|
#1
| ||||
| ||||
| I really would like a good answer to this because I am extremely puzzled. I recently used a MBP at a friend's house (which speed, I don't recall). I asked if I could run a video encoding test to compare its speed to my home computer. I took out a DVD of mine, and used Handbrake (which must be Universal) to rip a chapter. No matter what exact settings were used as far as encoder, codec, etc., encoding at 100% quality often got about 48fps. In other words, over 1.5x playing speed. This is simply astounding. The same program, running on my Mac, a PowerMac G5 1.6GHz, gets about 8fps encoding rate. This is the same rate I get in the program I usually use for converting DVD video to QT format, MacMPEG2Decoder. Actually, that's using the MPEG-4 or H.264 or Sorenson 3 codec. My preferred codec, Sorenson (the OG), gets about 1.25fps, which is slow enough to make the smallest rip (a 30-second ad, for example) into a fairly big ordeal. NOW, here is where the confusion comes in. Looking at some benchmarks, such as the ones on OWC's site (http://eshop.macsales.com/benchmark/...07,109,127,128, the slowest G5, mine, outperforms the MacBook pretty consistently. I feel as if I visited a Bizarro universe in which MBPs are insanely fast, only to return to this plane and find that they're not that fast at all. I realize that laptops aren't meant to perform on par with desktops; but it doesn't change the fact that several different rips attained up to 50fps encoding rate on the MBP I used. Nothing can change that number, and the fact that my G5 is absolutely glacial in comparison. Explain. Please. My brain hurts. |
|
#2
| ||||
| ||||
| Come on, people! Hey guys who own MacBook Pros, all you have to do is rip some video from a DVD (preferably with the *free* program Handbrake) and tell me what encoding rate you get. And if fellow G5 owners can do the same and post some rates, we'll have a decent basis for comparison aside from just my own machine. Just make sure you name the program you used to do the ripping. I am really suprised no one has responded yet. |
|
#3
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
What brand and model of drives are in your two machines? Does the frame rate significantly change if you rip the contents of the DVD to your hard drive first (using something like MacTheRipper), then encode with Handbrake?
__________________ Power Macintosh G4/500MHz "Yikes!" 10.4.11 Server • 1024MB • 3 x 120GB + 320GB • DVR-111D • 2 x Radeon 7000 PCI • 2 x 17" CRT MacBook 2.0GHz Core 2 Duo - White 10.5.4 • 2048MB • 80GB • CD-RW/DVD-ROM iPod Photo 60GB • iPod nano 1GB • AT&T DSL 6Mb/768k http://www.jeffhoppe.com |
|
#4
| ||||
| ||||
| Forget the holiday, man, people need to start ripping stuff now! Now! NOW! ![]() Just to clarify, I only own the G5. Someone else owns the MacBook Pro I was using. As for what drives each uses, Everymac.com tells me that my G5 uses a 4X/8X/16X/10X/32X SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW), and the MBP uses either a 4X single-layer DVD±RW/CD-RW SuperDrive or an 8X dual-layer DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW SuperDrive, depending on the model. But I don't think the drives make much difference, it's the CPU that's the bottleneck here. And actually, when I rip content, I extract the clip I want to my HD and *then* convert it using MacMPEG2Decoder. So, if anything, the MBP makes my computer even more pathetic by encoding at least 6x faster *while* ripping directly from the DVD. Or, I was hallucinating. That's why I'm so curious (and yes, a little impatient) to see what others have to say. I might be totally crazy, or missing some crucial difference. Perhaps it's my G5 that's so slow, rather than the MBP being fast. I have no other frames of reference aside from a brief time using that one MacIntel laptop :/ |
|
#5
| ||||
| ||||
| Dual G5 1.8ghz 10.4.6 2gb Ram MPEG-4: 37-39 fps average H.264: 15-19fps average.
__________________ Dual 1.8GHz G5 2GB, 1TB, Radeon 9600XT 128MB, 10.5 20" Apple Cinema Display + Dell 2005FPW 20" dual-head iBook G3 700MHz 640MB, 40GB, Rage128 16MB, 10.4, dying battery |
|
#6
| ||||
| ||||
| My rip times when I first got my D1.8 G5 were slow. I then (overtime) upgraded my RAM and my Superdrive (all included in my signature) and now I get insane ripping speeds. Ripping is not just processor intensive, there are several factors in the ripping speed.
__________________ PowerMac G5 Dual 1.8(Rev A.), , 7 Gig RAM, Pioneer DVR-110, ATI X800XT, OS X 10.4.11 & 10.5.4, 23'' HD LCD Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Mhz, SuperDrive, ATI X1600, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.5.4 Tibook 400Mhz, DVD drive, 1024 RAM, ATI Rage, OS X 10.4.7 1TB Time Capsule 5g iPod 30Gig White |
|
#7
| ||||
| ||||
| That being said, aren't there some people out there with both a G5 and a MacBook Pro? I've only heard one set of numbers so far, for the G5. Where are the MBP owners?! If they could run Handbrake on both and post the results, it would be very interesting. Drive speed alone can't explain it, nor can RAM, since I have 1.5 GB of it and the MacBook had about the same.
__________________ 2.33GHz 17" MacBook Pro — 2GB RAM, 100GB HD, Mac OS X 10.5.4. 1.6GHz G5 — 1.5GB RAM, 80GB HD, Mac OS X 10.4.11. (for PPC development) 400MHz G4 — 640MB RAM, 20GB HD, Mac OS 9.1. (for all the old apps I can't run on the MBP) 16GB iPod touch, 250GB Western Digital external HD, 1TB LaCie 2big Triple external HD (RAID 0), 22" ViewSonic VP2250wb LCD |
|
#8
| ||||
| ||||
| Bench testing with Apple vs. Apple, etc. is constantly being done at BareFeats.com. Search their database for shootouts.
__________________ PowerMac G5 Dual 1.8(Rev A.), , 7 Gig RAM, Pioneer DVR-110, ATI X800XT, OS X 10.4.11 & 10.5.4, 23'' HD LCD Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Mhz, SuperDrive, ATI X1600, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.5.4 Tibook 400Mhz, DVD drive, 1024 RAM, ATI Rage, OS X 10.4.7 1TB Time Capsule 5g iPod 30Gig White |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Benchmarking | Phluxy | Mac OS X System & Mac Software | 1 | January 15th, 2006 02:13 PM |
| Comprehensive Cross platform benchmarking | FrgMstr | Apple News, Rumors & Discussion | 4 | December 31st, 2001 08:55 PM |