Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Rarewares "Oggenc2.85using aoTuVb5.7" vs. venc.exe "aoT (Read 4844 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Rarewares "Oggenc2.85using aoTuVb5.7" vs. venc.exe "aoT

Did a conversion with both with the same settings but the results are different. Aren't they supposed to be the same since they oggenc uses aoTuVb5.7?

Edit: Didn't expect the title to be truncated without a notice. Originally the title was: "Rarewares "Oggenc2.85using aoTuVb5.7" vs. venc.exe "aoTuV Beta 5.7" different results"

Rarewares "Oggenc2.85using aoTuVb5.7" vs. venc.exe "aoT

Reply #1 –
How much different is different? When dealing with lossy codecs using complex math, even a different compiler or its settings can result in tiny changes in the output file.
Full-quoting makes you scroll past the same junk over and over.

Rarewares "Oggenc2.85using aoTuVb5.7" vs. venc.exe "aoT

Reply #2 –
Quote from: Yirkha on
How much different is different? When dealing with lossy codecs using complex math, even a different compiler or its settings can result in tiny changes in the output file.

I don't know. I just used foobars's bitcompare tool, which told me that the differences start at 0.4687755 s. I also looked at them with TC's bitcompare tool but that didn't help much since the length is a little bit different, I'm guessing different metadata. But the data seems to start and end the same bits by looking at them.
What better tool could I compare them?