You need to make those comparisons yourself and determine which tradeoffs are appropriate to your application. There is no simple way for us to make a one-to-one comparison that will necessarily fit your requirements - so we cannot provide any comparisons. It is my understanding that ffmpeg does use some "short cuts" in their codecs to achieve higher performance, at the expense of some quality degradation. Measuring the performance of one encoder operating at a high quality level against one operating at a low quality level will provide substantially different measurements, but will not necessarily be a "fair" comparison of the two encoders. if I open ispy I can select add camera and get video, indicated url. In the case of ffmpeg comparisons, you also have to be sure you are comparing encode/decode at similar quality levels. There are simply too many variables involved in any such comparison.
Providing performance comparisons between IPP functions and other applications is a very tricky business. What I would really like to see from intel is that the codecs from intel on single thread should be as good as codecs from ffmpeg on single thread.Īnother point is that with every release i would expect intel to publish the performance improvements with respect to previous release all comparisons done with single thread (in the case here i was expecting a performance comparison of all the codecs from ipp 6.1 to ipp 7). It would be good if you can provide some camparative analysis between intel and ffmpeg codecs.
#ISPY FFMPEG H264 SOFTWARE#
The software provides users with an identity masking tool that uses highly advanced deception algorithms which allow them to hide their real IP address and location.
#ISPY FFMPEG H264 CODE#
I have another query: is intel ipp sample code / library using cache on the system in an optimal way? I did not see anywhere that the code is cache sensistive. With iSpy, you can monitor all activities, which includes text messages, e-mails, call logs, file changes, screen captured pictures, web history, background information and much more. Here is more info on comparison: for a typical HD input 30 fps, ipp h264 decoder gives max 18-20fps o/p whereas ffmpeg h264 decoder gives max 35 fps o/p on a 2.3 ghz linux m/c. Even if i calculate your ways the performance of ffmpeg H264 decoder is substantially (40%-50%) better than ipp h264 decoder without a doubt. The way you are calculating the performance is good if we take both ipp h264 decoder and ffmpeg decoder with single thread.