Low CPU Intensive video codec needed

[fitch.j]

I have a small issue and was wondering if any of you guys know more about how CPU intensive certain codecs are.

I've got to play some video's on a projector screen that is connected to a very old PC. (1.8ghz single core)

The client usually asks for the video in MPEG2 format, at 1280x720:

Format : MPEG-PS
File size : 332 MiB
Duration : 3mn 41s
Overall bit rate : 12.6 Mbps

Video
ID : 224 (0xE0)
Format : MPEG Video
Format version : Version 2
Format profile : Main@High-1440
Format settings, Matrix : Default
Duration : 3mn 41s
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 11.7 Mbps
Nominal bit rate : 12.0 Mbps
Width : 1 280 pixels
Height : 720 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16/9
Frame rate : 25.000 fps
Colorimetry : 4:2:0
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.507
Stream size : 309 MiB (93%)

Audio
ID : 192 (0xC0)
Format : MPEG Audio
Format version : Version 1
Format profile : Layer 2
Duration : 3mn 41s
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 384 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits
Video delay : -80ms
Stream size : 10.2 MiB (3%)

Filesize is not really an issue, however too large and evidently this will take more work by the CPU.

I'm willing to take some quality loss as obviously there is no way to avoid this, however with it being projected, i'd like to keep it as reasonable as possible.

I'm not sure if any other formats will work any better ? I'm aware of certain formats that are more CPU intensive (H264 for example) but not of which ones are lighter on the CPU.

I may just have to reduce the bitrate of the MPEG2 if there are no better options.

Cheers for any help.

[Baldrick]

Try mpeg1. Convert using the old free tmpgenc 2.5.

[guns1inger]

However mpeg-1 might struggle with quality at those resolutions unless you use a high bitrate, in which case you are probably better off with mpeg-2.

I would question the need for that resolution. You will get better quality blowing up SD res video that has been well encoded with a reasonable bitrate, than having HD res video encoded at a poor bitrate.

[fitch.j]

I didn't realise MPEG1 would be any better than MPEG2 so i'll give that a go cheers!

I'll just re-encode it from Media Encoder as then its using the source footage ( 1080i )so best chance at keeping quality at lower bitrates rather than re-encoding an already compressed encode.

I'll render out a few tests at SD resolution to compare.

MPEG is looking to be the best option then still ? I was considering trying WMV to see how that worked.