• Blogs
• Forums
• Tradeshows
• Partners
• White Papers
• Podcast Show Notes
• Events

Sorenson Media Squeeze 6 Test Drive

Nov 23, 2009 12:00 PM, By Jan Ozer

           

Figure 3. Changing the preference to encode multiple files simultaneously in Sorenson Media Squeeze 6.

Windows performance comparisons

I tested Windows performance on my 3.33GHz, dual-quad-core processor HP Z800, encoding a single file to H.264 and WMV 9 formats, and then loading eight files into the program and encoding again. With the WMV files, Squeeze 6 (as with Squeeze 5) encoded the files in parallel, producing significant time savings. Note that you have to check the "Allow simultaneous jobs" checkbox in the Preferences panel to encode in parallel (see Figure 3).

Table 1. Squeeze single- and multiple-file encoding times for Windows. N/As mean that the encoding tool wasn't capable of loading multiple instances (AME, Episode).

With H.264 files, Squeeze doesn't encode in parallel, which is why encoding eight files in sequence took eight times the single-file encoding time. When I asked why, the Sorenson product manager told me it was because the H.264 codec was hyper-threaded and encoding in parallel might slow the process down. To test this, I loaded eight instances of Squeeze and encoded my 1-minute test file to the target parameters in each one. You can see the results in Table 1.

For Windows Media files, Squeeze 6 is an absolute screamer, decreasing Squeeze's already category-leading encoding time by 33 percent for single files and 23 percent for multiple files. If you're producing Windows Media files, between the quality and encoding speed, Squeeze 6 is a great choice.

For H.264, Squeeze 6 is significantly slower than Squeeze 5. Note that I used MainConcept's multipass encoding for both versions, prioritizing quality over encoding time. If you opt for the available two-pass mode in Squeeze 6, you'll cut encoding time down to 1:04 (compared to 2:08 for multipass). I didn't compare the quality of the two-pass vs. the multipass file, but if you're in a hurry, you can run that analysis and see if you can shave your encoding time without too much loss in quality.

As you can see, my tests seemed to indicate that Sorenson could improve multiple-file encoding times by encoding H.264 files in parallel, as it does with WMV. If you're encoding multiple files, you can also load multiple instances of Squeeze—just keep selecting the program in the Start menu or clicking on the desktop icon, and multiple instances will load. Load separate files into each instance, choose your encoding parameters, and click the Squeeze button. They'll all happily chug along, cutting your multiple-file H.264 encoding times by around 43 percent, according to my tests.

Overall, if you have Adobe Media Encoder and you need single- or multiple-file H.264 production, there's little reason to look to Squeeze unless you need the review and approval workflow, or other features offered by Squeeze. If you're choosing between Episode and Squeeze 6 solely based on H.264 output quality and performance, Squeeze 6 is the winner.