'll get some Penryn and Phenom data when they become available. Also, if anyone out here has some of the high end AMD chips, please contribute. Instructions and the file are at that url.

 

Also, please report your results here in this thread. I will keep the data at that url to keep things simple.

 

Thanks all.

 

For some reason my pc won't let it run????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, thanks to all who contributed data.

 

24-Feb-2008 - Finally updated the data tables on the x264 benchmark page. They are now html based (not .gif images) which makes my life updating them much easier and I will keep this tables up-to-date daily as people post results. Have a look at the 'Data Tends' table that contains a look at the Phenom quad vs. both Kentfield and Yorkfield quads. There are also some comparisons of Wolfdale dual vs. Conroe dual, and some other good stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×