TMPGEnc...does it always take forever to convert?

[Jae Rell]

Is there any way to speed up the process?

[MpegEncoder]

Is there any way to speed up the process?

Yes, faster CPU

[Jae Rell]

[macleod]

I think the orginal poster was looking for some way to speed up the process given their current config. Of course, since the original poster did not indicate ANYTHING pertaining to their current process, any people responding must look to the ole' crystal ball to figure out what the original poster is doing. Also, what does forever mean? In relation to what other application?

Some general items:

1) close down anything not relating to the conversion - no surfing, no playing games, etc. Basically, don't touch the computer and dont have other things going -viruscan, etc
2)Turn the quality down to estimate or the fastest option
3) Don't convert items to anything other than VCD spec (ie SVCD,CVD,DVD)
4)Convert ONLY the "movie", not the intro and not the credits
5)Do CBR and not VBR or 2 pass VBR or Constant Quality (CQ)
6)I think that half pixel motion option should be unchecked
7) process the audio separately (dont know if start to end time of the process will mae much of a difference, if any
8) Consider mainconcept or CCE encoder, both available in the $60-$100 range

Thats about all I can think of off the top of my head.

[torisdad]

Don't use any of the smoothing, clipping, resizing, deniterlacing functions in TMPGEnc. They really slow it down. If you need to do any of these then frameserve from Virtual Dub (it's a lot less daunting that it first sounds). Also if you use TMPGEnc to encode your audio then Virtual Dub can convert the frequency rate for you too.

[Anonymoususer]

What are your computer Specs...? How long does it take for you to encode..?

[tygrus2000]

I never understand the rush to encode material. Don't you want the best quality possible? Isn't that worth waiting a few hours or even a whole day for? You only have to do it once, unless you are backing up 20 dvds a day which would be unusual.

I let an encode with MainConcept go for 18 hours, over night and while I was working. I don't sit there and watch it. MainConcept is faster than TMPGEnc and the quality is comparable, try it if you need fast encodes. Or you can directly sacrifice quaility for speed by turning down your bit rates and turning off any other settings. Personally, I wouldn't make those kinds of sacrifices for speed.

[Vejita-sama]

Not everyone is backing up DVDs, some people are encoding home movies or video clips. Speed is important because you can't really do anything else with your PC while you're encoding and not everyone has a 2nd PC to use during that time.

I use CCE because it's faster and I think gives better MPEG2 encodes (TMPGEnc seems to give better MPEG1 encodes IMHO). I've upgraded by CPU several times since I started working with digital video.

At first I had a AMD K6-2 500, it took me 18hrs+ to convert a 90min DivX file to xVCD (SeVCD). Then I got a Tbird 1.2Ghz, which encoded (CCE) at about 1.2x source runtime (per pass). Then AMD 2200 which encodes at 0.7x source runtime. And now a AMD 2600 which encodes at ~0.55-0.6x source runtime.

That means I can encode the same 90min Divx file in about 45min instead of 18hrs. But the quality is the same. Long story short speed matters. So your encoder (TMPGEnc, CCE, Ulead, Mainconcept), processor and settings/filters affect encode time.

[MpegEncoder]

Speed is important because you can't really do anything else with your PC while you're encoding and not everyone has a 2nd PC to use during that time.

I completely disagree. I run lots of encode sessions while I do LOTS of other things on the same PC (and it's only a 500MHz K7). Depending on what you're doing, it will slow the encoding. However, the encoding in NO way interfers with other activities.

[akrako1]

TMPGEnc allows the use of multi-threading for multi-CPU's. Even though I don't have the system to try it, I'm assuming it will give quicker results.

Also, think about your memory speed. When I upgraded from DDR2100 memory (266 Mhz) to DDR3200 (400 Mhz) I noticed a definite decrease in encoding times.

[MOVIEGEEK]

The larger the resolution the slower the encoding,720x480 will take approx.twice as long to encode as 352x240.As was stated above using CBR or CQ instead of VBR will cut encoding time by about 40%.

[DRP]

Speed is important because you can't really do anything else with your PC while you're encoding and not everyone has a 2nd PC to use during that time.

I completely disagree. I run lots of encode sessions while I do LOTS of other things on the same PC (and it's only a 500MHz K7). Depending on what you're doing, it will slow the encoding. However, the encoding in NO way interfers with other activities.

I agree with you. I'm running a Duron 800 with 384MB RAM and right now I'm doing two simultaneous TMPGEnc encodes of 720x576 XSVCD quality whilst checking e-mail, writing this forum entry - surfing in two other web browsers, playing mp3s on Winamp, downloading multiple files from web, sharing and downloading from eDonkey, sucking photos off my digital camera, scanning others, printing some out on a colour printer all at the same time and reading newsgroups in Forté Agent.

One TMPGEnc session has been going for 17:32 and has another 11 minutes to go - the other has been running for 17:32 as well (I started them simultaneously) and is currently reporting another 248:07 till completion - though I fully expect that one to speed up considerably once the other is finished.

I'm running W2K Pro SP3 and obviously I don't have too many stability problems

[Chris X]

Dont listen to those fools. They most likely do not get professional results from there encodes. When you do a DV encode, its best to have the drives de-fragmented as possible. Surfing, playing, games, watching pr0n on the puter at the same time doing an encode can lead to heavy fragmentation causing skips and dropped frames in the encode result.

[lordsmurf]

Dont listen to those fools. They most likely do not get professional results from there encodes. When you do a DV encode, its best to have the drives de-fragmented as possible. Surfing, playing, games, watching pr0n on the puter at the same time doing an encode can lead to heavy fragmentation causing skips and dropped frames in the encode result.

You can do whatever you want during encode, given enough resources.
You're confusing encode with capture. During capture, do nothing but capture.

[thayne]

Dont listen to those fools. They most likely do not get professional results from there encodes. When you do a DV encode, its best to have the drives de-fragmented as possible. Surfing, playing, games, watching pr0n on the puter at the same time doing an encode can lead to heavy fragmentation causing skips and dropped frames in the encode result

Encoding quality has nothing to do with file fragments and computer usage. If you use your PC while encoding it will take longer, but using your computer while encoding has no effect on the output quality!

I work normally when encoding and don't go out of my way. I even burn DVD's while encoding. I have even encoded two different files at the same time with differnt encoders, both files turned out fine (one Mpeg-2 with TMPGEnc and one DivX with Dr. Divx). Of course encoding multiple files at the same time will pretty much make your computer useless for doing anything else during that time I only do that when I let it run over night...

On the other hand, when you capture don't touch anything and make sure your drive isn't fragmented...

BTW, before you go off calling others fools, you better make sure you actually know what you are talking about....

[lordsmurf]

I work normally when encoding and don't go out of my way. I even burn DVD's while encoding. I have even encoded two different files at the same time with differnt encoders, both files turned out fine (one Mpeg-2 with TMPGEnc and one DivX with Dr. Divx).

I wouldn't suggest that, using multiple encoders at the same time, nor burning while encoding (buffer underrun). Can probably do it, but I'm not willing to take chances on wasted media or OS destabilization (happened last time I ran Procoder and TMPGEnc Plus at same time).

But I'll work on photos in Photoshop during encode, as I can specify the PS RAM usage, leaving TMPGEnc the rest. Or check email, surf web.

I remember running 8 concurrent sessions of DVD2one one time. That's encoding (transcoding, whatever) too. Took forever, but was easier since that program has no batch mode, and I let it run overnight. All fine.

But when I capture, I don't even move the mouse (I once saw it drops frames when I did that).

[thayne]

I wouldn't suggest that, using multiple encoders at the same time, nor burning while encoding (buffer underrun). Can probably do it, but I'm not willing to take chances on wasted media or OS destabilizatio

Well, I wouldn't recommend it either, I was just making the point that you can and it will not mess up your encode. My machine is solid and I don't worry about crashes...

[Chris X]

My Apologies. Capturing is what I should have said.


later

[Poplar]

Never was a fun of TMPG. Perhaps never will be. I got a slow computer, so encoding with TMPG is really a pain. More importantly, I think CCE and MCE produce better quality, in addition to speed. On the other hand, TMPG is very newbie-friendly and many grow up with TMPG and love it.....

[Gazorgan]

Bullpucky. I can do everything while encoding. I typically encode overnight/day so I get about 20 hours uninterrupted to a session. ( I Sleep and night and Work during the day, which leaves evenings open for other computer things). I never got the "can't use my computer" thing, but I know there are people at their computers 24/7/365.....but not me. I typically run 2 encoding sessions since I can't batch certain projects, and trhey run 1/2 as fast as normal.

Now this is all on W2K/XP only. Don't even think about this with 98, it doesn't do mutlitasking well enough to pull this off reliably.

You can basically do what you need to do while encoding. I routinely burn and even game(which effectively halts the encoding session until I'm done and quit, well duh!).

[DeadLamb]

I've found the faster your cpu the less one is willing to wait..... Once you break 2+ gigs most stuff is so fast you just get used to --blip blip blip- load load etc etc..

etc etc etc.. sooooooooo when I go to encode something it's just "doh!! 7 hours!?!" being I'm just not use to seeing that..

I know it's not what the first poster is looking for as far as an answer but the over night encode really is the most painless way to do it. Heck it's like ya never even know what is going on.. Wake up and like magic, it's done..

[phinsman]

Speed is important because you can't really do anything else with your PC while you're encoding and not everyone has a 2nd PC to use during that time.

I completely disagree. I run lots of encode sessions while I do LOTS of other things on the same PC (and it's only a 500MHz K7). Depending on what you're doing, it will slow the encoding. However, the encoding in NO way interfers with other activities.

One time I played a game of Madden while doing a TMPGenc encode. I obviously had it set to encode during idle time only.

When I came back to TMPGenc from the game it was basically at the same spot.

Dale

[FallGuy]

But when I capture, I don't even move the mouse (I once saw it drops frames when I did that).

I must be lucky. I do all sorts of low CPU intensive things (surf, email, MS Office) while I capture video from my DV Camcorder, and I don't have a problem with dropped frames. I'm using an Abit nForce2 board. The DV connection is IEEE1394, the CPU is an XP2700 on a 266MHz FSB (both overclocked about 20%), 512MB of PC3500 RAM, and my capture drive is a pair of WD's (with the large cache) in a Raid0 array ... nothing all that fancy. For those that have a problem with dropped frames, are you compressing at the same time or capturing a raw .avi file? As long as I don't try to compress while I capture, I'm fine.

[Chris X]

iT DOESn'T Matter if your capturing or encoding, as either way your capturing, since it reads from a file to encode.....duh...... when you got your HDD Thrashing.... that can really complicate things dont ya think?



I donno... but I got my theories, algorithmic thoughts

But I guess.... Its a good thing TMPGenc offers Priority adjustments in that case...

[lordsmurf]

iT DOESn'T Matter if your capturing or encoding, as either way your capturing, since it reads from a file to encode.....duh...... when you got your HDD Thrashing.... that can really complicate things dont ya think?

Capturing and encoding do not access the HD in the same fashion. The capture writes are realtime and therefore utilize faster access, and needs full usage. The encodes do not. The info is not written and read realtime. And the program can vary the speed, depending on the priotity set. And modern 7200rpm hard drives can do multiple things at one time (like encoding), when not needed for dedicated attention (like capturing).

I've used several encoders since I started playing with digital video, but somehow I always come back to TMPGEnc, not because it's "easier" or "dummy friendly" or "newbie" or whatever, but because it works, it's fast if setup properly, and it has lots of options. And yeah, I do like the GUI. I left DOS in 1998, and I don't plan to go back to command lines.

[FallGuy]

Capturing is like drinking from a firehose. When that stream is coming in, it's not going to slow down to wait for you to catch your breath (so to speak). So if your computer misses a few frames, it's too bad 'cause they are history. Whereas when you encode, the encoder grabs each frame of your source video from your HDD, makes calculations, writes a compressed output frame, and then fetches the next frame. Even if it takes 20 minutes to handle each frame, the next one is waiting patiently on your HDD. That's the major difference.