Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- From: "Chris P." <msdn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 10:39:22 -0400
On Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:13:34 -0000, shfnet wrote:
ok, i'm trying this out by means of a blocking queue (CQueue from the
base classes), and the cpu load is appx. 30-40%. this is much better
now, but still far from graphedit's 5-15% cpu usage.
It does some additional processing that I'm not sure you can completely
eliminate. You can go searching to see if there is anything else to turn
off in the options.
it's strange that i set the WMEncoder to 30 frames per seconds and it
ignores it.
It doesn't ignore it, that's just the target output rate. It will still
process all the input frames and then throw some away. When connected to a
live source it is the live source that is responsible for rate control, not
WME.
--
http://www.chrisnet.net/code.htm
[MS MVP for DirectShow / MediaFoundation]
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- From: shfnet
- Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- References:
- Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- From: shfnet
- Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- From: Chris P.
- Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- From: shfnet
- Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- Prev by Date: Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- Next by Date: Re: Direct Show Video Memory
- Previous by thread: Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- Next by thread: Re: cpu usage: Graphedit vs Windows Media Encoder
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
