.

[Stephen304]

.

[s55]

It would be a great speed improvement if you made a 64 bit macintosh version of handbrake.

Sorry to spoil your dream world, but 64bit builds of HB are not going to give you any kind of magical performance increase.
My own testing on a Intel Core2 show a 5~10% increase at the best of times.

You can already build 64bit versions of HB on leopard, you don't need snow leopard for that.

[Stephen304]

.

[s55]

HandBrake Is not any faster on snow leopard than it is on Lepoard (using 64bit builds).

[Stephen304]

.

[KonaBlend]

Yes it is! Do some tests, run HB normal build on 10.6 then run 64 bit on 10.6 on the same video/dvd with the same settings.

Wait wait wait, are you saying that snow leopard doesn't run apps substantially faster than leopard? Isn't that why apple is making snow leopard? To make apps run faster? Helooo?

The question is, have you tried running a 64-bit build of HandBrake on 10.5.7 vs. 10.6.0, same hardware, and factoring out the usual benchmark interference such as optical drives, busy systems? If so, I would like to see a full HB log for each session.

[Stephen304]

.

[TedJ]

I also LOVE coloured text!

[Stephen304]

.

[KonaBlend]

The current movie i am processing at the moment is only using %90 of my processing power, when in fact it can go up to %200. (because of new features apple has added and an incompatibility between cpu % readers and the way the os does the processing)

No. Snow Leopard will not magically make an app that is running running at < 50% core efficiency use 100% core efficiency.
No. Snow Leopard will not magically make an app use OpenCL unless the app has been programmed to do so.
...and besides, HandBrake in 32-bit or 64-bit form is easily capable of maxing out 8 cores on a Mac Pro. If you know what you're doing.

No, obviously 64 bit by itself won't make it faster, but 64 bit on SNOW leopard is faster, not just leopard or any other computer. Snow leopard runs 64 bit apps MUCH faster

How much? 1%? 2%? Anything less than 5% means they've done good, sound, release optimizations for their kernel and userland. Anything between 5%-10% means they've done a superb job. But the way you're talking it sounds like you think it will be at or nearly twice as fast. Since you refuse to quantify what MUCH faster means, it's hardly more than an overly enthusiastic statement on your part. You know, the kind which you refuse to use a concrete number so as to leave a way to spin your way out of bogus claims.

Wait wait wait, are you saying that snow leopard doesn't run apps substantially faster than leopard? Isn't that why apple is making snow leopard? To make apps run faster? Helooo?

Uhm yeah I'll say exactly that. Unless the apps are reengineered by-their-authors to take advantage of Snow Leopard's new features, exactly how do you think Snow Leopard is going to run apps substantially faster? In my book substantially faster is in the realm of at least a 25% or improvement.

The question is have YOU tried running 64 bit HB on Snow Leopard with a decent system?

Your complete lack of an answer is worth a thousand words

[Stephen304]

.

[rhester]

Ok, fine, i give up. All i wanted is a 64 bit HB application. I should have made a better excuse to ask for one. You guys argue too much.

Yeah, logical and sound reasoning is always a bummer. 'tis much better to engage in rampant fanb0i-ism.

I'd lock the thread but I'd rather at least keep the insanity localized.

Rodney

[OZMP]

I came looking for a 64bit HB app to test out the Snow Leopard build I am running on my MacPro.
Is there anyway to get hold of the binary installer that WAS here: http://forum.handbrake.fr/viewtopic.php ... 001#p52990

Cheers,

[s55]

The new build system that was put into place recently supports 64bit builds on mac. If you checkout the source from the SVN, and read the docs in the /doc folder you could compile yourself a 64bit build.

[chrysrobyn]

The current movie i am processing at the moment is only using %90 of my processing power, when in fact it can go up to %200. (because of new features apple has added and an incompatibility between cpu % readers and the way the os does the processing)

No. Snow Leopard will not magically make an app that is running running at < 50% core efficiency use 100% core efficiency.
No. Snow Leopard will not magically make an app use OpenCL unless the app has been programmed to do so.
...and besides, HandBra

I can usually tell the difference between a rabid fanboy and a troll, but I can't tell here.

1) I'd trust the developer here when he says that 64 bit isn't all that plus a bag of chips.
2) Snow Leopard speeds up for several reasons, including small subsystem optimizations, thinning some unused code (including fat binaries) and totally rewriting Finder in Cocoa. As KonaBlend said, Snow Leopard won't magically use OpenCL, up core efficiency use and it won't turn single threaded applications into multiple threads. It might make it easier to write multithreaded apps, but it won't do it for you.
3) I've seen a few write-ups on using GPUs for encoding and transcoding video, and it seems like there's not too much benefit for a whole pile of effort. http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl ... 12/0156222 is one place.

[ssj2_goha]

Ok, fine, i give up. All i wanted is a 64 bit HB application. I should have made a better excuse to ask for one. You guys argue too much.

if you HAVE a copy of 10.6 you should know how to build from source with xcode, get the svn and build the 64 bit version. If you don't know how to do that where did you steal your copy of 10.6 from?

[jann]

Ok, fine, i give up. All i wanted is a 64 bit HB application. I should have made a better excuse to ask for one. You guys argue too much.

if you HAVE a copy of 10.6 you should know how to build from source with xcode, get the svn and build the 64 bit version. If you don't know how to do that where did you steal your copy of 10.6 from?

I hope I am not the only one who has a problem with the tone this thread has taken. Granted, not everyone who has Snow Leopard has the right to be using it at this point in time (Aug 26, 2009) however, that is no reason to take this kind of attitude.

For instance, a posting above says to download the source from SVN, look in the /doc folder for instructions on building a 64-bit build of HandBrake. However, I am sure I am not the only one who noticed that there is no such directory as "/doc" in the current release tar.gz source. Why not? If we can compile the current source from SVN for 64-bit, is there a reason why we cannot download the current "HandBrake-0.9.3.tar.gz" from the site and do the same? I am just wondering why, if the /doc dir is in SVN, why is it not in "HandBrake-0.9.3.tar.gz"? I do not know many developers who would not release the SVN contents as the "source tar.gz file".

Not trying to be a smart-alek here, just trying to make a point that even those of us with the "right' to have Snow Leopard do not necessarily have the instructions to compile HandBrake to 64-bit. Maybe instead of attacking someone who *may* have the right to use Snow Leopard, we might should think about building it and posting it for them (and others). If, indeed, it is so simple, why not do this -- and make it the DEFAULT download for Mac users? We have a 10.5-only version of HandBrake. 10.5 *can* run 64-bit apps with no problems!

I am not saying that s/he could not do it on their own, just wondering why, with all the dev builds of Snow Leopard released to date, there is no "official" 64-bit HandBrake binary yet? I for one (who constantly boots in 64-bit mode on my MacBook Pro -- and DOES see a speed improvement) have noticed the "Intel" label in Activity Monitor next to HandBrake, instead of "Intel (64 bit)" and kinda wondered why, if it is so easy to do the build, is the HandBrake 10.5 only version NOT 64-bit. 10.5 WOULD run this correctly and it would stop these type of requests.

One last thing regarding speed improvements of 64-bit, etc. Speed of encoding is not the only reason to go 64-bit (although I *do* agree with the poster that stated 5% or so improvement is good enough.) Think about this: In the past, interleaved parallel memory has yielded improvements of 5% to 8%! 5-8%! Any IT specialist would tell you that this is worth it if you simply had to recompile! The fact that "a 5-8% increase is worth it" has also been drilled into EVERY person upgrading their RAM since Apple enabled RAM interleaving with the Centris 650 and Quadra 800!! "Always install memory in matching pairs" Sound familiar? So why do we not think that going 64-bit is NOT worth it if it *just* gives us a 5-8% improvement in speed!?

Among other reasons. 64-bit apps on OS X have the following benefits:
* They’re even more secure from hackers and malware than the 32-bit versions of the same application
* Access to more RAM per process
* Boosts overall performance of an application
* 30% - 50% decrease in load time across the board

Anyway, just my .02

[s55]

However, I am sure I am not the only one who noticed that there is no such directory as "/doc" in the current release tar.gz source. Why not?

The build system was re-written some time after 0.9.3 was released. Thus, no doc folder, no new build system, no 64bit build support etc.

If we can compile the current source from SVN for 64-bit, is there a reason why we cannot download the current "HandBrake-0.9.3.tar.gz" from the site and do the same?

Old build system didn't support it.

I am just wondering why, if the /doc dir is in SVN, why is it not in "HandBrake-0.9.3.tar.gz"? I do not know many developers who would not release the SVN contents as the "source tar.gz file".

Um, source packages are for the revision of code that ties to the released binaries. Source packages are not SVN.

If, indeed, it is so simple, why not do this -- and make it the DEFAULT download for Mac users? We have a 10.5-only version of HandBrake. 10.5 *can* run 64-bit apps with no problems!

No-one debates that. Infact, the last 2 snapshots have had 64bit mac and linux builds included on the snapshot download page.

I am not saying that s/he could not do it on their own, just wondering why, with all the dev builds of Snow Leopard released to date, there is no "official" 64-bit HandBrake binary yet?

The code is not and has not been in a state for release to general users. Thus, there hasn't been a release build. When the code is ready, there will be a 64bit release with 0.9.4.

[TedJ]

Is this a good time to mention that there are 64 bit builds available for the current development snapshot?

One of the reasons why we do not make 64 bit releases available for the 0.9.3 release is because, as s55 pointed out, 64 bit builds were impossible under the build system we were using last November. What you rather the developers spend their time doing - backporting the current build system to code that's coming up on 12 months old, or working on the new features due for release in 0.9.4?

The other stumbling block is that 64 bit builds of Handbrake do not offer decryption facilities for encrypted DVD's, as the current release of VLC (and it's libraries) are only 32 bit.

[rhester]

I do not dispute that 64-bit is the way forward, but...

Among other reasons. 64-bit apps on OS X have the following benefits:
* They’re even more secure from hackers and malware than the 32-bit versions of the same application

How would this be, exactly? The standard attack vector by malware these days is custom driver code, not infecting individual applications. That hasn't been "trendy" for years now.

* Access to more RAM per process

True enough - but if your application doesn't require it (and x264 prior to mbtree certainly *could not* take advantage of an address space > 2GB), there's nothing to be gained here.

* Boosts overall performance of an application

Agreed, though I assume you recognize that a good bit of that speed benefit is thanks to the operating system's usage of more registers and the inevitable larger amount of on-die cache available - benefits that come with a 64-bit OS and CPU regardless of whether the app itself is 32-bit or 64-bit.

* 30% - 50% decrease in load time across the board

How is that? You're suggesting the demand-pager in the OS automatically shrinks the number of opcodes in the binary at load time?

Again, there are indeed absolute benefits in a move to a 64-bit world (and some drawbacks!), but I am concerned about the generalized worldview a lot of people seem to hold that 64-bit is some sort of miracle technology (like OpenCL). The single biggest advantage to a 64-bit world is precisely what it sounds like - a larger address space (both for the application and the operating system), permitting usage of more RAM. Other benefits are entirely secondary (and rather subjective).

Rodney

[dynaflash]

Is this a good time to mention that there are 64 bit builds available for the current development snapshot?

Heck for mac you even get a nifty dock icon with the 64 bit "Badge of speed" on it !