Media Encoding Performance: StuffIt 11

[OutpostDEaD]

(I meant for this to be a suggestion for the AnandTech main site but posted it in forum suggestions in error)
It would be nice to see StuffIt 11 .jpg compression/decompression results in the Media Encoding Performance section of your reviews. It take FOREVER to compress/deconpress .jpg files but it compresses them almost 30% with no picture quality loss so I've been converting my .zip'd jpgs to .stix format (we're talking hours here). Also, they claim StuffIt 11 .stix format is now optimized for dual core processors and just a couple days ago they released the mobile version of StuffIt Mobile for cell phones so it seems the .stix format may become popular. The compression/decompression really gives my CPU a workout and it would be great to see how different CPUs compare and if their claim to dual core optimization really makes a difference.

 

[Diogenes2]

Exactly what is your relationship with " Stuffit " ?

 

[OutpostDEaD]

I'm a new user of the format. I always beeline to the Media Encoding Performance section of the reviews of new CPUs and MBs whenever I'm planning on an upgrade. I do a lot of DIVX encoding as well so that review section is awesome, for me. Actually, I almost regret buying the program because it works sooooo slowly just like DIVX on my single core P4 but maybe it might make a good benchmark tool in the reviews since it seems to be so CPU intensive.

 

[Diogenes2]

Originally posted by: OutpostDEaD
I'm a new user of the format. I always beeline to the Media Encoding Performance section of the reviews of new CPUs and MBs whenever I'm planning on an upgrade. I do a lot of DIVX encoding as well so that review section is awesome, for me. Actually, I almost regret buying the program because it works sooooo slowly just like DIVX on my single core P4 but maybe it might make a good benchmark tool in the reviews since it seems to be so CPU intensive.

Does it use both cores ? ( 100% )

 

[AkumaX]

i dont think there's a multi-threaded version of divx yet. if you want to encode something, encode x264!

 

[OutpostDEaD]

Yes, 100% CPU usage. I just did a rough benchmark off the harddrive of 124 jpg files (it only works on jpg files)(151MB total) and it took 8min 15secs to compress down to 100MB. It took 7min 35sec to decompress. All the while at 95-100% CPU usage. To archive my 6GB camera CF card down to 4GB is torturous and requires an all niter. Since AnandTech benchmarks video and audio it would be cool to see jpg benchmarks as well. I added my rig info to my signature. It's old and hope to upgrade to Core 2 duo maybe quad and P35 or X38 by years end. In the meantime, I'll be overdosing on Anand's site and Tom's etc.

 

[OutpostDEaD]

Yeah, x264 is sweet! Unfortunately, my set top DVD player only does DIVX and DIVX Ultra (subtitles for a noisy room, yea!) so I just encode to DIVX for now.

 

[jhtrico1850]

Why bother? Incompatibility with other systems, for what? 30% (I'm assuming 70% end result) compression? You know you can just recompress current JPEGS into smaller JPEGs.

 

[OutpostDEaD]

OK, we're getting way off topic here. My fault. I was only trying to suggest a benchmarking tool. I should have titled this Media Encoding Performance: Benchmarking. I didn't intend for this to be a format comparison thread but rather a benchmarking suggestion for the reviewers. Here we have a program that uses 100% of your CPU, supports multi core, and takes a very LONG time to accomplish its task. I just thought that reviewers at anandtech.com might want to know about this and maybe use it to benchmark CPUs and motherboards. I did not intend to promote the format but rather only it's use to benchmark new hardware. Just like way back when fractals when used to benchmark hardware, it wasn't very practical to wait around for an hour for the finished fractal to be displayed on your screen, but it was perfect for benchmarking.