DivX 6.8 Encoding

Website: Divx.com

We tested video encoding performance using VirtualDub-MPEG version 1.6.15 and DivX 6.8 with multi-threading enabled and SSE2 or SSE4 enabled where appropriate. We did a two-pass encode of a 15-minute 276MB MPEG-2 digital TV recording with a target file size of 100MB.

While this benchmark does use SSE4 which is currently unique to Intel's 45nm processors, the latest DivX 6.8 has enhanced multi-threading support and uses SSE2 enhancements, which applies to all of the processors tested.

Although Intel has admitted to bit-tech that it throws out some "best case scenario" numbers to the press, we took our usual MPEG-2 digital TV recording that we use for our XviD tests and DivXed it instead, using the same VirtualDub we always do.




Even though DivX 6.8 is highly threaded, it still benefits from a higher clock speed. CnQ adds an extra 50 seconds onto the encode time, which is not a good result and is also surprising considering the load is relatively consistent as it churns through the file. As it is, the triple-core performs better and naturally the Intel 45nm CPUs that have SSE4 benefit here too.

AutoMKV x264 Encoding

Website: Doom9

We tested x264 compression using AutoMKV version 0.90 and x264 to compress a 1.1GB DVD VOB file into 350MB MP4 file using a two-pass encode and we used a 112kbps LAME encoder to compress the audio. The whole process is dependent on both single and multi-core performance and the entire encoding time was recorded.

There's quite a shift to using MKV or MP4 wrappers for x264 content now, especially for movie content and those in the large anime fansubbing community. x264 doesn't have the same SSE enhancements as DivX 6.8, but the benefits of extra cache and better memory performance should still show notable improvements.


Surprisingly in AutoMKV the performance difference between enabling and disabling CnQ is very little indeed - just 20 seconds. Considering the AutoMKV scripting program does several different things in succession, the performance down the field is exceptionally linear. The performance is still a good chunk slower than the gentle progression of other quad-cores down the table, but it's still faster than every dual-core and triple-core processor. This is good to know if you want a low power x264 encoding machine.