HandBrake or RipBot264

[marsyas91]

I've been using HandBrake for all my x264 encoding needs, but there are sometimes when it can't get the job done - and I turn to RipBot264. I'd like to start using it as my only encoder, but for some reason it's "slower" than HandBrake.

With comparable settings (2-pass, 720p, 8000 kbps, no audio converting) for a 2 hour file, RB will give me an eta of 5 hours on the first pass, while HB will usually take the same amount on both passes together.

My media device of choice is PCH. I use the normal preset for HB and Level 4.1 for RB.

Is there anyway I can "speed up" RipBot264? Or is it supposed to be "relatively slower"?

[poisondeathray]

If you are using the same settings they should take approximately the same amount of time provided you are using the same filters, x264.exe version.

They are just front ends. The actual encoding engine is the same. You can choose to lower the quality settings and it will go faster.

[marsyas91]

That's my point... One time I "stumbled" across an encoding time closer to what I expected (and get in HB), but I wasn't able to achieve that encode time - until now. I looked around the settings (but didn't change any) and set up a 75 minute file to convert. Which is giving me 45 minutes for the first pass.

I guess I'll be testing throughout the day on a variety of files to see if these results are sustainable.

[poisondeathray]

Bitrate won't make much of a difference on encoding speed

Look more closely at the exact settings: b-frames, reference frames, b-frame decision, psy trellis/ psy-rd, AQ settings, partitions, me range, many many more...

They all have an effect on quality and encoding speed at various settings. You can easily make it go 3x faster or 10x slower depending on the encoding settings alone

Handbrake might be using turbo first pass settings (ie. low quality, but faster speed)

Just compare the log files for each to look at the settings

[marsyas91]

I did a quick comparison of the advanced options for the Normal HB and High RB profiles: 2 ref and 2 b-frames for HB, 3 and 3 for RB. Doesn't seem like a significant difference.

And yeah I use turbo first pass in HB. But I doubt this cuts the encode time by 60%.

Another note: RB uses x264x64 - pretty sure HB doesn't.

[poisondeathray]

I looked at the log files for some small test encodes, the difference is largely accounted for from the settings.

The turbo pass uses different settings, ie. ref 1, me dia, analyze none, trellis 0 , 8x8 dct 0 - this easily accounts for the 1st pass speed difference. You can test it out on using a command line for yourself.

x264 x64 should be about 5-10% faster, everything else equal

[marsyas91]

I looked up the advanced settings on a mencoder guide and you're right, even a slight tweak can take you from 17 fps to 13.

Guess I'll just have to make sure I'm not doing anything else (reading/writing/copying other large files) while encoding.

Thanks

[3560freak]

not trying to thread jack here, however this is the first time I am encoding a BD movie to mkv using ripbot264 and while my machine is not the speediest, it has been over 24 hrs and its not even 25% through the 2nd pass. Are there any suggestions that can be given to help out, other then get a new computer Thanks

[Baldrick]

HD H264 encoding is very slow. For faster encoding try constant quality/quantizer and lower the video resolution/frame size.

Or it might be something wrong with just that BD movie....try another one and see if still same problem.

[3560freak]

I will make some adjustments next time, however, I am encoding this down to 720p with a file size of approx 6GB (for a 147 minute movie run time) and only Dolby sound (no high end codecs). I was thinking that the smaller file size would be faster but I am now thinking that its just my machine specs that is causing it. Thanks for the quick reply

[FulciLives]

I will make some adjustments next time, however, I am encoding this down to 720p with a file size of approx 6GB (for a 147 minute movie run time) and only Dolby sound (no high end codecs). I was thinking that the smaller file size would be faster but I am now thinking that its just my machine specs that is causing it. Thanks for the quick reply

It's just your system. Mine is a hint faster than what your specs indicate that you have and if I do a 720p H.264 encode it takes as you have found out a very long time. I think the last one took like 39 hours or something like that.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

P.S.
I prefer to use XVID4PSP myself but I don't use it for speed. I have no idea how it compares to the others speed wise.

[3560freak]

thanks for the reply, its good to hear real life reports from someone who has similar specs.