MediaCoder

I just tested the x86 version of build 5290 on a 64-bit Win7 PC.
It passed all the 14 usual tests (see Test Report: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=10383).
Hence, it is the best of the recent versions (since 5230-36).

It also lacks some recently reported bugs. It will now (1) convert from NTSC to PAL (changes frame rate), (2) does not double the frame rate on using Xvidcore, (3) correctly reads and saves Presets and (4) reads the duration of large files to the nearest second (hence will correctly merge large files).

My previous favourite build was 5230, which I had kept for most of my uses, even though it failed to merge large files correctly.
Hence, 5290 is now my default FAVOURITE, as it is better.

Edit: this conclusion was extended to the 64-bit version after further evidence (see later posts below)

I have just tried the 64-bit version of 5290, after changing all my Presets to suit (see: viewtopic.php?f=28&t=12247).
It also passed the tests.

Half of the conversions took just as long as did the 32-bit version and the other took longer! (The various conversion tests are done on a 100-sec source file).
However, the conversion of a 1h 28 min test with Add Track was somewhat quicker.
But, overall, I see little advantage in using the 64-bit version.
So, I shall continue testing the builds via the 32-bit versions since it has a wider audience.
(but see the Post on the 27 Oct below)

meRobs wrote:I have just tried the 64-bit version of 5290, after changing all my Presets to suit (see: viewtopic.php?f=28&t=12247).
It also passed the tests.

Half of the conversions took just as long as did the 32-bit version and the other took longer! (The various conversion tests are done on a 100-sec source file).
However, the conversion of a 1h 28 min test with Add Track was somewhat quicker.
But, overall, I see little advantage in using the 64-bit version.
So, I shall continue testing the builds via the 32-bit versions since it has a wider audience.

What about the ability to use multiple cores of say a quad-core cpu? Are the 32 and 64 bit versions comparable there, too?

kieranc wrote:What about the ability to use multiple cores of say a quad-core cpu? Are the 32 and 64 bit versions comparable there, too?

Yes, in each case, on the Tasking tab you can set All Cores.
I have a 4-core CPU.

After comparing the 32- and the 64-bit versions of 5290/2, I conclude that the 64-bit version is faster and doesn't have the Xvidcore problem that affects the 32-bit versions.
This is discussed in viewtopic.php?f=17&t=12251

Hence, the best build I have seen to date is the 64-bit 5292.

After more testing (see above link) I discovered that in fact the 64-bit version is faster in all my tests. The earlier conclusion was due to the 64-bit Presets being not exactly the same as the 32-bit ones.

As a result: future routine testing for the Test Reports will be with the 64-bit version.