Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 7th July 2019, 17:24   #41  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,227
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 19:08   #42  |  Link
Boulder
Pig on the wing
 
Boulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hollola, Finland
Posts: 4,636
Looks like a 3700X is the new 1700X as the best bang for buck. Hopefully we'll see a benchmark for the most used presets like slow, slower and veryslow.

We should really thank AMD for keeping the socket the same for all these years, upgrading gets very cheap.
__________________
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes
I'll see you on the dark side of the Moon...
Boulder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 19:12   #43  |  Link
hajj_3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boulder View Post
Looks like a 3700X is the new 1700X as the best bang for buck. Hopefully we'll see a benchmark for the most used presets like slow, slower and veryslow.

We should really thank AMD for keeping the socket the same for all these years, upgrading gets very cheap.
3600 is the best bang for buck, 6 cores, 12 threads - $199. Those weren't given to reviewers though as AMD obviously wants people to buy their more expensive chips.
hajj_3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 19:40   #44  |  Link
Stereodude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Region 0
Posts: 1,138
Do any of these sites run any sort of standardized x265 test that I can download and run on my system to see how my current system compares to the new Ryzen 3xxx CPUs?
Stereodude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 19:56   #45  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Do any of these sites run any sort of standardized x265 test that I can download and run on my system to see how my current system compares to the new Ryzen 3xxx CPUs?
Guys from https://news.xfastest.com/review/rev...-3900x-review/
used my x265 fhd benchmark
http://forum.pclab.pl/topic/1184884-x265-FHD-Benchmark/

That guy also used the same benchmark but instead of fps showed elapsed time in seconds. To get fps you have to do this 2500/seconds.
https://youtu.be/rcFUGSElZEs?t=8m18s

Last edited by Atak_Snajpera; 7th July 2019 at 20:01.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 20:34   #46  |  Link
Stereodude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Region 0
Posts: 1,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
Guys from https://news.xfastest.com/review/rev...-3900x-review/
used my x265 fhd benchmark
http://forum.pclab.pl/topic/1184884-x265-FHD-Benchmark/

That guy also used the same benchmark but instead of fps showed elapsed time in seconds. To get fps you have to do this 2500/seconds.
https://youtu.be/rcFUGSElZEs?t=8m18s
Thanks! Is the build of x265 in your package new enough to take advantage of all the new (to AMD) features in the Zen 2 architecture?

Code:
Intel Xeon E5-2687W v2 @ 3.4GHz ( 8C / 16T )
 
y4m  [info]: 1920x1080 fps 50/1 i420p8 sar 1:1 unknown frame count
raw  [info]: output file: NUL
x265 [info]: HEVC encoder version 2.2+15-a18ab7656c30
x265 [info]: build info [Windows][GCC 6.2.0][64 bit] 8bit
x265 [info]: using cpu capabilities: MMX2 SSE2Fast SSSE3 SSE4.2 AVX
x265 [info]: Main Still Picture profile, Level-4.1 (Main tier)
x265 [info]: Thread pool created using 16 threads
x265 [info]: Slices                              : 1
x265 [info]: frame threads / pool features       : 5 / wpp(17 rows)
x265 [info]: Coding QT: max CU size, min CU size : 64 / 8
x265 [info]: Residual QT: max TU size, max depth : 32 / 1 inter / 1 intra
x265 [info]: ME / range / subpel / merge         : hex / 57 / 2 / 2
x265 [info]: Keyframe min / max / scenecut / bias: 50 / 500 / 40 / 5.00
x265 [info]: Lookahead / bframes / badapt        : 20 / 4 / 2
x265 [info]: b-pyramid / weightp / weightb       : 1 / 1 / 0
x265 [info]: References / ref-limit  cu / depth  : 3 / on / on
x265 [info]: AQ: mode / str / qg-size / cu-tree  : 1 / 1.0 / 32 / 1
x265 [info]: Rate Control / qCompress            : CRF-28.0 / 0.60
x265 [info]: tools: rd=3 psy-rd=2.00 rskip signhide tmvp strong-intra-smoothing
x265 [info]: tools: lslices=6 deblock sao

encoded 2500 frames in 131.23s (19.05 fps), 7025.74 kbps, Avg QP:37.21
So the Ryzen 3900X is ~3x as fast with x265 encoding as my Xeon E5-2687W v2?

I realize this is only one particular x265 test scenario, but if I can get a 3x speed improvement with the much slower preset I normally use for 1080p x265 I should be in the car heading to Microcenter to buy a Ryzen 3900X system right now.
Stereodude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 20:44   #47  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Thanks! Is the build of x265 in your package new enough to take advantage of all the new (to AMD) features in the Zen 2 architecture?

Code:
Intel Xeon E5-2687W v2 @ 3.4GHz ( 8C / 16T )
 
y4m  [info]: 1920x1080 fps 50/1 i420p8 sar 1:1 unknown frame count
raw  [info]: output file: NUL
x265 [info]: HEVC encoder version 2.2+15-a18ab7656c30
x265 [info]: build info [Windows][GCC 6.2.0][64 bit] 8bit
x265 [info]: using cpu capabilities: MMX2 SSE2Fast SSSE3 SSE4.2 AVX
x265 [info]: Main Still Picture profile, Level-4.1 (Main tier)
x265 [info]: Thread pool created using 16 threads
x265 [info]: Slices                              : 1
x265 [info]: frame threads / pool features       : 5 / wpp(17 rows)
x265 [info]: Coding QT: max CU size, min CU size : 64 / 8
x265 [info]: Residual QT: max TU size, max depth : 32 / 1 inter / 1 intra
x265 [info]: ME / range / subpel / merge         : hex / 57 / 2 / 2
x265 [info]: Keyframe min / max / scenecut / bias: 50 / 500 / 40 / 5.00
x265 [info]: Lookahead / bframes / badapt        : 20 / 4 / 2
x265 [info]: b-pyramid / weightp / weightb       : 1 / 1 / 0
x265 [info]: References / ref-limit  cu / depth  : 3 / on / on
x265 [info]: AQ: mode / str / qg-size / cu-tree  : 1 / 1.0 / 32 / 1
x265 [info]: Rate Control / qCompress            : CRF-28.0 / 0.60
x265 [info]: tools: rd=3 psy-rd=2.00 rskip signhide tmvp strong-intra-smoothing
x265 [info]: tools: lslices=6 deblock sao

encoded 2500 frames in 131.23s (19.05 fps), 7025.74 kbps, Avg QP:37.21
So the Ryzen 3900X is ~3x as fast with x265 encoding as my Xeon E5-2687W v2?

I realize this is only one particular x265 test scenario, but if I can get a 3x speed improvement with the much slower preset I normally use for 1080p x265 I should be in the car heading to Microcenter to buy a Ryzen 3900X system right now.
Ivybridge does not have AVX2 hence poor performance in x265.

Last edited by Atak_Snajpera; 7th July 2019 at 20:47.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 21:08   #48  |  Link
Stereodude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Region 0
Posts: 1,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
Ivybridge does not have AVX2 hence poor performance in x265.
Well, the x264 results for the 3900X are almost double this system too and AFAIK AVX2 makes less of a difference with x264.

Code:
encoded 2500 frames, 38.21 fps, 22398.07 kb/s
Stereodude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 21:16   #49  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by birdie View Post
The most relevant graph for encoding/rendering:

The picture's URL is 404.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 21:18   #50  |  Link
Stereodude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Region 0
Posts: 1,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
The picture's URL is 404.
Works here.
Stereodude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 22:40   #51  |  Link
RanmaCanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 109
The 3900x is impressive, but I would also like to see some real world results. Benchmarks are great, but no one uses crf 28 to encode, or at least they shouldn't haha. I as well would like to see some crf 18-20 at slow, slower, very slow, slowest and placebo. Right now I encode my TV/Movie blurays on slow (1080P gets 5-7 fps), and anime on slower (1080P gets 0.8-1 fps if I am lucky!), with a Ryzen 2700. I haven't tried 4k yet as I don't own a compatible drive to rip the few 4k movies I own.

I score 21.97 fps on Atak's benchmark, and 3.03 on Sagitare's.
RanmaCanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2019, 22:46   #52  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 735
Some other x265 tests I found:

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/a...-3900x/13.html

TPU seems to meassure plain x265 and x264 at crf mode and slow preset, instead of frontends like handbrake.

https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/939...4-x265-en-flac

Staxrip x264 + x265. They have interactive graphs and comparison with a lot of CPUs.
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2019, 00:06   #53  |  Link
birdie
.
 
birdie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
The picture's URL is 404.
They changed the URL after I posted it. I've edited my post and fixed the URL.
birdie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2019, 01:13   #54  |  Link
Stereodude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Region 0
Posts: 1,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by RanmaCanada View Post
The 3900x is impressive, but I would also like to see some real world results. Benchmarks are great, but no one uses crf 28 to encode, or at least they shouldn't haha. I as well would like to see some crf 18-20 at slow, slower, very slow, slowest and placebo. Right now I encode my TV/Movie blurays on slow (1080P gets 5-7 fps), and anime on slower (1080P gets 0.8-1 fps if I am lucky!), with a Ryzen 2700. I haven't tried 4k yet as I don't own a compatible drive to rip the few 4k movies I own.

I score 21.97 fps on Atak's benchmark, and 3.03 on Sagitare's.
TPU used CRF 20 and slow and the 3900X looks to be almost twice as fast as your 2700.

I've been encoding 1080p at CRF 16 placebo 10-bit (8-bit source). It's ~0.25fps on my 8 or 10 core Ivy Bridge E5's. I have a lot of cores, but an old'ish CPU architecture.
Stereodude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2019, 01:20   #55  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by hajj_3 View Post
3600 is the best bang for buck, 6 cores, 12 threads - $199. Those weren't given to reviewers though as AMD obviously wants people to buy their more expensive chips.
GamersNexus reviewed a 3600
https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreview...marks-vs-intel
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2019, 05:40   #56  |  Link
RanmaCanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
TPU used CRF 20 and slow and the 3900X looks to be almost twice as fast as your 2700.

I've been encoding 1080p at CRF 16 placebo 10-bit (8-bit source). It's ~0.25fps on my 8 or 10 core Ivy Bridge E5's. I have a lot of cores, but an old'ish CPU architecture.
No where do they list how long the video is they use to encode, so it's pretty much useless. Yes it does show it is almost twice as fast, but fps is a far better indicator of speed. For all we know they could have gotten 8fps on the 3900x and 4.5fps on the 2700x. Time to complete something means nothing without a reference point, especially when we have no idea what the reference material was. Was it an extremely complex scene, or was it just a test pattern (which is stupidly easy).

I know not everyone will agree with me, but as someone who encodes and encodes, fps is far more important to me as every fps gained is an extra 2 or so minutes of footage encoded per hour (if I did the math right). Hence why I would like the actual results in that instead of time.
RanmaCanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2019, 08:47   #57  |  Link
jd17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by birdie View Post
The most relevant graph for encoding/rendering:

Thank you for that!
You are completely right, everything else is irrelevant.

Those Ryzen 3000 efficiency results are extremely impressive.
jd17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2019, 11:05   #58  |  Link
mariush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 590
Slightly off topic but apparently the hardware HEVC encoder in the Navi RX 5700 is way powerful, much faster than h264 implementatin

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-_T3vsv-Q and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY2fbAzFiUE
mariush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2019, 19:00   #59  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,227
Ryzen 1600 vs 2600 vs 3600 in x265 FHD Benchmark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Zru...utu.be&t=3m28s
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2019, 19:37   #60  |  Link
Stereodude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Region 0
Posts: 1,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
Ryzen 1600 vs 2600 vs 3600 in x265 FHD Benchmark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Zru...utu.be&t=3m28s
The video doesn't even have the right screenshots with the right label and it's rather hard to see the results. To save someone else the difficulty...

Ryzen 5 1600 - 18.73 fps
Ryzen 5 2600 - 21.10 fps
Ryzen 5 3600 - 32.71 fps

The Ryzen 9 3900X has twice as many cores as the Ryzen 5 3600 and is almost twice as fast. It looks to be pretty close to linear. So the Ryzen 9 3950X should be about 33% faster than the 3900X in the benchmark (presuming the TDP doesn't clobber it).

Last edited by Stereodude; 8th July 2019 at 19:40.
Stereodude is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 15:01.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.