AVI to MPEG2 Conversion - Taking 5+ hours.... is this right??

eskimo

Whenever I used "Any Video Converter" to convert an .avi file to an MPEG2 DVD-PAL file it takes at least five hours for the conversion process to complete.

Is this right?? My laptop has more than enough memory and disk space. Why is this so slow? Are there any programs that do it much faster?

Capt'n Midnight

depends on lots of things
which codec, resolution
laptop spec , cpu
and how long is the file ?

Kieo

convertx to dvd 30 mins, 40 max

eskimo

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

depends on lots of things
which codec, resolution
laptop spec , cpu
and how long is the file ?

Original file:
Duration: 01:54:35
Format: .mp4 (sorry, this current one is not .avi. but the same thing happens with .avi files too)
Video Size: 1280 x 528
FPS: 24 fps
File size: 1.4gb

Converting to:
Video codec: mpeg2video
Video Size: 720x576
Video Bitrate: 8000
Frame Rate: 25
Audio Codec: ac3
Audio Bitrate: 128kbps
Audio Channel: 2

Computer Spec:
Windows Vista Home Basic Service Pack 1
Memory: 1.00GB
Processor: AMD Turion 64 X2 Mobile Technology TL-50 1.60 Ghz
Hard-disk: 11GB free of 64.4GB

The laptop is less than 2 years old and runs perfectly, and only has the bare essentials installed and very little running. I've been using Windows for 14 years and this one I can't figure out.

Jonathan

Your computer is pretty crap specwise tbh...

You are reencoding a film length hd source to a dvd. That takes time.

eskimo

jmccrohan wrote: »

Your computer is pretty crap specwise tbh...

You are reencoding a film length hd source to a dvd. That takes time.

It's just a laptop. It's the basics. But a program like Any Video Converter should function at full speed with those spec, surely, and NOT take SEVEN hours (yeah it took seven hours in the end)........

PogMoThoin

Nothing wrong there, its a laptop with only 1GB ram running Vista, 1GB is barely enough for Vista let alone try convert an .avi.

PaddyTheNth

eskimo wrote: »

It's just a laptop. It's the basics. But a program like Any Video Converter should function at full speed with those spec, surely, and NOT take SEVEN hours (yeah it took seven hours in the end)........

I'm not massively surprised either tbh...I wouldn't have guessed 7+ hours but I would have guessed 4-5.

The combination of barely enough RAM to run the OS plus a pretty feeble processor is killing you.

eskimo

What video conversion program do you guys use?

eskimo

P.S. I should have pointed out that WinAVI Converter only takes maximum two hours to do the same job. I just found AVC simpler to use. And I'm still no wiser as to why it takes so long. Anyway, I'll just go back to WinAVI.

Thanks for the advice!

Voodu Child

PaddyTheNth wrote: »

I'm not massively surprised either tbh...I wouldn't have guessed 7+ hours but I would have guessed 4-5.

The combination of barely enough RAM to run the OS plus a pretty feeble processor is killing you.

Aye, you've a fairly slow processor, and 1GB isn't enough for Vista to run well, i'd recommend 2GB, it's a fairly cheap upgrade and well worth it.

Encoding time is a function of a lot of variables as mentioned, you can speed up or slow down an ecode a huge amount with different quality settings etc. Even with WinAVI, there are different quality settings that will greatly slow your encode.

It may even be a case that AVC is not using both cores effectively. (have you checked cpu usage?)

eskimo

Yeah I just did it on WinAVI Converter.

45 MINUTES!

45 mins vs 7 hours. AVC sucks!!
I'm sure there's no amount of settings you can change that justify 7 hours when it can clearly be done in 45 mins. I blame AVC. Unless I can be proven wrong.

Jonathan

eskimo wrote: »

Yeah I just did it on WinAVI Converter.

45 MINUTES!

45 mins vs 7 hours. AVC sucks!!
I'm sure there's no amount of settings you can change that justify 7 hours when it can clearly be done in 45 mins. I blame AVC. Unless I can be proven wrong.

Different settings, different encoders.

Its a bit like taking two totally different cars and asking why they have different accelerations.

eskimo

jmccrohan wrote: »

Different settings, different encoders.

Its a bit like taking two totally different cars and asking why they have different accelerations.

How different could two standard free video converters be? Could the differene be SO large as to explain why one of them is 9 times faster than the other?

watty

yes.

And usually if you want high quality a slower multipass is better. You convert once and watch many.

It takes MASSIVE HW, usually dedicated, to convert realtime at DVD quality. So any ordinary PC should take much longer than playing time unless you are reducing quality or resolution a lot.

I can't get better than x2 real time (2hrs view time takes 4 hrs proc time) for decent DVD quality encoding in MPEG4 (real broadcast MPEG4, not DivX). 2G RAM, XP with all unneeded services off, X1600 graphics and AMD 3700+ x64.

Converting for 320x 240 is faster than real time. Converting for Archos DVD resolution (but not DVD quality) but DivX is about 17fps (slightly faster than real time). But lower bitrate/quality settings as only a 4.3" screen.

andrewison

try looking at handbrake, open source and very very good. However remember it all depends on ur processor , memory, etc.....to how long it take to encode.

CCSL

Converts to loads of different formats and its free!

converts video files audio files and images.

Can also rip straight from dvd to mpg or any other format you might need.
and even fixed damaged audio/video files.

www.formatoz.com