Contrary to popular belief, x264 isn't very cpu hungry, especially not if you set speed=100 (via command line or tray). PNG on the other hand... is a real cpu pig. Note that when we select x264, small regions of the screen are still sent as png (or rgb24). In 0.10, we can also use webp lossless for those.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Stroller <[email protected]>wrote: > > On 11 July 2013, at 11:47, Antoine Martin wrote: > >> I think I used to be able to cope with this with "--encoding jpeg > >> --quality 15" in the past but this is no longer supported in xpra. > > > > How so? jpeg encoding is still supported and so is the quality setting. > > That said, jpeg encoding is terrible, you should be using x264 instead. > > Doesn't x264 incur a performance penalty on the machine which is encoding > it? > > Most of the computers in my house would not be able to encode > full-resolution x264 in real time. > > Stroller. > > _______________________________________________ > shifter-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.devloop.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/shifter-users > _______________________________________________ shifter-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.devloop.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/shifter-users
