CCE vs TMPGENC, what's better?

has anyone compared the video quality between CCE and TMPGENC? is the encoder in CCE better than tmpgenc? i know CCE can't open DVD2AVI files which sucks, but i could always dump the AVI and open that in CCE if it makes the movies come out better. Thanks,

There are many opinions each way It really depends on the individual.Personally I use tmpg and have excellent quality svcds. so I won't even try the other until I see a loss in quality. Others say cce is better----Way overpriced

The CCE vs TMPGEnc argument is like the Mac vs PC argument, or the Dolby Digital vs DTS argument - each side has its supporters, and the perceived quality of either is entirely subjective, so there's really no "right" answer. However, I have seen a encoder-comparison website which rated CCE a FRACTION higher than TMPGEnc, but that's all it was: a fraction. The quality differences between the two are so small that they're almost impossible to quantify.

If you want value for money and high quality, stick with TMPGEnc. If you have money to burn and can't spare much encoding time, go with CCE - it's supposed to be the fastest MPEG-2 encoder around. (I use the latest version of the LSX Premiere plugin when I'm really pressed for time - it's pretty damn fast and the quality's much better than earlier versions.) Otherwise I'm a TMPGEnc man all the way.

I think the comparison page was at www.tecoltd.com/enctest/enctest.htm

C h a o j i

Yes, please use the SEARCH capabilities of this website to se this topic debated several times over.

You CAN use CCE with DVD2AVI. Save project to get your d2v. Then use AVISynth with the mpeg2dec.dll plugin to frameserve to CCE. This only works with 2.5 and NOT 2.6. You do not have to do the YUV>RGB>YUV conversion, thus saving even more time. Include the line "resampleaudio(44100)" in your script even if you are not encoding the audio in CCE. I would advise encoding the audio with BeSweet as the quality will be much better. I have read that the "resampleaudio44100" is only nessessary with an AMD CPU...I have an Intel (I built the system myself, so I know for sure) and if I don't include that line in my script CCE will crash when I load my .avs file This method works very well for me for SVCD creation.
Bill

thanks guys. i actually tried to search for this before posting but didn't search hard enough i guess

i love tmpgenc and i'm going to stick with it

For some people they can't see the difference between these two great programs because they are compressing for VCD or SVCD. However, when you start compressing video for DVD. The difference is huge. For starters TMPGEnc can't go as high as 9.8Mbps (only 8.0Mbps) and only has two passes in VBR mode CCE has up to 9 passes.

With CCE SP the video is not only indistinguishable from the original but also smaller in size than its TMPGEnc counterpart (more video fits on DVD). CCE SP can produce video that is ideal for DVD but TMPGEnc has other benefits that beats hands down on CCE.

TMPGEnc has great compability, it inputs just about any video format. CCE does not only AVI or DVD2AVI if you use AVISynth. It Multiplex, Demultiplex, Calculates File size, It has editing tools, Resize video and more.

Also, keep in mind that after CCE compresses the video you must have to multiplex it with audio to get an Mpeg file and resize the video before input if your source is not in 720X480. In other words, a pain in the***

If you are going to do VCD then yes, don't even bother with CCE. TMPGEnc does it all for you. Resize, multiplex and audio and even calculates the file size for the appropiate bit rate.

Also, CCE mentions in its manual that its MPEG1 is might not be VCD compliant.

The answer is: Both rock when used together.

CCE is the fastest encoder at the level of quality it produces. It pretty much sucks at audio, so only use it for video. Actually it doesn't even do audio for VBR MPEG2, so plan on using another app for audio.

Tmpgenc can do everything else including encode, like editing, mux (fantastic), transcode, etc. It's much slower at encoding, but has quite a few more options available. It also handles pretty much any file you throw at it.

They are designed to meet different needs, and I have found that they compliment each other very well.

I didn't read through all the replys but i'll mention it anyways, Ive tried CCE a couple times and found that it sucks so much resource from your computer its only good if your NOT planning on using your computer while encoding.

I use TMPG and get killer quality (DVD>SVCD 2/pass) and can still use my computer while encoding w/o seeing any type of lag or slow down in system performence.

My vote goes to TMPG.

As far as CCE costing alot......im not going to link or tell you where to get it for free but I will say this.......YAHOO-DVDBACKUP

Later

The fact that CCE seems to take up all your CPU is simply because of the process priority. Tmpgenc runs by default at Low priority, and CCE runs at a higher priority.

If you are using a 'real' Windows operating systems (WinNT, Win2k, WinXP) then you can very_easily adjust the priority of the process so you will get more control on your desktop, and it will still encode in near-realtime.

Tmpgenc is nice, but sorry, I'm not waiting 14 hours to encode a 2 hour capture, that's ridiculous. CCE handles encoding in near-realtime or even better than realtime, and with the priority adjustment you can still get some work done =)

I have two problems with TMPGEnc and they are somewhat related. It's slow, and no YUV input. If it had a YUV input, and you were using a YUV source of course, the avoidance of the YUV>RGB>YUV conversion would yield about a 35-40% increase in overall encoding speed. This alone would be a great improvement in speed. I wrote to TMPGEnc's author about a year ago and suggested this even though his site said that he was only interested in hearing suggestions from corporate users and not individual like me. The funny thing is, with TMPGEnc priced at $48.00, INDIVIDUALS could afford to buy it....unlike CCE. Still, he only wants to hear from the big shots, and not us lowly individuals....what could we know. Still TMPGEnc is a great program and CCE has only a slightly better picture, at least at SVCD specs. I did notice the quality improvement with CCE seamed to show up more on my TV than on my computer, so burn a disc and compare on your TV. Also, when I use TMPGEnc I am forced to do the YUV>RGB> YUV thing and with CCE I am not. That alone could be the source of the improvements I see with CCE. Format conversions NEVER improve quality....at the very best, they won't hurt it too much. As far as CCE hogging my computer, since it does in 2 hours what TMPGEnc does in 14+, it can have my computer the 2 hours it takes.
Bill