Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > MPEG-4 AVC / H.264

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 16th May 2008, 01:03   #41  |  Link
ChronoCross
Does it really matter?
 
ChronoCross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitAl56K View Post
Wow, that's quite a flame! hehe

Please sign up at Labs and send me your account name so I can get a copy into your hands
What can I say, I'm a skeptic. PM sent.
ChronoCross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 06:06   #42  |  Link
Ajax_Undone
I dont care so should you
 
Ajax_Undone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In hell next to the boiling pit of Lava...
Posts: 989
Oh my I just might **** and die in the most embarrassing way so Digit how much will this little add-on cost me the consumer.... Once Officially released that is...
__________________
My Installer's ||

Last edited by Guest; 16th May 2008 at 14:51. Reason: rule 4
Ajax_Undone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 06:39   #43  |  Link
DigitAl56K
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 936
Please don't do that. It may be embarrassing and could lead to death. As I mentioned earlier, pricing hasn't been decided yet. We'll be making that decision a little later in the year.
DigitAl56K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 06:49   #44  |  Link
Ajax_Undone
I dont care so should you
 
Ajax_Undone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In hell next to the boiling pit of Lava...
Posts: 989
no prob bro by the way sent a pm about 10 min ago...

ps I didnt mean to ask I was just curious and hadnt read the whole post just as yet
__________________
My Installer's ||

Last edited by Ajax_Undone; 16th May 2008 at 06:51.
Ajax_Undone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 07:11   #45  |  Link
Ajax_Undone
I dont care so should you
 
Ajax_Undone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In hell next to the boiling pit of Lava...
Posts: 989
Will the Dr or Converter be updated to use this codec or has this been even discussed? Or are you guy making a new encoder app all together...
__________________
My Installer's ||
Ajax_Undone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 07:23   #46  |  Link
DigitAl56K
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 936
I can't elaborate too much on that yet, Ajax, but when the time comes you'll see more products released through Project Rémoulade at DivX Labs, and of course I'll also post updates here at Doom9.
DigitAl56K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 07:42   #47  |  Link
Henrikx
Registered User
 
Henrikx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 306
Is a Linux version planned?
Henrikx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 08:06   #48  |  Link
unskinnyboy
Registered User
 
unskinnyboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NTSC R1
Posts: 2,047
Very good news, and long awaited. What I am awaiting with even more eagerness is the unveiling of the encoder bit of Project Rémoulade. Will have to see how that compares to the other H.264/AVC encoders, namely, x264, Ateme etc. Would we see some DivX-certified AVC standalone players soon then? Let's wait and see...
__________________
unskinnyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 08:44   #49  |  Link
IgorC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,319
Here Divx decoder has comparable speed with last version of fastest H.264 decoder CoreAVC 1.7

CPU E2160
Timecodec. Render: Null.

1080p (300.2006.1080p.BluRay.DTS.x264-CtrlHD.sample.noaudio.mkv) . Divx H.264 decoder crashes in MPC while seeking or repetitve playback
Code:
CoreAVC
User: 5s, kernel: 0s, total: 5s, real: 33s, fps: 308.5, dfps: 48.5

Divx
User: 6s, kernel: 0s, total: 6s, real: 36s, fps: 234.5, dfps: 43.4
720x304p x264 at 980 kbits
Code:
CoreAVC
User: 0s, kernel: 0s, total: 0s, real: 3s, fps: 1315.4, dfps: 336.4

Divx
User: 0s, kernel: 0s, total: 0s, real: 3s, fps: 1248.5, dfps: 314.7
Dirty_1080p QT H.264 CAVLC trailer
Code:
Divx 
User: 22s, kernel: 0s, total: 22s, real: 69s, fps: 161.1, dfps: 51.8

CoreAVC
User: 17s, kernel: 0s, total: 17s, real: 60s, fps: 208.4, dfps: 59.2
720x304p_v2 sample
Code:
divx
User: 2s, kernel: 0s, total: 2s, real: 10s, fps: 1414.2, dfps: 353.6

coreavc
User: 2s, kernel: 0s, total: 2s, real: 9s, fps: 1515.9, dfps: 370.5
20 Mbits 1080p
Code:
Coreavc 
User: 13s, kernel: 0s, total: 13s, real: 55s, fps: 234.3, dfps: 56.2

Divx
User: 15s, kernel: 0s, total: 16s, real: 61s, fps: 191.3, dfps: 50.7
I also checked CPU load during playback in MPC. Divx charged CPU slightly more than CoreAVC 1.7 . But Divx decoder did nothing bad at all and enough close to CoreAVC. Smooth 1080p playback and multithread support are great. On that 2K 100 Mbit sample has borked output and only at 7.6 fps.

Last edited by IgorC; 16th May 2008 at 08:50.
IgorC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 09:12   #50  |  Link
DigitAl56K
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 936
Thanks for posting your results. That's a little larger of a difference than we saw, I'm interested in some screenshots of CPU-Z on your box if you don't mind.

I noticed you used the null renderer, how do things play out with the a renderer attached?
DigitAl56K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 09:55   #51  |  Link
CiNcH
Registered User
 
CiNcH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 567
Is the whole H.264 thing now a result of the MainConcept aggregation?

MainConcept is a pretty good H.264 decoder BTW. It may eat up quite some CPU time but it is the most compatible software-only decoder when it comes to integrating it into a streaming environment.

I will have to work out another test with DVBViewer (and PAFF streams) and different H.264 decoders and check/compare DVBSource (buffers/queues) and renderer (jitter, frame dropps) behaviour. [rule 6 material deleted] Think that a streaming environment (push graph scenario) can sometimes be tricky compared to file playback (mostly pull graph scenario).
__________________
Bye

Last edited by Guest; 16th May 2008 at 14:54. Reason: rule 6
CiNcH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 10:06   #52  |  Link
Shinigami-Sama
Solaris: burnt by the Sun
 
Shinigami-Sama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: /etc/default/moo
Posts: 1,923
geez, problems with dbviewer everywhere, sounds like they're the ones that really need to pull up their socks eh?

looking forwards to a good product like this in divx, its been a while since something big and nice has happened

and just remember, don't let the marketing guys set your price, look at what happened with slysoft, nearly priced themselves out of doom9
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by benjust View Post
interlacing and telecining should have been but a memory long ago.. unfortunately still just another bizarre weapon in the industries war on image quality.
Shinigami-Sama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 10:13   #53  |  Link
CiNcH
Registered User
 
CiNcH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 567
"Problem with DVBViewer" here is completely different...

DivX decoder has problems with DVBViewer's DVBSource, CyberLink and Elecard demuxer.

And the jitter I have reported may not even be related to DVBViewer at all: http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?...postcount=3803
__________________
Bye

Last edited by CiNcH; 16th May 2008 at 12:24.
CiNcH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 10:27   #54  |  Link
sparky
DivX Team
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitAl56K View Post
Thanks for posting your results. That's a little larger of a difference than we saw, I'm interested in some screenshots of CPU-Z on your box if you don't mind.

I noticed you used the null renderer, how do things play out with the a renderer attached?
Also can you tell which colorspace is negotiated between the decoder and the renderer, in both cases?
sparky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 12:03   #55  |  Link
Sergey A. Sablin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Tomsk, Russia
Posts: 366
totally OT: just curious, who's tagging divx related thread with "coreavc"? (check "Tags" field above "Quick Reply")
Sergey A. Sablin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 14:47   #56  |  Link
the_corona
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 55
Very interested, although performance isn't quite there yet.......curious how divx labs can post such radically different results than I get (specific settings that help their decoder and hurt CoreAVC?).

Here's some tests I performed, without filenames for "obvious" reasons (bah...doing SS since formatting is a nightmare here.....):




Edit: CPU-Z screenshot (guess useless but whatever)


Edit 2: OK retested FFDshow with latest rev....I'm impressed, gotten quite a bit faster since I last updated apparently (I switched back to old just to make sure I wasn't testing it differently.....but it is reproducable!) Congrats to FFDShow (and FFMpeg) Team!

Last edited by the_corona; 16th May 2008 at 15:40. Reason: added FFDShow Rev 160
the_corona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 15:01   #57  |  Link
_xxl
ffdshow user
 
_xxl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Romania
Posts: 818
Why did you use an old ffdshow version?
_xxl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 15:05   #58  |  Link
the_corona
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by _xxl View Post
Why did you use an old ffdshow version?
Because that's what I had installed on this box and I thought it doesn't really matter....all I really wanted to compare was CoreAVC/Divx.

I can retest the clips with the latest revision, but do you think there is a point?

Edit: updated first post with newer versions.

Last edited by the_corona; 16th May 2008 at 15:48.
the_corona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 15:06   #59  |  Link
DigitAl56K
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 936
the_corona: Yesterday I had to repack our binary. I am wondering if it has affected performance. Stay tuned - I will check it out this morning.
On DVBViewer: Reports are that Beta 1 is not working with live streams which may or may not be related to connections to the splitters mentioned by CiNcH. We'll be looking into that shortly.

Last edited by DigitAl56K; 16th May 2008 at 15:10.
DigitAl56K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2008, 16:47   #60  |  Link
Ice =A=
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 153
So do I see this correctly:
With independent tests CoreAVC ist very considerably faster than DivX (Beta1)?!

I personally would have no problem with that, given the early development state of DivX h264 and the fact that CoreAVC is a full price product and currently holds the record for the fastest h264 software decoding.

However, since the numbers the DivX guys posted are that much more in favour of DivX, I can not stop to wonder and maybe feel a little kidded...

Last edited by Ice =A=; 16th May 2008 at 16:58.
Ice =A= is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
coreavc, divx, h264 decoder, remoulade

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:20.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.