Nehalem's Media Encoding Performance

We had time to run two of our media encoding tests: the DivX 6.8 and x264 workloads.

DivX 6.8 with Xmpeg

Our DivX test is the same one we've run in our regular CPU reviews, we're simply encoding a 1080p MPEG-2 file in DivX. We are using an unconstrained profile, encoding preset of 5 and enhanced multithreading is enabled.

The DivX test is an important one as it doesn't scale well at all beyond four threads, any performance advantage Nehalem has here is entirely due to microarchitectural improvements and not influenced by its ability to work on twice as many threads at once.

DivX 6.8 w/ Xmpeg 5.0.3

Clock for clock, Nehalem is nearly 28% faster than Penryn in our DivX test. Even better is when you put this performance in perspective: at 2.66GHz Nehalem is faster than the fastest Penryn available today the Core 2 Extreme QX9770 running at 3.2GHz. At 3.2GHz, Nehalem will be fast. The improvements in performance here are entirely due to the faster L2 cache and micro-architectural gains; being able to have more micro-ops in flight and improved unaligned cache accesses give us a significant improvement in video encoding performance.

The last time we saw these sorts of performance gains was when Conroe first launched.

x264 Encoding with AutoMKV

Using AutoMKV we compress the same source file we used in our WME test down to 100MB, but with the x264 codec. We used the 2_Pass_Insane_Quality profile:

x264 w/ AutoMKV 

Encoding performance here went through the roof with Nehalem: a clock for clock boost of 44%. Once more, Nehalem at today's artificially limited, modest clock speed is already faster than any Penryn out today. What Intel did to AMD in 2006, it is doing to itself in 2008. Amazing.

A Quick Path to Memory Faster Unaligned Cache Accesses & 3D Rendering Performance
POST A COMMENT

108 Comments

View All Comments

  • Justin Case - Sunday, June 08, 2008 - link

    The chances of AMD dying are approximately... zero. The question is whether they stay as an independent company or get bought by someone else. Their IP and patent portfolio alone are worth more than the company's current value, even if they didn't sell a single CPU and didn't have any fabs.

    The top candidate is Samsung, followed by IBM, followed by the UAE. But the real nightmare scenario is this: Microsoft buys AMD, and slowly makes its software incompatible with (or run much slower on) everyone else's CPUs. After that, they have zero incentive to improve the chips, because no one else can compete anyway.

    Since it's been shown that Microsoft can violate antitrust legislation as much as it wants (as long as it pays off a few senators), this is not at all impossible. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
    Reply
  • VooDooAddict - Monday, June 09, 2008 - link

    That would be the beginning of the end for MS.

    MS buys AMD? .... that would be the day I buy a fully loaded Mac Pro.
    Reply
  • Griswold - Friday, June 06, 2008 - link

    Listenting to whom? Somebody as naive and clueless as you, who apparently believes breaking laws in the past should be forgiven and forgotten until there is no competition at all, because the market will magically make things work out perfectly for the customer anyway...?
    Reply
  • n0b0dykn0ws - Thursday, June 05, 2008 - link

    If Nehalem comes out and does run circles around current processors, then we're better off, right?

    The only problem is that Intel is holding back on it's CPUs.

    Without competition, Intel will only give us 'just a little taste'.

    Me personally? I want the full strength version at today's prices.

    n0b0dykn0ws
    Reply
  • Rev1 - Monday, June 09, 2008 - link

    AMd is still competitive in the price segment of lower end cpu's, and after the PT4 debacle intel doesnt wanna loosen it's grip anytime soon to AMD. Reply
  • Zurtex - Thursday, June 05, 2008 - link

    You've written:

    "Encoding performance here went through the roof with Nehalem: a clock for clock boost of 44%."

    But your graph shows the exact opposite. I'm assuming you just got the numbers on the graph the wrong way around, rather than your analysis mixed up.
    Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, June 05, 2008 - link

    Uh, sometimes bits get flipped when in transfer from Taiwan, yeah, that's it.

    Anyhow, thanks for the notice. Fixed.
    Reply
  • 8steve8 - Thursday, June 05, 2008 - link

    exactly what I expected.

    imc was long overdue for intel...


    can't wait to buy one, but I've been hearing us mere consumers wont be able to until well into 09?

    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now