Slow Video Compression

What settings are u using?

And whats your CPU?

1080p, 12000 bit rate, 30 fps and 8120

Handbrake will use the CPU @ 100% and its a good thing,

unless u are short on RAM with slow CPU.

U can set priority to lower setting to ease up the CPU.

Default is "normal".

I Have 8gb RAM, Is That Good?

What Reference frame and Max B-frames?

8GB is OK.

What is your OS? W7?

Handbrake version?

Windows 7, Yes
Handbrake 0.9.6

What Reference frame and Max B-frames?

In English Please

Click on the advanced tab and on left upper corner, u'll see it : )

BTW, is your CPU OC'd?

1 Reference 3 B

So, u didn't changed anything yet, right?

Where are u going to watch the final video? What device?

I Did Not Change Anything, Things Might Go On Youtube And I Might Watch Them  
What Are Reference Frames?

Than u can set -> it will finish faster. It all has to do with compression and detail recognition...

Reference frame 1

Max B-frames 1

Encoding at high resolution will slow down the encoding process.

If you are using the x.264 codec then you should know that it needs a lot of processing power for the encoding process which means it will be relatively slow. If you are using the XviD codec, then the encoding process will not be as slow because that codec requires less processing power. But the end result will not be as good as using x.264.

OK, on what? LCD tv? What Size?

On Phone devices?

On Computer?

jaguarskx is right.

AVI quality is low when compared to MKV or MP4.

I assumed that u are encoding in to MKV, so what are u using?

MP4

OK, on what? LCD tv? What Size?

On Phone devices?

On Computer?

24" LED 1080P
I Might Post One Tommarow  

On 24inch u should go to 720P

and never see the difference and it would be done 3 times faster : )

BTW, what is the source of the video?

Unfortunately, I cannot find any benchmarks for blu-ray encoding using the exact same resolution as the blu-ray movie itself. I recommend you do a test; encode a blu-ray movie down to 720p (1280x720) resolution and compare your frame rates to the following:





Source: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-812...

If you get similar results then there is nothing wrong with your system. As mentioned before, the higher the resolution, the slower the encoding time. Encoding using the x.264 codec is pretty slow especially during the 2nd pass. It's the price you must pay if you want the high quality that the x.264 codec can output.

Of course, your actual encoding performance depends on whatever settings you are using. I would just use default settings for your test.

Im Like 1-2 Feet Form It!
Fraps

Is this your CPU? Post your set up, is it unlocked? OC'd?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

It's At 3.69GHz (205 x 18), i paid $210 at that site like 4 months ago... i hate newegg!

$205 was the estimated price AMD would charge for the FX-8120 on it's release date. Some speculated that would be the bulk price or tray price (lots of 1,000).

http://vr-zone.com/articles/report-amd-fx-release-date-...

There has since been price cuts made by AMD in February down to $199.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5595/amd-releases-fx6200-...

Just recently AMD announced another price cut down to $165.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2012042701_AMD_cuts_...


It's not Newegg's fault you paid $210 4 months ago. If anything blame AMD for cutting their prices in an attempt to attract people to buy their CPUs. In other words, you bought the FX-8120 too soon.