digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]

digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives] (http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/)
-   Avisynth Scripting (http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/avisynth/)
-   -   How to get faster Encoding Times... (http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/avisynth/2003-how-faster-encoding.html)

Jellygoose 01-01-2003 02:56 PM

How to get faster Encoding Times...
 
Hi all!

this probably doesn't belong here but...
I was wondering how I could achieve a faster encoding time.
I have an Athlon XP1800+ w/ 256MB Infineon Ram...

I assume there is no other way than getting a new CPU... Well if there are any TMPGEnc software tweaks (or OS tweaks) which I should know about, please let me know guys... :lol:

Daagar 01-01-2003 06:06 PM

I've read that you can turn on some of the mutithreading options in TMPGEnc even if you only have a single CPU and see some performace gain, but other than that you are somewhat limited by how optimized the avisynth filters are, the amount of resizing you are doing, and then of course your CPU and RAM. SansGrip has mentioned he may eventually do some optimization of his filters in the future which may help, but who knows how much difference it would make...

SansGrip 01-01-2003 07:05 PM

If you're using the latest FluxSmooth it's already very highly optimized in assembly language. Blockbuster is still in C++, but is very speedy already. And Sampler should have essentially zero impact on encoding time :).

jorel 01-01-2003 09:15 PM

if you ever use the "resise" first on the script :
faster,but more final size!
:wink:

conquest10 01-01-2003 09:45 PM

i use resize in my script and i don't notice any difference in times. maybe just 2-3 minutes.

Gaudi 01-01-2003 09:51 PM

I have noticed that CPU priority does not affect very much the encoding. I have noticed that TMPEG uses almost 99 percent of the CPU time, so I donīt think the times can be reduced.

BTW, I am using Athlon Thunderbird 1.33 GHz, 512 mb ram.

Gaudi

SansGrip 01-01-2003 10:15 PM

If using many Avisynth processing filters (smoothers, etc.), you'll find a significant performance boost by placing them after the resize instead of before.

Some people claim this makes smoothers too aggressive, so either turn down the settings a little or run the smoother before the resize, if you find it a problem.

jorel 01-01-2003 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SansGrip
If using many Avisynth processing filters (smoothers, etc.), you'll find a significant performance boost by placing them after the resize instead of before.

Some people claim this makes smoothers too aggressive, so either turn down the settings a little or run the smoother before the resize, if you find it a problem.


".....placing them after the resize instead of before."

yes,sometimes you get 1/3 of gain in time in this way,
i do tons of tests,remember my (old) list of scripts?

"...or run the smoother before the resize, if you find it a problem."

yes Sansgrip, i'm with you,
but to get time put "resise" first,right?
:wink:

Jellygoose 01-02-2003 05:15 AM

Well I could upgrade my RAM to 512MB for a great price... I wonder if it would change anything though... I already have 256mb, isn't that basically enough for our purposes?

jorel 01-02-2003 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jellygoose
Well I could upgrade my RAM to 512MB for a great price... I wonder if it would change anything though... I already have 256mb, isn't that basically enough for our purposes?

yes,256 mb it's ok! :wink:
512mb is better,increase "a little" performance,not double,
the scale isn't linear
:!: .


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:41 AM  —  vBulletin Đ Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd

Site design, images and content © 2002-2022 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2022 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.