AutoGK & Similar

Conrad11

Conrad11

Conrad11

Soldato
Joined
12 Jun 2005
Posts
5,361
Hi there,

I have been using this in Vista 32 bit to compress my movies for a while now.

Is there anything better out there now?

Also is there a 64bit version as i am upgrading to 64bit soon (Q6600).

IIRC the rule is 10mb per minute/ XVID / AC3 Sound.....right?

Thanks.
 
I used this for the first time with my Quad core today (Q6600 @ 3.2Ghz).

Managed to encode a film in 50 minutes into 1400mb setting (5.1 surround) which i am pretty please with, but it never used 100% of the cpu, it was using around 80% - is there a bottleneck somewhere?

Using autogk 2.48b (with 64bit version of virtualdub)

Specs (atm):
Q6600 (@ 3.2Ghz)
2x1gb DDR2 ram
250GB Sata HDD
X1900XT

May try handbrake and see what thats like.

Thanks.
 
are you using the newest autogk?

afaik, there is not virtualdubmod 64? -that's what autogk uses, when doing the xvid encoding, it should use multicore
 
Yeah its the newest autogk.

Your totally right - i thought it was using VirtualDub not VirtualDubMod. What i did was download the 64bit version of VirtualDub and just replaced the files.....

The 80% is spread between the 4 cores but ideally I would like an application to use 100% of the cpu and i was wondering if i had a bottleneck?
 
jbloggs said:
You might want to have a look at HandBrake...although I personally prefer AutoGK. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah thats what i am trying at the moment - but i am unsure on what the best settings are to use. I think handbrake looks slightly better and appears to use more of the cpu although i quit the encode so i am unsure of the quality.

There are some presets but i am unsure of whether the are good or not.
 
Last edited:
Just tried a handbrake encode and it takes a lot longer when using the "film" preset, any particular reason for this?

...for now I think i will stay with AutoGK.
 
I have been using AutoGK again recently - v2.48B

I have managed to get the time to encode a film down to 33minutes for a 2 hour 10 minutes film - thats using the "quality" setting at 75% which produces a file size of 1.94GB.

My only quibble is that it still isn't using 100% of the CPU, unless its the hard drive that is the limiting factor?
 
quality is better when you choose the filesize

'quality' runs are only 1pass i think, that's why they're so much faster, but you lose some quality
 
I use gk with specific settings for encoding, autogk doesn't give me the correct results sometimes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom