What are we all using? DiVX 3.x or 5.02 pro?

[thorz]

Another reinstallation of XP
And now I was wondering: I use Vidomi and the CHICKEN's tutorial for DiVX encodding and the results are nice. I was using DiVX 3.11a, but I was wondering if now I just install the 5.02 pro encoder/codec from CDRSOFT and start to make my movies with it.

I only like to have one codec installed. I work with Dv video also so its not so wise to have a lot of codecs in my system, and I already have some others for other tasks.

I heard some time ago in the net that the quality of the 3.11a was superior to the one from the 5.0x. I don't know if this is still true comparing the PRO version of 5.02 with the 3.11a, and who better than all you people here in the forum can tell me that?

So what do you think? It is still worth it to bother installing the 3.11a? I don't like the way that this codec registers in Windows XP (it ask you to replace a newer file, sure that you have note that). It is not that it gives any problems, it is just that replacing a newer file is not a thing that I like so much. Anyway, its the quality at the end that interest me more. Ando off course not only in encoding video, but also the quality of the codec PLAYING it also.

 

[shadoe_phantom]

thorz I believe we all generally have both installed.
I use 3.11a for some types of titles and 5.02 for others.
You should have both though so that you don't have problems with playback on other DivX files you might get from others.
The quality of 5.02 is better than 3.11a I believe, though 5.0 and 5.01 had their problems. Some people are just purists and either don't know how to work with it or just used to 3.11a so 5.02 got a bit of a mixed rep.
I say you have both and try encoding with both and choose the one that gives you better picture. If one gives you trouble with a title, try the other =)
Good luck

 

[satans_priest]

none of those use the force luke , use XVID - the real experience

h++p://xvid.hopto.org/

 

[shadoe_phantom]

tests show that they are still on par Xvid and DivX so no force above the other yet. Given time though, Xvid has the potential to outdo DivX (if they don't work harder).
But as you can see, Xvid has stopped its developement right now (a bit childish *just 'cause someone else stealing their stuff, not too open source is it lol * but nonetheless it stopped), but am guess it will probs be back in developement soon enough.

 

[ChickenMan]

Another aspect to consider is that when DVD Player come out at the end of the year that can play DivX movies, they WILL NOT be able to play DivX 3 encodes, but will be able to play DivX 5 encodes and probably Xvid as well.

 

[USS]

Both

Like Phantom do, I use one or the other, depending on the title.

DivX 3.11a provides more details in general than DivX 5.02 Pro, but tends to be "blocky".

Too much blocks? I use DivX 5.02. Otherwise, I use DivX 3.11a, in general.