Fabio Pis wrote: H264 test is worst than GTX 580. I saw with gpuZ that gpu load is with mpeg2 dvd constant a 93%, with h264 gpu load it never does not exceed the 63%,and, it is not constant I ask myself if it exists an h264 alternative codec more optimized.. I have to search. edit: After AVG antivirus install: "64","57","41","5" so with 3dvision/physiX/AVG I lose nearly 20% in mpeg2 dvd and MPE on. Fabio, Thank you for the complement, but you are reading to much into our benchmark, you have to be aware of the limitations of any benchmark. If you look at what the H.264 test is doing you will see that it is mostly using 1920 x 1080 material and encoding to 1920 x 1080 so there is no scaling for the GPU to do. On the other hand the MPEG2-DVD encoding uses the same material and of course scales it to DVD 720 x 480 NTSC. That more than likely, is the major difference that causes the MPEG2-DVD to use much more GPU. Do not get another codec it is only likely to cause many more problems than it worth. This benchmark was designed to evaluate your hardware/software so if you are getting bad results we can try to analyze your system so we can make suggestions if you do not have good results. Since your results are at the top of the list you should just be happy and do not mess it up. I am not sure you understand what the numbers mean on your AVG comment. The numbers are 64 is a disk intensive score and is listed as Disk I/O, the next number is 57 and this did not change and it is the MPEG2-DVD encoding time, the third number of 41 is the H.264 encoding number and the lasr number of 5 or 4 is the time it takes to obtain the Preview files. Since the limitations of the available Windows timer is 1 second you have to be aware that any answer is going to vary +/-1 second. Now you can see why we always suggest turning off all unnecessary processes when editing.
... View more