My cpu measurements for 6 different mp3 programs
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: Tech Talk
Forum Description: Discuss musical instruments, equipment, hi-fi, speakers, vinyl, gadgets,etc.
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=80200
Printed Date: November 28 2024 at 15:49
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: My cpu measurements for 6 different mp3 programs
Posted By: Boray
Subject: My cpu measurements for 6 different mp3 programs
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 09:38
|
My cpu and ram measurements for 6 different mp3 playing programs. Tested: Foobar, 1for1, Billy, Winamp, VLC and Windows Media Player. http://user.tninet.se/~zmj477m/mp3players/" rel="nofollow - http://user.tninet.se/~zmj477m/mp3players/ ------------- http://boray.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - http://boray.bandcamp.com |
Replies:
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 09:41
| IMO Foobar is the best player, people dislike it because of the minimal design (which is a reason I like it so much) and because you have to customize it to get 100%. |
Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 09:57
|
I'd get foobar if it was available for mac (grrr). I use songbird for flac albums and itunes for mp3. Both of which work great for me. And have good designs -------------  
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 10:06
I use MOC. 
|
Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 12:39
AVANT LIGHTBULB APPROVES OF THIS POST ------------- 
|
harmonium.ro wrote:Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 13:00
How can a music player with a GUI be minimal?  
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 13:08
|
I had foobar for awhile but even on my old laptop I didn't find a really compelling reason to switch. Winamp's been good to me. Also, lol Windows Media Player. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 13:15
|
I don't care enough to not use iTunes. So I guess it's good that you didn't bother to test iTunes because I wouldn't care anyway. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 13:20
I'll continue using the player that includes Milkdrop.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 13:21
That's right Vomps. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_Player_Daemon" rel="nofollow - MPD or gtfo. |
Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 13:27
 -------------
|
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 13:28
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 13:31
I said minimal design not minimal player.
|
Posted By: Boray
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 15:48
I didn't test iTunes because I don't want to install something that comes in a 78MB install file. That size is not just unbelievable, but probably also a hint about that it's not very lightweight...
------------- http://boray.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - http://boray.bandcamp.com |
Posted By: Boray
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 15:49
|
btw, I added "Windows Media Player Classic" to the test. ------------- http://boray.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - http://boray.bandcamp.com |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: August 01 2011 at 16:12
Yeah, and you have to redownload the 78 mb for every update, god bless Apple. For what it's worth, iTunes is using about 36,000 kb of memory playing an MP3 right now on my computer, but, as I said earlier, I really don't care. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: mono
Date Posted: August 02 2011 at 04:58
How can Foobar and WMP Classic have lower consumption with GUI than minimized?? ------------- https://soundcloud.com/why-music Prog trio, from ambiant to violence https://soundcloud.com/m0n0-film Film music and production projects https://soundcloud.com/fadisaliba (almost) everything else |
Posted By: Boray
Date Posted: August 02 2011 at 06:20
You mean when idle? Good question. I measured that again now and got exactly the same values for when idle with and without gui: Foobar: 0.137 MHz. WMP Classic: 0,68 MHz I guess these are such small numbers that it's in the margin or error. And there is one more thing I have discovered: If you do something else with the computer while measuring, for example scroll around heavily in your web browser, the numbers goes up slightly. I guess this could have to do with that the programs have to wait for the system when it's occupied doing things maybe. ------------- http://boray.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - http://boray.bandcamp.com |
Posted By: Boray
Date Posted: August 02 2011 at 06:48
|
Noticed something more now: The value for Windows Media Player varies in between 232 to 288 depending on how big the window is. I guess it takes much cpu to show that progress bar. ------------- http://boray.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - http://boray.bandcamp.com |
Posted By: Andy Webb
Date Posted: August 02 2011 at 17:48
You should test Zune. It'd be off the chart  I still love the design though, so I won't stop using it.  ------------- http://ow.ly/8ymqg" rel="nofollow">  
|
Posted By: Oliverum
Date Posted: August 03 2011 at 14:54
Since no-one seems to have done anything but whine IŽll say it myself - well done, good test. ------------- All the best freaks are here, please stop staring at me. Marillion - Freaks (1988). |
Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: August 03 2011 at 20:23
I quite agree actually. Also I like your avatar -------------
|
Posted By: digitalchemistry
Date Posted: November 21 2011 at 16:15
| Early winamp build...runs smooth, not connected to the WWW, 24bit compatibility... |