[vorbis] Windows XP and MP3

[Beni Cherniavsky]

On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, Wilson wrote:

> Are you sure you're not counting visualization as well. Try turning all of
> that off for a more realisitic test. Any $40 CPU today should be able to
> play ten simultaneous OGG files without choking.
> 
No.  Sorry for posting by memory - I re-checked when I got back home and
it shows 24-25% total winamp consumption, while the decode threads only
eats 10-12%.  But it's probably depends on whether the file is
mono/stereo, which I forgot by now :-)  Nobody else mentioned it either -
any benchmark is meaningless without info on number of channels and the
bitrate of the decoded files.  As if this wasn't enough, I'm running a
plugin from before beta4 (because winamp still doesn't recognize it,
upgrade and/or reinstall didn't help).

PS: CDex upgraded to beta4 in their last vesrion 4.0 beta 0.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Beni Cherniavsky" <scben at techst02.technion.ac.il>
> To: <vorbis at xiph.org>
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 4:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [vorbis] Windows XP and MP3
> 
> 
> > On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Adam Ottley wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On April 13, 2001 12:36 pm, you wrote:
> > > > > Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Maybe it's because I was just looking at the task manager,
> > > > > but still, Winamp mp3 oscilates between 0% and 2% while
> > > > > Winamp ogg is at 5%-6%.
> > > > >
> > > > I've been getting some wild differences here.  I've found Wintop to be
> the
> > > > best gauge of CPU use in Win9x (Wintop is in the kerneltoys package,
> just do
> > > > a search on microsoft.com for it), and I get a much smaller difference
> > > > between the Winamp 2.22 Mp3 decoder and Ogg beta 4 in Winamp.  On my
> P2-400,
> > > > Mp3 runs about 6-7% where Ogg is about 8%.  I also tried it on a
> vanilla
> > >
> > > This is too _small_ a difference to be realistic.
> > >
> > > > P200, and Mp3 took ~20-22% where Ogg was ~24-25%.  Both were in Win98.
> > >
> > > These numbers are _way_ too high for a 200 MHz cpu, even if it is a P5.
> > >
> > This were my numbers for a P200 Ogg too.  MP3 was slightly faster than
> > this, I don't remember exactly now.
> > I did look at the decode thread only, and had similar results with the
> > wave writer output plugin (which plays max possible speed).
> >


-- 
Beni Cherniavsky <cben at crosswinds.net>
                 (also scben at t2,cben at tx in Technion)

10001110111100111100001001010 m/s

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.