|
XviD quality review - in pictures
|
|
|
pieroxy
Newbie
|
23. February 2006 @ 22:37 |
Link to this message
|
I did put up a review of encoding 'Finding Nemo' in XviD. I did several encodes: 500, 750, 1000, 1500, 2000, 3000, 4000kbps. Results are quite surprising - in terms of quality and target bitrate - and I sure didn't expect that out of the review...
Well, see for yourself:
http://nerds.palmdrive.net/video/21Feb2006/index.html
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
28. February 2006 @ 02:19 |
Link to this message
|
It's not so surprising. XviD is a really old format. If you would've done the same with h264 codec, then the results would've been really different at least in normal motion pictures. I'm not sure about CGI, but in cartoons very low bitrate looks still good. I have few 170mb anime videos, one's are 640 pixels wide, compressed with XviD and other that are 1280 pixels wide, compressed with h264. And believe it or not, these 1280 pixels wide actually look better than the smaller one compressed with XviD, and they both take only 170mb.
|
Member
1 product review
|
28. February 2006 @ 07:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey arcanix, can you tell me how much CPU did it take to run the h264 video? Everytime I run something HD at the moment (like WMV or QT), it seems to be very hard for my computer to handle.
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
28. February 2006 @ 07:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well my CPU runs them perfectly, and while playing cpu-usage is below 50%. That's with wmv's, haven't tested qt since it's quite crappy.
|
Member
1 product review
|
28. February 2006 @ 07:56 |
Link to this message
|
Well, I've tried WMV at about 856x600 (or something) and it's pretty high, like about ~75-80% of CPU usage. I've noticed that it's been doing that with even 640x480 files that are XviD encoded. I have an Athlon XP 2700+ w/ 1GB 3200 DDR and a 9800Pro. Could it be a problem with my drivers (which seems very possible), or something to do with a codec-pack I have installed (which could also be the problem)? Thanks for responding.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
28. February 2006 @ 09:29 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Well, I've tried WMV at about 856x600 (or something) and it's pretty high, like about ~75-80% of CPU usage.
Well I was talking about 1280x720 video wmv. That's huge cpu usage for video that small.
Quote:
Could it be a problem with my drivers (which seems very possible), or something to do with a codec-pack I have installed (which could also be the problem)?
It's hard to say. What's is your cpu usage when you're not playing anything? I just might simply be that you have too many programs running at the same time. Also check the properties of your player, that you don't have post-processing on. Post-processing high resolution videos takes hell of a lot resources. If you're using windows mediaplayer, try vlc-player instead.
|
