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 Encoder GUIs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 21st March 2016, 09:02   #14301  |  Link
MaistroX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wonderland
Posts: 159
Hi burt123!


1. No itīs not, itīs a AMD3+ running at originaly @ 4,7Ghz

2. Inside is pretty Clean and case is open all the time.
Also had the idéa of it gettin overheated, but have changed the CPU Fan, Motherboard also tryed differnt ramīs just to figure out what could be wrong, and this only happens with RipBot264 when it runs 100% of all cores on the CPU.


After Writing this Q last night I started a new rip with only 4 cores activated just to see how it worked and adjusted it to 6/8 cores just Before 2-pass started, and PC keeps going without any crash/Freez!




image hosting free


But would be easyer to be able to set the nr. of cores to be used from within RipBot264 otherwise one have to set it manually everytime RipBot264 starts.

Regards MaistroX

Quote:
Originally Posted by burt123 View Post
A couple of questions for you :-

1st:- is your PC overclocked ???
Ripbot could be considered as a stress test, as it DOES run the CPU @ 100% most of the time.

2nd:- how clean is it inside your case & motherboard etc ??
Sounds like it might be overheating, check & clean the CPU fan(s), and video card(s) fan(s).

I'm pretty sure that Ripbot can't be "throttled".

Last edited by MaistroX; 21st March 2016 at 09:05. Reason: Adding pictures! :)
MaistroX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2016, 09:41   #14302  |  Link
Ma
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaistroX View Post
But would be easyer to be able to set the nr. of cores to be used from within RipBot264 otherwise one have to set it manually everytime RipBot264 starts.
If this crash is related to x265, you can add '--pools 6' option to x265 command line. If it helps, you can try '-F2' option instead of '--pools 6' (if '-F2' helps, you can also try to use x265 compiled by VS 2015 instead of GCC 5.3).
Ma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2016, 11:32   #14303  |  Link
MaistroX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wonderland
Posts: 159
But as far as I know I only use the x264 part!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ma View Post
If this crash is related to x265, you can add '--pools 6' option to x265 command line. If it helps, you can try '-F2' option instead of '--pools 6' (if '-F2' helps, you can also try to use x265 compiled by VS 2015 instead of GCC 5.3).
MaistroX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2016, 11:39   #14304  |  Link
Ma
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaistroX View Post
But as far as I know I only use the x264 part!
In x264 there is '--threads X' option. You can try '--threads 6' for example.
Ma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2016, 12:35   #14305  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,536
@Maistrox
What happens if you run LINX from first post for couple minutes? Check cpu temps during strest test. CPU should be rock stable even at 100%.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2016, 13:33   #14306  |  Link
MaistroX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wonderland
Posts: 159
Just tryed that and the result is here ->
windows screen capture

Also, just finnished a encode with RipBot264 and set the cores to 6/8, that worked just fine.

Regards MaistroX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
@Maistrox
What happens if you run LINX from first post for couple minutes? Check cpu temps during strest test. CPU should be rock stable even at 100%.
MaistroX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2016, 14:18   #14307  |  Link
soneca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
With the new version of KNLMeansCL, the PC with GTX650 became operational.
soneca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2016, 14:28   #14308  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaistroX View Post
Just tryed that and the result is here ->
windows screen capture

Also, just finnished a encode with RipBot264 and set the cores to 6/8, that worked just fine.

Regards MaistroX
Check also with 0.6.5 which uses AVX as well.
https://github.com/sanekgusev/LinX-o.../LinX-0.6.5.7z

Regarding --threads. By default x264 on your CPU uses 12 threads (8 * 1.5). You may also try --threads 8 instead of 6.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2016, 19:28   #14309  |  Link
MaistroX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wonderland
Posts: 159
I will try 0.6.5 also, just finnished a 5 step test with ALL RAM avalible and biggest Problem Size, see here ->


image hosting over 5mb
with the following log:
"
Intel(R) LINPACK 64-bit data - LinX 0.6.4

Current date/time: Mon Mar 21 13:35:50 2016

CPU frequency: 4.690 GHz
Number of CPUs: 8
Number of threads: 8

Parameters are set to:

Number of tests : 1
Number of equations to solve (problem size) : 60083
Leading dimension of array : 60088
Number of trials to run : 5
Data alignment value (in Kbytes) : 4

Maximum memory requested that can be used = 3113540512, at the size = 60083

============= Timing linear equation system solver =================

Size LDA Align. Time(s) GFlops Residual Residual(norm)
60083 60088 4 3864.765 37.4164 3.101542e-009 3.065849e-002
60083 60088 4 3892.257 37.1521 3.101542e-009 3.065849e-002
60083 60088 4 3906.159 37.0199 3.101542e-009 3.065849e-002
60083 60088 4 3906.839 37.0135 3.101542e-009 3.065849e-002
60083 60088 4 3924.515 36.8468 3.101542e-009 3.065849e-002

Performance Summary (GFlops)

Size LDA Align. Average Maximal
60083 60088 4 37.0897 37.4164

End of tests
"

Regards MaistroX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
Check also with 0.6.5 which uses AVX as well.
https://github.com/sanekgusev/LinX-o.../LinX-0.6.5.7z

Regarding --threads. By default x264 on your CPU uses 12 threads (8 * 1.5). You may also try --threads 8 instead of 6.

Last edited by MaistroX; 21st March 2016 at 19:42.
MaistroX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st March 2016, 21:28   #14310  |  Link
Ronski
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 60
I've recently been encoding using H265 but am getting much bigger files sizes than expected, with only a small decrease from the original BR rip. I use CQ and CRF set to 16, profile is [High 4.0] FHD. Progressive. Taking a 20.2GB video file (sound tracks removed) H265 ends up at 24.4GB and H264 ends up at 15.7GB using the same settings.

I thought one of the big improvements with H265 was a reduction in file size, am I misunderstanding or do I just have CRF set to low? I watch on a 120" screen so like to keep good quality.

PS. MaistroX, try lots of different stress tests, recently overclocking my X99 rig it would crash on one particular stress test but not another, and I had to increase the voltage slightly, by reducing the core count your reducing the load and thus the voltage won't drop so much. Video transcoding is considered by many as a form of stress testing.

Last edited by Ronski; 22nd March 2016 at 21:55. Reason: Quoted wrong size starting file.
Ronski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd March 2016, 03:34   #14311  |  Link
soneca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 753
I've never used the x265 but I understand the standard crf values for the two encoders to generate the same visual quality are quite different. ie, you are using a high value.

x264 default = CRF23
x265 default = CRF28
soneca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd March 2016, 09:55   #14312  |  Link
Wildfire
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
Wait for tomorrow. I think your windows is still using cached update.zip file.
Well, it's been a while but still nothing. The OpenCL tab is still empty.
Wildfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd March 2016, 20:16   #14313  |  Link
Ronski
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by soneca View Post
I've never used the x265 but I understand the standard crf values for the two encoders to generate the same visual quality are quite different. ie, you are using a high value.

x264 default = CRF23
x265 default = CRF28
Thanks, I'll give it a go at 22 and see how that comes out. Edit: Results in a 5.68GB file (no audio yet), just need to play it on the big screen and see how it compares.

Got to say I've just had one of those moments that makes you smile.

I have an old i750 running at 3.6Ghz and my new X99 5820K running at 4.5Ghz. Now I had 1 encoding server on the i750 and two on the X99, I'm now running 6 encoding servers on the X99, each time I added a server the FPS increased, tried adding another on the i750 and it made no difference, but boy it does work well on the X99. Currently cruising at just over 43FPS between them all in H265, gained about another 10FPS by adding the 4 additional servers.

Last edited by Ronski; 22nd March 2016 at 21:57.
Ronski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd March 2016, 00:36   #14314  |  Link
burt123
Registered User
 
burt123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NSW, Australia.
Posts: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronski View Post
Thanks, I'll give it a go at 22 and see how that comes out. Edit: Results in a 5.68GB file (no audio yet), just need to play it on the big screen and see how it compares.

Got to say I've just had one of those moments that makes you smile.

I have an old i750 running at 3.6Ghz and my new X99 5820K running at 4.5Ghz. Now I had 1 encoding server on the i750 and two on the X99, I'm now running 6 encoding servers on the X99, each time I added a server the FPS increased, tried adding another on the i750 and it made no difference, but boy it does work well on the X99. Currently cruising at just over 43FPS between them all in H265, gained about another 10FPS by adding the 4 additional servers.
Yes, I run multiple servers on the one PC, and yes it DOES make a lot of difference.

We need more servers, Atak
burt123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd March 2016, 02:13   #14315  |  Link
soneca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 753
I do not have conditions to run that way then do my conversions using my old 980X, or 4790K. Lately I have used only the 4790K for this kind of work because it is slightly faster and consumes less power.
Let them work and go to sleep.
soneca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd March 2016, 16:10   #14316  |  Link
jthekk2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 28
Atak, is there any way to include a setting to have the first pass handled by one machine for the entire file and then split the file (and stats file) into chunks for distributed encoding? I've been testing with the current distributed encoding but am seeing massive bitrate drops in high action scenes where the scene fell into different chunks. I'm hoping that a first pass pre-chunking would allow for proper bitrate determination relative to the file as a whole before encoding. This will obviously bottleneck the process to the speed of the server doing the first pass, but is more ideal since it yields a better encode in the end.
jthekk2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd March 2016, 16:17   #14317  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,536
I think It would be better if you increased chunk size from 1 min to old 10 min value. This method would be much faster than first pass on single machine.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd March 2016, 16:19   #14318  |  Link
jthekk2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
I think It would be better if you increased chunk size from 1 min to old 10 min value. This method would be much faster than first pass on single machine.
I'll give it a try but the problem would still remain if the action scene falls at the 10 minute mark and is split and the second chunk has an otherwise low level of action (so lower average bitrate). Also, since most shows aren't exactly a multiple of 10, the last chunk will always be smaller and might present the same issue. Unless I'm missing something and there is some error handling for that.
jthekk2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd March 2016, 16:19   #14319  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronski View Post
Thanks, I'll give it a go at 22 and see how that comes out. Edit: Results in a 5.68GB file (no audio yet), just need to play it on the big screen and see how it compares.

Got to say I've just had one of those moments that makes you smile.

I have an old i750 running at 3.6Ghz and my new X99 5820K running at 4.5Ghz. Now I had 1 encoding server on the i750 and two on the X99, I'm now running 6 encoding servers on the X99, each time I added a server the FPS increased, tried adding another on the i750 and it made no difference, but boy it does work well on the X99. Currently cruising at just over 43FPS between them all in H265, gained about another 10FPS by adding the 4 additional servers.
It is odd that you have troubles with saturating 6C / 12T CPU.
I have no problems with 8C / 16T CPU even with cropped frame (1920x800).

Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd March 2016, 16:22   #14320  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by jthekk2 View Post
I'll give it a try but the problem would still remain if the action scene falls at the 10 minute mark and is split and the second chunk has an otherwise low level of action (so lower average bitrate). Also, since most shows aren't exactly a multiple of 10, the last chunk will always be smaller and might present the same issue. Unless I'm missing something and there is some error handling for that.

Last chunk is always the biggest. Otherwise We could end up with 1 frame chunk .
Longer chunk sizes should help in better bitrate distribution (less aggressive)
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
264, 265, appletv, avchd, bluray, gui, iphone, ipod, ps3, psp, ripbot264, x264 2-pass, x264 gui, x264_64, x265, xbox360

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 11:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.