Hi everyone!First of all, excuse my English. I'm Spaniard, and my english istn't good.I want to send you some questions:I've got a PS3 and a AMD Athlon 64 3200+ (1.99 GHz). The CPU has XP (32bits) installed, and my network connection between PS3 and PC is 100Mbits. My goal is transcode .mkv files in the PC and see them in my LCD connected (HMDI) to PS3.I know that I've got a slow CPU to achive this, but I'm thinking to purchase a brand new PC.Here's my first question:

-I had read that with a dual core 2.66GHz is quite enough, but nowadays there are quad-cores in market. In your opinion, which is the best option: (1) purchase a fast dual core (above 3GHz) or (2) purchase a Quad Core bellow 2.6GHz?? (Remember my goal. The CPU is only to transcode .mkv files and stream them tho PS3)

Now the second:

-100 Mbits is enough?

And the third one:

When I play .mkv files (720/1080), with MEncoder engine (basic tunning options in PS3 media server set, like only 2 audio channels and 100 broadband) , I've got stuttering, and the use of the proccesor in the PC becomes 100%, but, when I use TsMuxer the results are much better. I can see and hear the .mkv files with no problems, the use of PC's proccesor is trivial/insignificant... The only problems detected: Not every .mkv runs (PS3 reports corrupted file), or you can hear the stream but there's no image (black screen).For those .mkv that runs with TsMuxer:-Are there options to set in PS3 media Server that permit change the streaming of .mkv's audio tracks? Some of those .mkv I hear them in english by default when I know that they have spanish tracks inside.

PijusMagnificus wrote:-I had read that with a dual core 2.66GHz is quite enough, but nowadays there are quad-cores in market. In your opinion, which is the best option: (1) purchase a fast dual core (above 3GHz) or (2) purchase a Quad Core bellow 2.6GHz?? (Remember my goal. The CPU is only to transcode .mkv files and stream them tho PS3)

Now the second:

-100 Mbits is enough?

And the third one:

When I play .mkv files (720/1080), with MEncoder engine (basic tunning options in PS3 media server set, like only 2 audio channels and 100 broadband) , I've got stuttering, and the use of the proccesor in the PC becomes 100%, but, when I use TsMuxer the results are much better. I can see and hear the .mkv files with no problems, the use of PC's proccesor is trivial/insignificant... The only problems detected: Not every .mkv runs (PS3 reports corrupted file), or you can hear the stream but there's no image (black screen).For those .mkv that runs with TsMuxer:-Are there options to set in PS3 media Server that permit change the streaming of .mkv's audio tracks? Some of those .mkv I hear them in english by default when I know that they have spanish tracks inside.

PijusMagnificus.

Faster Dual-core is better than slow Quad-core.100 Mbits is more than enough. 1080p mkv only take 30 MbpsAsk the third question after you change your CPU.

Quad core is always better than dual core for applications well optimized for multithreading.Up to 2x when frequency is the same. If differ, 300Mhz(2.66 Qcore / 3.0 C2D) will not give you another 2 cores for example

And how did you come to this conclusion? Unless you base it on the fact that some codecs are not multi-threaded where the sheer speed of a single core counts...

tongkk wrote:100 Mbits is more than enough. 1080p mkv only take 30 Mbps

"Baraka" (original not recompressed video stream) when using mencoder for the VC-1 transcode with the "keyint=1:vqscale=1:vqmin=2" settings has scenes with sustained ~320Mb/s resulting bitrate and peaks reaching even 370Mb/s with the mentioned settings.

And how did you come to this conclusion? Unless you base it on the fact that some codecs are not multi-threaded where the sheer speed of a single core counts...

tongkk wrote:100 Mbits is more than enough. 1080p mkv only take 30 Mbps

"Baraka" (original not recompressed video stream) when using mencoder for the VC-1 transcode with the "keyint=1:vqscale=1:vqmin=2" settings has scenes with sustained ~320Mb/s resulting bitrate and peaks reaching even 370Mb/s with the mentioned settings.

I use Q9300, although the CPU usage is increase significant after enable the multicore support , but I don't find any significant difference between the non-multicore support setting. 1080p still lag ! So I think a 3Ghz dual-core may have a better performance than 2.5 Ghz Quad-core under non-mutlicore support setting.

I still wonder why a original Blu-ray disc only have max 50 mbps data, but a compressed mkv will take 320 Mpbs ?? Why the mkv 's bitrate will higher than the original blu-ray copy ??

And how did you come to this conclusion? Unless you base it on the fact that some codecs are not multi-threaded where the sheer speed of a single core counts...

tongkk wrote:100 Mbits is more than enough. 1080p mkv only take 30 Mbps

"Baraka" (original not recompressed video stream) when using mencoder for the VC-1 transcode with the "keyint=1:vqscale=1:vqmin=2" settings has scenes with sustained ~320Mb/s resulting bitrate and peaks reaching even 370Mb/s with the mentioned settings.

I use Q9300, although the CPU usage is increase significant after enable the multicore support , but I don't find any significant difference between the non-multicore support setting. 1080p still lag ! So I think a 3Ghz dual-core may have a better performance than 2.5 Ghz Quad-core under non-mutlicore support setting.

I still wonder why a original Blu-ray disc only have max 50 mbps data, but a compressed mkv will take 320 Mpbs ?? When the bitrate will higher than the original copy ??

for some codecs (VC1), there's no multithreaded support... that means the transcode with a 2.8Ghz dual core will be faster than a 2.3ghz quad...

tongkk wrote:I still wonder why a original Blu-ray disc only have max 50 mbps data, but a compressed mkv will take 320 Mpbs ?? Why the mkv 's bitrate will higher than the original blu-ray copy ??

I am referring to the situation when transcoding does takes place (like when using the mencoder method, not tsremux). The output video compression is MPEG2 and because of keyint=1 all frames are coded as intra-frames so it's far less efficient. To maintain the specified "quality" (vqmin=2) a very high bitrate results.

tongkk wrote:I still wonder why a original Blu-ray disc only have max 50 mbps data, but a compressed mkv will take 320 Mpbs ?? Why the mkv 's bitrate will higher than the original blu-ray copy ??

I am referring to the situation when transcoding does takes place (like when using the mencoder method, not tsremux). The output video compression is MPEG2 and because of keyint=1 all frames are coded as intra-frames so it's far less efficient. To maintain the specified "quality" (vqmin=2) a very high bitrate results.

AS I know , 1080i mpeg (Japan HDTV TS file with AAC 5.1) only stream at max 25 Mbps, I still wonder why a high quality 1080p can take 320 Mpbs ?? It is 12.8 times of a 1080i mpeg bitrate!!! Is it reasonable? Any PC / CPU can cope with such high bitrate movie ???? 320Mbps = 40 MByte/s (even harddisk are unable constantly have 40 MByte/s transfer rate!!)

Because 20Mbit AVC is not the same as 50Mbit MPEG2 In peak bitrates it can be up to 10times greater because AVC have to be re-coded to MPEG2.If peak bitrate 320Mbit you see on PS3, check also what max bitrate report PMS. I don't suppose that your bitrate in PMS will be realy 320Mbit. For WHY, try to read here little bit more.Also you can't recode 20Mbit MPEG2 to 20Mbit MPEG2 without loosing quality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Because that more bitrate less detail you will loose. Because that 15Mbit AVC (1080p) can have more than 100Mbit in peak bitrate.(You can lower it but picture can be more blocky...)All these question were already many times answered so please don't ask it again and try to be less lazy.