The profiles were chosen against disk bandwidth and say nothing about CPU. The
locked CPU target is a stock 10MHz 68000 for both of them, so both must fit
833,333 cycles -- picking sasi does not rescue it, it still misses 31% of
frames against scsi's 42%.
Splits the miss into what the encoder can fix and what it cannot: re-coding
every non-SKIP block as V1 is the floor, and it still misses 11 frames at sasi
and 12 at scsi, all of them above ~90% non-SKIP. So a cost-aware mode decision
can reach about three quarters of the misses; the rest need a structural
answer, not a better encoder.
Also: V4 is 448 cycles against RAW's 400, and RAW is pixel-exact. On the CPU
axis V4 is strictly dominated and the byte lagrangian's mode preference
inverts. Only the byte-rich profile can take that escape, so the cycle ceiling
should cost sasi MORE quality than scsi despite costing it fewer cycles.
FINDINGS 28.7/28.8.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01194oWYW8DQXK1SZ2DnChW6
prosolis
31c4c1aba1