CPU Tests: Encoding

One of the interesting elements on modern processors is encoding performance. This covers two main areas: encryption/decryption for secure data transfer, and video transcoding from one video format to another.

In the encrypt/decrypt scenario, how data is transferred and by what mechanism is pertinent to on-the-fly encryption of sensitive data - a process by which more modern devices are leaning to for software security.

Video transcoding as a tool to adjust the quality, file size and resolution of a video file has boomed in recent years, such as providing the optimum video for devices before consumption, or for game streamers who are wanting to upload the output from their video camera in real-time. As we move into live 3D video, this task will only get more strenuous, and it turns out that the performance of certain algorithms is a function of the input/output of the content.

HandBrake 1.32: Link

Video transcoding (both encode and decode) is a hot topic in performance metrics as more and more content is being created. First consideration is the standard in which the video is encoded, which can be lossless or lossy, trade performance for file-size, trade quality for file-size, or all of the above can increase encoding rates to help accelerate decoding rates. Alongside Google's favorite codecs, VP9 and AV1, there are others that are prominent: H264, the older codec, is practically everywhere and is designed to be optimized for 1080p video, and HEVC (or H.265) that is aimed to provide the same quality as H264 but at a lower file-size (or better quality for the same size). HEVC is important as 4K is streamed over the air, meaning less bits need to be transferred for the same quality content. There are other codecs coming to market designed for specific use cases all the time.

Handbrake is a favored tool for transcoding, with the later versions using copious amounts of newer APIs to take advantage of co-processors, like GPUs. It is available on Windows via an interface or can be accessed through the command-line, with the latter making our testing easier, with a redirection operator for the console output.

We take the compiled version of this 16-minute YouTube video about Russian CPUs at 1080p30 h264 and convert into three different files: (1) 480p30 ‘Discord’, (2) 720p30 ‘YouTube’, and (3) 4K60 HEVC.

(5-1a) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 480p Discord(5-1b) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 720p YouTube(5-1c) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 4K60 HEVC

7-Zip 1900: Link

The first compression benchmark tool we use is the open-source 7-zip, which typically offers good scaling across multiple cores. 7-zip is the compression tool most cited by readers as one they would rather see benchmarks on, and the program includes a built-in benchmark tool for both compression and decompression.

The tool can either be run from inside the software or through the command line. We take the latter route as it is easier to automate, obtain results, and put through our process. The command line flags available offer an option for repeated runs, and the output provides the average automatically through the console. We direct this output into a text file and regex the required values for compression, decompression, and a combined score.

(5-2c) 7-Zip 1900 Combined Score

AES Encoding

Algorithms using AES coding have spread far and wide as a ubiquitous tool for encryption. Again, this is another CPU limited test, and modern CPUs have special AES pathways to accelerate their performance. We often see scaling in both frequency and cores with this benchmark. We use the latest version of TrueCrypt and run its benchmark mode over 1GB of in-DRAM data. Results shown are the GB/s average of encryption and decryption.

(5-3) AES Encoding

WinRAR 5.90: Link

For the 2020 test suite, we move to the latest version of WinRAR in our compression test. WinRAR in some quarters is more user friendly that 7-Zip, hence its inclusion. Rather than use a benchmark mode as we did with 7-Zip, here we take a set of files representative of a generic stack

  • 33 video files , each 30 seconds, in 1.37 GB,
  • 2834 smaller website files in 370 folders in 150 MB,
  • 100 Beat Saber music tracks and input files, for 451 MB

This is a mixture of compressible and incompressible formats. The results shown are the time taken to encode the file. Due to DRAM caching, we run the test for 20 minutes times and take the average of the last five runs when the benchmark is in a steady state.

For automation, we use AHK’s internal timing tools from initiating the workload until the window closes signifying the end. This means the results are contained within AHK, with an average of the last 5 results being easy enough to calculate.

(5-4) WinRAR 5.90 Test, 3477 files, 1.96 GB

CPU Tests: Simulation and Rendering CPU Tests: Legacy and Web
Comments Locked

135 Comments

View All Comments

  • mode_13h - Thursday, August 5, 2021 - link

    Thanks for the correction. That was a real head-scratcher!
  • msroadkill612 - Thursday, August 5, 2021 - link

    Under the table on p1
    "The top part is a Ryzen 7 5700G, featuring eight cores and sixteen threads, with a base frequency of 3.8 GHz and a turbo frequency of 4.6 GHz. The Vega 8 graphics runs at 2000 MHz, and we get 16 lanes of PCIe 3.0 for graphics, plus another four for storage."
    Not so -AFAIK - all apus have 8 lanes for the graphics pcie slot.

    anand made the same mistake on a previous apu review as i recall. its very misleading.
  • nanonan - Friday, August 6, 2021 - link

    The 4000G series have 16 lanes and so do these, it was not misleading at all as far as I can tell.
  • Fulljack - Friday, August 6, 2021 - link

    nope, the connection to GPU were different according to the package. any APUs packaged on AM4 will have x16 PCIe 3.0 connection—always has been since Raven Ridge.

    for laptop, FP6 and previous package were limited to x8 PCIe 3.0 connection for the GPU.
  • pman6 - Thursday, August 5, 2021 - link

    will have to wait for 6000G, since this has old ass graphics with no AV1 decoding support. Enjoy your choppy 4k/8k video
  • nandnandnand - Thursday, August 5, 2021 - link

    ~2x graphics performance, AV1 decode, DDR5, PCIe 4.0, USB4, and possibly a Zen 3+ IPC increase.
  • GreenReaper - Thursday, August 5, 2021 - link

    Yeah... they're good CPUs, but not the one to get if you're buying something to use for the next decade.
  • GeoffreyA - Thursday, August 5, 2021 - link

    Possibly the best for AM4 folk that want an APU.
  • GeoffreyA - Thursday, August 5, 2021 - link

    Can't comment on 8K, but 4K runs smoothly even on an old 2200G.
  • pman6 - Thursday, August 5, 2021 - link

    not 4k60 AV1 it doesn't. Or it uses a lot of cpu resources

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now