Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Core Duo iMac 20" 2gigs Ram: Handbrake test.

T

thestaton

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Well last night I wanted to see what kind of numbers I could get using HandBrake 0.7.1-cvs to encode season one of 24. Dont watch the show its incredibly addicting 🙂

Core Duo iMac 20" 2gigs of Ram, 256 Video card upgrade.

Settings 720x400 Open GL effects rest are in the screen shot.
The AVG FPS was 25 - AVG file size is 250 megs.
AVG time for each pass was 45 minutes.

If I change the picture settings to 320 range the FPS jumps up to around 65 on AVG. But I was wanting a better looking picture!

Are there better optimzations to use to allow for quicker speeds with out losing much quality?

How does this compare to a dual g5?
http://homepage.mac.com/thestaton/pictures/handbrake.jpg

--staton
 
thanks thestation, 25fps is looking good for an imac, but im not too sure what it looks like compared with a dual g5.
 
Cool!!!!

65 on 320 is neat.

I use that setting for putting episodes of futurama, family guy on my Archos AV500.

That beats my Powermac Dual G5 1.8ghz, 2.5gb ram which usually gets about 45 - 50 at that setting..

My powerbook used to get around 21-25 at that same setting..

I assume handbrake running Rosetta, which bodes well for a binary release 🙂
 
My dual 1.8 Ghz with 1.5GB of RAM did some encoding with Handbrake last night. It took 30 minutes per pass (50 minute shows). I had it set at 1000 encoding MP4 averaging 50 FPS. Final file size average was 500MB.
 
How about H.264??????

SOMEBODY TRY H.264 FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!!!!



please.




I.

damn, I just looked at the picture linked he is using H.264. thought those numbers were to good to be true!

Sorry!
 
Wow, hopefully the FPS will be simialr on my MBP...
By the way, where did you get that desktop photo (aka wallpaper)? I want one!
 
punkmac said:
SOMEBODY TRY H.264 FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!!!!



please.




I.

damn, I just looked at the picture linked he is using H.264. thought those numbers were to good to be true!

Sorry!
Click to expand...

The numbers I quoted for my PM were using H.264. Somehow I expected more from the iMac.
 
I want to replace DVD recording with H264. Once I have 8 gigs or so, I will dump the files onto DL DVDs.

What setting would you say in H264 is about equal to Standard DVD?

I'm going to keep it at its original resolution, which I believe was 640x something? What bitrate should I use?
 
hcuar said:
The numbers I quoted for my PM were using H.264. Somehow I expected more from the iMac.
Click to expand...


Well I get about 3-5 frames p/sec on my 1ghz flat panal iMac. Woo-hoo!

So the new core duo is on par with a dual core powermac. All this with a pretty 20" screen.
 
DVD to H.264...

powerbook911 said:
I want to replace DVD recording with H264. Once I have 8 gigs or so, I will dump the files onto DL DVDs.

What setting would you say in H264 is about equal to Standard DVD?

I'm going to keep it at its original resolution, which I believe was 640x something? What bitrate should I use?
Click to expand...

I have figured without quality loss, about 1/4 the size of the original file. I started at this quality but decided to go a little lower, it takes up less space and plays alot smoother on my system. Yes H.264 chokes on my system at high bitrates.

The most important titles I've kept at DVD quality, an archive so to speak.

Hope this helped.


I.
 
Those are actually pretty damned good speeds for H264 encodes, which is especially CPU hungry. If you want to try faster speeds just encode using standard MPEG4 (select FFMPEG, AVI output, mp3 sound). That should easily encode 3-5x faster.
 
My friend and I went to an apple reseller the other day--No apple store here--and played with the 20" iMac -- base model. We were playing 3-720p videos at once, and still doing other stuff. Safari opened amazingly fast, and we were getting just a bit faster than real time h.264 encoding.

I can't wait for my macbook.
 
punkmac said:
I have figured without quality loss, about 1/4 the size of the original file. I started at this quality but decided to go a little lower, it takes up less space and plays alot smoother on my system. Yes H.264 chokes on my system at high bitrates.

The most important titles I've kept at DVD quality, an archive so to speak.

Hope this helped.


I.
Click to expand...

Yes, you helped me very much.

Should I use the de-interlace setting, if it something from TV?

I guess, if I have something about 2 hours taking up about 4 gigs on MPEG2 DVD, I will give a 1 gig H264 setting a try. I think I've tried about that before, and it was indeed very good.

Thanks for your help. I really appreciate. This should save a lot of room in my house.
 
powerbook911 said:
Yes, you helped me very much.

Should I use the de-interlace setting, if it something from TV?

I guess, if I have something about 2 hours taking up about 4 gigs on MPEG2 DVD, I will give a 1 gig H264 setting a try. I think I've tried about that before, and it was indeed very good.

Thanks for your help. I really appreciate. This should save a lot of room in my house.
Click to expand...

Yes the 1/4 rule gives very nice results.

As far as the deinterlacing thing goes, it all depends, if you check the few samples in Handbrake you can see
sometimes interlacing artifacts (lines splitting the picture into 2 fields) Most all Hollywood DVDs have been mastered from film in 24p.(Noninterlaced) Most DVDs with Video based content (TV) are going to be interlaced. I suppose the companies don't want to spend a fortune remastering and adding dropping frames and fields to get 24p.


I would check first, if you do alot of TV based converting.

Happy to help.(who else am I going to talk to about this stuff?!?)



I.
 
I'm actually a bit disapointed with those numbers. For a dual core, it's pretty weak. In similar settings (within 100 pixels, and 572kbps) I've seen a G5 iMac 2.1g reliable get between 24 and 28 fps on h.264 encoding. I might have set it to 24 fps.

I simply would have expected a more signinicant speed increase. @ 700 kbps, it would seem like an easy task for a duo 2.0
 
ibilly said:
I'm actually a bit disapointed with those numbers. For a dual core, it's pretty weak. In similar settings (within 100 pixels, and 572kbps) I've seen a G5 iMac 2.1g reliable get between 24 and 28 fps on h.264 encoding. I might have set it to 24 fps.

I simply would have expected a more signinicant speed increase. @ 700 kbps, it would seem like an easy task for a duo 2.0
Click to expand...

But Handbrake is running in Rosetta is it not? I imagine it will run faster when it's not 🙂
 
MacRumorUser said:
But Handbrake is running in Rosetta is it not? I imagine it will run faster when it's not 🙂
Click to expand...

There's an intel version of handbrake. It's what we ran at the reseller. I'm assuming that's what he was running for a test.
 
This is only partly related to this question;

I'm running a G5 Dual 2ghz to run handbrake to convert a stack of old mini-dvds to a format I can use in iMovie. So far it's working great.

I have 2.5gbs of ram. Will Handbrake speed up if I add more ram or is there an upper ceiling on what is helpful?

Thanks
Cherokee
 
punkmac said:
As far as the deinterlacing thing goes, it all depends, if you check the few samples in Handbrake you can see


I would check first, if you do alot of TV based converting.

Happy to help.(who else am I going to talk to about this stuff?!?)



I.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the project I did last night looked a lot better in the handbrake preview, with deinterlacing turned on. Lots of lines on the screen, without it.

Oh, do you do the 2 pass, when using H264? I guess if I have the time it is always the way to go, don't you think? I have a lot to transfer, so I think I'll just do it all while I sleep, until its all gone. 🙂

What about in ten years? Do you think our computers will still have software that can play H264?
 
2 pass

powerbook911 said:
Yeah, the project I did last night looked a lot better in the handbrake preview, with deinterlacing turned on. Lots of lines on the screen, without it.

Oh, do you do the 2 pass, when using H264? I guess if I have the time it is always the way to go, don't you think? I have a lot to transfer, so I think I'll just do it all while I sleep, until its all gone. 🙂

What about in ten years? Do you think our computers will still have software that can play H264?
Click to expand...

I always use 2 pass now. It's worth it. Everything is fine tuned the second time around. I used 1 pass on a few of my sons anime DVDs just to make a quick copy, and I could cleary tell the difference. Blocky encoding and weird sound flaws.

If you just want to rip something that's desposable go for it.


In 10 years we'll have Ultra HDTV 2000*4000 Resolution and some new encoding tool.

I.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back