Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Forums
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down

Author Topic: lame benchmarks (pun intended)  (Read 21805 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline koaftder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2004
  • Posts: 2116
    • Show only replies by koaftder
    • http://koft.net
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #59 from previous page: February 03, 2012, 01:20:22 AM »
Code: [Select]
LAME 3.99.4 64bits (http://lame.sf.net)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding AKsack.wav to AKsack.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) 128 kbps qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:05/    0:05|    0:05/    0:05|   52.606x|    0:00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        74.4  13.4  12.2
Code: [Select]
Hardware:

    Hardware Overview:

      Model Name: iMac
      Model Identifier: iMac11,3
      Processor Name: Intel Core i7
      Processor Speed: 2.93 GHz
      Number of Processors: 1
      Total Number of Cores: 4
      L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB
      L3 Cache: 8 MB
      Memory: 8 GB
      Processor Interconnect Speed: 4.8 GT/s
      Boot ROM Version: IM112.0057.B00
      SMC Version (system): 1.59f2
      Serial Number (system): xxxxxxx
      Hardware UUID: xxxxxx
Code: [Select]
Software:

    System Software Overview:

      System Version: Mac OS X 10.7.2 (11C74)
      Kernel Version: Darwin 11.2.0
Logged
 

Offline mongo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 964
    • Show only replies by mongo
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #60 on: February 03, 2012, 01:40:46 AM »
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ @2.6 GHz

Code: [Select]
LAME 3.99.4 64bits (http://lame.sf.net)
CPU features: SSE (ASM used), SSE2 (ASM used)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding AKsack.wav to AKsack.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) 128 kbps qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:08/    0:08|    0:08/    0:08|   31.520x|    0:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        74.4  13.4  12.2
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: +0.5dB
Logged
 

Offline haywirepc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2009
  • Posts: 1331
    • Show only replies by haywirepc
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #61 on: February 03, 2012, 02:19:35 AM »
I got 7 seconds on a quad core intel windows xp box.
 
I got 6 seconds on a quadcore intel ubuntu box.
 
Both those machines would cost less than 500$ right now.
 
For me, that kind of puts many things in perspective about the x1000.
 
Thanks Piru.
 
Steven
Logged
 

Offline Terminills

  • Grand Conspirator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2003
  • Posts: 594
  • Country: 00
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • Show only replies by Terminills
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #62 on: February 03, 2012, 11:56:24 AM »
  Don't care so much about the thread but the tags are funny. :)
Logged
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

edited by mod: this has been addressed
 

Offline Akiko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2002
  • Posts: 1026
    • Show only replies by Akiko
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #63 on: February 03, 2012, 01:25:09 PM »
Quote from: Piru;678877
/me pats the Mac mini G4 & PowerBook G4 ;-)

"Up Your Shaft"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypasUL_GktI
« Last Edit: February 03, 2012, 02:20:06 PM by Akiko »
Logged
 

Offline pampers

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 146
    • Show only replies by pampers
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #64 on: February 03, 2012, 06:52:34 PM »
Just my 2 cents on PowerMac MDD 1.67Ghz (OC)

Ram Disk:> showconfig
SYSTEM:     PowerMac3,6
REGISTERED: Dominik Glowacki
PROCESSOR:  7445/7455 (G4) (V3.3) 1667MHz (FSB 167MHz)
VERSION:    MorphOS version 2.7, Ambient version 1.43, Kickstart version 51.37
RAM:        Node type $8A, Attributes $1505 (FAST), at $20000CA8-$7C7F0000 (~1480.0 meg)
BOARDS:
 Vendor $106B Device $0034 Apple Computer Inc., UniNorth 2 AGP
 Vendor $1002 Device $5961 ATI Technologies Inc, RV280 [Radeon 9200]
 Vendor $10EC Device $8139 Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd., RTL-8139/8139C/8139C+
 Vendor $1033 Device $0035 NEC Corporation, USB
 Vendor $1033 Device $0035 NEC Corporation, USB
 Vendor $1033 Device $00E0 NEC Corporation, USB 2.0
 Vendor $1102 Device $0002 Creative Labs, SB Live! EMU10k1
 Vendor $1102 Device $7002 Creative Labs, SB Live! Game Port
 Vendor $106B Device $0019 Apple Computer Inc., KeyLargo USB
 Vendor $106B Device $0019 Apple Computer Inc., KeyLargo USB
 Vendor $106B Device $0033 Apple Computer Inc., UniNorth 2 ATA/100
 Vendor $106B Device $0031 Apple Computer Inc., UniNorth 2 FireWire
 Vendor $106B Device $0032 Apple Computer Inc., UniNorth 2 GMAC (Sun GEM)
Ram Disk:> lame_ppc AKsack.wav
LAME 3.98.4 32bits (http://www.mp3dev.org/)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding AKsack.wav to AKsack.wav.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) 128 kbps qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:22/    0:22|    0:22/    0:22|   12.053x|    0:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        76.1  13.4  10.5
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: +0.5dB
Ram Disk:> lame_vmx AKsack.wav
LAME 3.98.4 32bits (http://www.mp3dev.org/)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding AKsack.wav to AKsack.wav.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) 128 kbps qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:15/    0:15|    0:15/    0:15|   17.575x|    0:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        76.1  13.4  10.5
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: +0.5dB
Ram Disk:>
Logged
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show only replies by Karlos
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #65 on: February 03, 2012, 08:47:57 PM »
Quote from: Terminills;678938

Don't care so much about the thread but the tags are funny. :)


:lol: I wonder who put that there?

And why do I feel like curried lamb meatballs for dinner...
Logged
int p; // A
 

Offline PiruTopic starter

  • \' union select name,pwd--
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2002
  • Posts: 6946
    • Show only replies by Piru
    • http://www.iki.fi/sintonen/
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #66 on: February 04, 2012, 12:34:15 PM »
It appears mr Mufa claims that I've "faked" the results. Thus I've decided to release couple of photographs showing the results:

http://sintonen.fi/pics/bench_raw_macmini_g4_15.jpg
http://sintonen.fi/pics/bench_raw_powerbook_g4_167.jpg

Excuse the poor quality of these pictures. They should still serve their purpose however.
Logged
 

Offline unusedunused

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Nov 2005
  • Posts: 479
    • Show only replies by unusedunused
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #67 on: February 04, 2012, 07:09:40 PM »
thats nothing new to me that Pa6 is slow.its a embedded CPU with less performance /MHZ.
some years ago i post on amigaworld links that show on some rare benchmarks that pa6 is slow.of course there are few benchmarks for pa6 because they want not show that it is slow i guess ;-)

but the fact that Apple choose is X86 depend i guess too that pa6 is not fast.Apple miss long time a fast and power save notebook CPU from motorola and pa6 does not fill the gap, so they give up PPC.

Quote from: Karlos;678827
What's interesting about this benchmark is that it takes my Q9450 8 seconds to perform the same test.
Code: [Select]

karlos@Megaburken-II:~/Desktop$ time lame AKsack.wav
LAME 3.98.2 64bits (http://www.mp3dev.org/)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding AKsack.wav to AKsack.wav.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) 128 kbps qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:08/    0:08|    0:08/    0:08|   33.665x|    0:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        76.1  13.4  10.5
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: +0.5dB

real    0m8.175s
user    0m8.120s
sys     0m0.060s

Those old PPC machines don't look too shabby under the circumstances.

you use a non SSE Version on windows.On my I5 760 (2.8 GHZ 3.3 GHZ turbo boost) it need 4 sec.see the output of CPU features (CPU features: SSE (ASM used), SSE2 (ASM used)).lame seem not run on multi core.Because i choose in windows shell 1 CPU.speed is same 4 sec.also i get only CPU load 25% seem 1 Core is active and the 3 cores (75% sleep).I guess multithread is not need in lame , because the frontend do it and start more lame threads at once.

my results are 4.5* faster as X1000 or in numbers, when i downlclock my X86 from  (3.3 GHZ /4.5) = 0.733 GHZ ore 733 MHZ it is as fast as X1000.

this is the result i get with that files for 64 bit from that page

http://lame.sourceforge.net/links.php#Binaries

i go to this

http://www.rarewares.org/mp3-lame-bundle.php

-------------------
C:\Users\pc>E:\tmp\lame.exe E:\AKsack.wav
LAME 3.99.4 64bits (http://lame.sf.net)
CPU features: SSE (ASM used), SSE2 (ASM used)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding E:\AKsack.wav to E:\AKsack.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) 128 kbps qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:04/    0:04|    0:04/    0:04|   55.937x|    0:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        74.4  13.4  12.2
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: +0.5dB

C:\Users\pc>
------
« Last Edit: February 04, 2012, 07:32:17 PM by bernd_afa »
Logged
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show only replies by Karlos
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #68 on: February 04, 2012, 07:20:12 PM »
Quote
you use a non SSE Version on windows.

You might be right about the SSE support (which I mentioned above that I'd have to check), but it most assuredly isn't running on Windows.
Logged
int p; // A
 

Offline unusedunused

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Nov 2005
  • Posts: 479
    • Show only replies by unusedunused
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #69 on: February 05, 2012, 09:21:28 AM »
Quote from: x303;678817
Tested with WinUAE. Lame 3.99.3 compiles it in 58 secs.

:laughing:

whre you have download the 3.99.3 ?
I have only 3.98.4 find

here on I5 760 need 32 sec in winuae.on 68k it use of course no SSE or any asm code line.time is simular to the 1. mac mini result, so another argument, that this test use no altivec on Mac mini and the values of 18 sec with altivec can be true.

The I5 I7 give a big speedup to the old Core DUO or QUAD.but when buy a new system today you can only buy new I5 for low price or better.and X1000 is tell as a new system.My system is over 1 year old.

but winuae can use native X86 lame.you need only execute winuaelame program with parameters to start the native lame you install in X86
« Last Edit: February 05, 2012, 09:40:31 AM by bernd_afa »
Logged
 

Offline x303

Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #70 on: February 05, 2012, 12:56:01 PM »
Quote from: bernd_afa;679306
whre you have download the 3.99.3 ?
I have only 3.98.4 find
Build this one myself. Shouldn't make a big difference in speed though. Not uploaded yet, was hoping to include a wos version too. But this one is crashing all the time.

Quote

here on I5 760 need 32 sec in winuae.on 68k it use of course no SSE or any asm code line.
We do have JIT :biglaugh:
Logged
 

Offline skolman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Oct 2007
  • Posts: 106
    • Show only replies by skolman
    • http://stagevu.com/user/skolman_mws
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #71 on: June 24, 2012, 07:40:28 PM »
Code: [Select]

 Machine Name: Mac mini
  Machine Model: PowerMac10,1
  CPU Type: PowerPC G4  (1.2)
  Number Of CPUs: 1
  CPU Speed: 1.42 GHz
  L2 Cache (per CPU): 512 KB
  Memory: 1 GB
  Bus Speed: 167 MHz


13s - total encode CPU time without write Tag:

Code: [Select]

SKOLMAN_MWS:~ AMIGA$ /Applications/lame -t /Volumes/RAM\ Disk/AKsack.wav
LAME 3.99.5 32bits (http://lame.sf.net)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding /Volumes/RAM Disk/AKsack.wav to /Volumes/RAM Disk/AKsack.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) 128 kbps qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:13/    0:13|    0:14/    0:14|   20.254x|    0:00
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        74.4  13.4  12.2

14s - normal test with write Tag:

Code: [Select]

SKOLMAN_MWS:~ AMIGA$ /Applications/lame /Volumes/RAM\ Disk/AKsack.wav
LAME 3.99.5 32bits (http://lame.sf.net)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding /Volumes/RAM Disk/AKsack.wav to /Volumes/RAM Disk/AKsack.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) 128 kbps qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:14/    0:14|    0:15/    0:15|   19.207x|    0:00
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        74.4  13.4  12.2
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: +0.5dB
Logged
A1200 BlizzardPPC BVision Lan/WiFi FastATA Gold,
EFIKA 5K2 R9250 MorphOS +Amiga Workbench
https://youtu.be/mjsGVkDjBOc
 

Offline glitch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Nov 2004
  • Posts: 371
    • Show only replies by glitch
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #72 on: June 25, 2012, 12:24:55 AM »
lame AKsack.wav
LAME 3.97 32bits (http://www.mp3dev.org/)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding AKsack.wav to AKsack.wav.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz 128 kbps j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:14/    0:14|    0:15/    0:15|   19.493x|    0:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        76.1  13.4  10.5
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: +0.5dB

Dual G5 2.7GHz - OSX 10.5.8 - old version and writing to a single drive - anyone got a PPC AltiVec OSX compiled version they can send me?  I only have a really old copy of XCode on this machine.
Logged
 

Offline glitch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Nov 2004
  • Posts: 371
    • Show only replies by glitch
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #73 on: June 25, 2012, 12:29:36 AM »
Hehe Google is your friend...

 ./lame AKsack.wav
LAME 3.99.5 32bits (http://lame.sf.net)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding AKsack.wav to AKsack.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (11x) 128 kbps qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
 10529/10529 (100%)|    0:07/    0:07|    0:07/    0:07|   39.013x|    0:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   kbps        MS  %     long switch short %
  128.0      100.0        74.4  13.4  12.2
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: +0.5dB

It appears to be using both cores.
Logged
 

Offline vox

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Posts: 862
    • Show only replies by vox
    • http://anticusa.wordpress.com
Re: lame benchmarks (pun intended)
« Reply #74 on: June 25, 2012, 02:51:50 AM »
Quote from: Piru;678787
]


Please use Linux Mint 11 on both
http://mintppc.org/
Or Debian Wheezy on both and redo the math.

Looking forward to compare those tests to these and let us know of how much space there is for MOS and OS4 to grow on same hardware.
Logged
Future Acube and MOS supporter, fi di good, nothing fi di unprofessionals. Learn it harder way! http://www.youtube.com/user/rasvoja and https://www.facebook.com/rasvoja
 
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up
« previous next »