[Cin] Test rendering whit x265

[Phyllis Smith]

Andrea,  in a followup, to your email below.  Does this mean that the
patch, ffmpeg_flush_tmp.diff, fixed ffmpeg 4.4 so that it works the same as
4.3?  I was confused if you had applied this patch or not or had just
changed render formats.

On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 1:31 AM Andrea paz <gamberucci.andrea at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I have tried rendering in DNxHR_sq; ffv1 and VP9 and confirm that
> there are no issues with dropped frames.
>
> [Note (OT): if you remember my other tests with x265, the encoding fps
> were around 25 fps (T about 85°C). Even with VP9 they are around 24
> fps and in fact it is a compressed codec, LonGOP and interframe like
> x265. Instead DNxHR and ffv1 are codecs studied just for editing and
> their greater efficiency is evident. DNxHR rendered at 111 fps with
> much lower temperatures (67°C) and with a CPU occupation of 20-30%.
> Ffv1 rendered at 88 fps; CPU 40% and T 70°C (I'm not sure but it seems
> to me that it also uses the GPU). The difference with compressed
> codecs in terms of quality and efficiency is huge. Even on the
> timeline they are much more efficient and playback is smoother. The
> only disadvantage is that they produce files of 4.3 GB instead of a
> few tens or hundreds of MB.]
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cinelerra-gg.org/pipermail/cin/attachments/20210810/1ea031e8/attachment.htm>