get it, but then how to reach 800% for one task at least ?as for the girls,
well, I strongly believe in practical experiments ;)
Le Lundi 10 avril 2017 15h06, Reindl Harald <[email protected]> a
écrit :
Am 10.04.2017 um 14:59 schrieb fred fred:
> hello Harald, it is not a conclusion, it's an expectation ! and a question :
> for one file from some format to x265, what it the best efficient way to use
> my 24 cores ? can you contribute ?BestFred
parallelization depends on a lot of things and you always have sharded
ressources like memory, IO, thread-synchronisation - for one video task
probably there is just no way to get 24 core to 100% CPU usage
with 3 different parallel tasks each using 8 cores probably better
because each one has it's own thread-synchronisation and so on
you just can't expect that throwing enough CPU cores on a problem will
solve it faster the same as 9 girls can't make a child in one month :-)
> Le Lundi 10 avril 2017 14h54, Reindl Harald <[email protected]> a
>écrit :
> Am 10.04.2017 um 14:43 schrieb fred fred:
>> thank you Moritz !
>> anyway, even with -threads 0
>> x265 [info]: Thread pool created using 24 threadsx265
>> I see with top command between 400% - 500% CPU on ffmpeg ...
>> I was expected like 2400% or 24 ffmpeg workers with 100%
>
> how did you come to the conclusion that parallelization scales magically
> and with no limits? if that would be realistic just throwing enough CPU
> cores on whatever problem would be the soplution - but that is not how
> computers are working
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[email protected] with subject "unsubscribe".
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[email protected] with subject "unsubscribe".
