Re: [MPlayer-users] Re: divx 6

[Rich Felker <dalias@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 08:30:34PM +0200, Matthias Wieser wrote:
> Am Freitag, 28. April 2006 19:02 schrieb Rich Felker:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 03:05:22AM +0200, Matthias Wieser wrote:
> > > > Don't post doom9 crap here, he's not respected at all after the last
> > > > fiasco.
> > >
> > > You mean the fiasco that mencoder with the best encoding options
> > > (selected by it's own developers) is much slower than xvid while giving
> > > worse quality? It's even much slower than DivX.
> >
> > No, I mean the fiasco with using invalid testing methodology, refusing
> > to come clean on the cases of bias in his testing, and getting made at
> > lavc and disqualifying it from the tests after I flames him (keep in
> > mind I am just a lavc user and have nothing to do with lavc
> > development).
> 
> Lavc just was to slow and had some additional issues.

False, this was NOT the reason given.

> > > Pretending that Xvid and Divx are slow and bad does not help...
> >
> > Divx is slow and bad.
> 
> DivX: 70fps
> LAVC: 26fps
> Xvid: 71fps

False, these are threaded numbers with single-thread for lavc and
multi-cpu for the others!! Give single cpu numbers.

> [...]
> http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/codecs-main-105-1.htm

Illegitimate.

> > but it's definitely the case 
> > for decoding with xvid...
> 
> Please insert your benchmark numbers:
> lavc: [...]fps
> xvid: [...]fps

Do your own. I have no interest in wasting my time downloading and
compiling xvid. The typical difference is 15-40% slower IIRC.

Rich

_______________________________________________
MPlayer-users mailing list
MPlayer-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/mplayer-users