[mythtv-users] Support for mythrokuplayer

[Ozzy Lash]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Yan Seiner <yan at seiner.com> wrote:

>
> On 01/23/2014 09:44 AM, jedi wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 03:54:50PM -0800, Yan Seiner wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On my very anemic servers (AMD Athlon Dual Core 4600+) it takes
>>> about 10x as long to transcode as to play.  I clocked it with a new
>>> i3-3240 dual core, and it took about 4x.  I figure it needs
>>> something like a i5-3470 quad core to make it reasonable.
>>>
>>      That doesn't sound right.
>>
>>      Are you sure that the transcoder is using threading? You should be
>> getting much better performance than that and using multiple cpus in
>> the process. If your content or your transcoder can't take advantage
>> of multiple cores, then a faster CPU probably won't help.
>>
>>
>>  Yup.  I'm using handbrake and it's running on all available cores. h264
> transcoding just takes time.  On the hyperthreaded Intel it shows as using
> 396% CPU :)
>
> Some of it may be that the Athlon is running on a RAID-5 SATA system,
> while the i3-3240 is running on a SSD in a RAID-1.
>
> I just think the old system has slower memory, slower hard drives, slower
> everything, pretty much; I think the memory is something like DDR-2 / 800
> whereas the new system is DDR3 / 1600.  It all adds up.
>
>
>
What parameters are you using for handbrake?  I am testing a transcode of a
1080i recording using the rokuencode.sh script from the mythrokuplayer git
tree, and it is averaging about 60 frames per second.  It is using all 4
cores of my Athlon II X4 630 processor, and each core is running at 2.8
gig, but that is twice as fast as realtime.  I haven't looked at the
quality, and haven't tried a 720p recording.

I would think that the i3 would be about comparable to mine.

Bill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20140123/c611f32b/attachment.html>