Subject: Re: [codec] Comparing codec contributions

From: "Christian Hoene" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2010 15:02:53 +0200

Hello,

Raymond identified a miscalculation in the former excel sheet. Here an updated version.  In addition, you can selected the relative amount of processing delay freely (e.g., Koen: something around 1%, Raymond: something between 100% and 200%). The lower bound is limited by packet headers (464 bits for the moment) and algorithmic delay.

With best regards,

 Christian

This graph is for 10% processing overhead and 464 bits packet over.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Dr.-Ing. Christian Hoene

Interactive Communication Systems (ICS), University of Tübingen 

Sand 13, 72076 Tübingen, Germany, Phone +49 7071 2970532 

http://www.net.uni-tuebingen.de/

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Christian Hoene
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 10:18 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [codec] Comparing codec contributions

Hi, 

I just set up the attached excel sheet to compare the codec contributions. I just plotted the algorithmic delay/rate tradeoffs for different coding modes and frames per packet. As a packet overhead I assumed 464 bits.

If you think the values in the Excel might be wrong, please feel free to correct them.

With best regards,

 Christian

---------------------------------------------------------------

Dr.-Ing. Christian Hoene

Interactive Communication Systems (ICS), University of Tübingen 

Sand 13, 72076 Tübingen, Germany, Phone +49 7071 2970532 

http://www.net.uni-tuebingen.de/