![]() Okay, lets see if I can get Handbrake to talk to my 3070, NVENC is better than I expected, the older generation (900 series) needed lots of bits to perform well, does worse than x264-veryfast. Not tested (yet): QuickSync Xe, NVENC Ampere, RDNA2 VCE. Or do we? įor the shooters video, at 6mbps: Turing NVENC h265 > Turing NVENC h264 > x264 slow, medium > QuickSync h265 > NVENC (old) h264 > x264 fast > Navi > x264 faster, veryfast > QuickSync h264 > All other AMD hw codecs. It supports features like 2-pass encoding that just doesn't exist on hardware codecs.īut for single pass, okay, yes, you don't actually need it. For uploads and permanent archiving, I would just wait for the x264 or x265 codec to crunch through it. You put it to 50 Mbps and it outperforms other hardware codecs like the one in your phone and (video)camera. ![]() ![]() Quicksync / NVENC still doesn't support quite a few features. Unless you are doing a cgi only production soley on a computer, chances are excellent the video you are transcoding was originally encoded by a dedicated chip, not a CPU running h264/h264 encoding software, so the video was imperfect to begin with for those that like to argue that QuickSync/nvenc introduce imperfections that software encoding wouldn't. Handbrake can do both and both will make even fast CPU encoding look like a tortoise by comparison with barely any noticeable image loss for the vast majority of people. Unless you are a professional movie studio/video production house encoding video on the CPU is a waste of time and power compared to using QuickSync or nvenc.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |