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. |
7th June 2014, 23:20 | #1 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 602
|
Hardware for dedicated x264 machine
So, I currently have a machine which encodes video, almost 24/7. The CPU is an Intel i7 3770k, overclocked to about 4.5ghz from the stock 3.5ghz (there is a big Noctua NH-D14 cooler strapped on helping this happen). My understanding is that RAM is not that important here, so I only have 4gb in there. And of course, no need for a big GPU, I'm just using on-board video.
Depending on the amount of high frequency content in the video, I'm getting about 3.5fps on the "veryslow" mode. (Keep in mind this is going from uncompressed or nearly uncompressed masters, not transcoding already encoded video). A totally noise/grain-less video camera interview can easily sail through much faster. Does anyone have experience using x264 with higher-end processors? Intel Xeons for example? If so, did you see significant improvements in encoding speed compared to "consumer" CPUs? Or should I just get whatever has the highest clock speed and to hell with anything else? |
8th June 2014, 00:10 | #2 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 729
|
Combination of clockspeed and core count. Haswell-E might be a good upgrade later this year, but sadly they are only preparing hexacores in the cheaper parts, the octacore (base clock 3 GHz) is going to cost 1000 USD (plus not exactly cheap motherboard and DDR4 memory). So besides that (and current Sany Bridge-E/Ivy Bridge-E hexacores), you are looking at using Xeons...
x264 does scale beyond 4core/8thread CPUs, eight cores and probably 16 cores should still give pretty good scaling. (and of course, there is the option of running more encodes concurrently) |
10th June 2014, 19:03 | #3 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,771
|
Quote:
Per clock per core a Haswell certainly outperforms Ivy Bridge, but there's a much lower limit on how many cores you can get. For harder to parallelize content, fewer faster cores is going to give better overall throughput. |
|
10th June 2014, 21:15 | #4 | Link |
RipBot264 author
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,816
|
Why do you waste space using uncompressed video files? Why don't you use ut video or magicyuv?
Whenever i have problem with core saturation i just encode multiple chunks at the same time.
__________________
Windows 7 Image Updater - SkyLake\KabyLake\CoffeLake\Ryzen Threadripper |
10th June 2014, 22:44 | #6 | Link |
RipBot264 author
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,816
|
Both we know that this is not a problem with avs2yuv tool.
__________________
Windows 7 Image Updater - SkyLake\KabyLake\CoffeLake\Ryzen Threadripper |
12th June 2014, 01:30 | #7 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,229
|
Quote:
Overclocking to 4.5 GHz is quite impressive on a i7-3770K, usually if you push them hard at that speed they'll overheat, regardless of how good the attached cooler is. This is because the cores simply can't transfer the heat quick enough to the CPU casing due to Intel cheaping out with the thermal interface material. The only way people usually get to 4.5 GHz without overheating the i7-3770K etc when pushed is by delidding, but that is a potentially CPU-destroying exercise. |
|
12th June 2014, 03:07 | #8 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 4,407
|
i7 3770K, 4.5 GHz, max temp seen ~68°C (Prime95 max heat). But an i7-5960X finally looks like a good upgrade for a not too crazy expensive x264 box. Last edited by Asmodian; 13th June 2014 at 02:00. |
12th June 2014, 21:57 | #9 | Link |
Derek Prestegard IRL
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,989
|
I administer a large number (100+) of high performance 12-16 core servers running a lot of different video encoding workloads, including x264.
Generally speaking, if you can feed x264 fast enough (i.e. if you're using no AviSynth or a light AviSynth script, and have a fast decoder), it will scale nicely up to use 12-16 cores for HD content on one of the slower presets. CBR encoding used to be problematic with tons of threads (36 threads for a 12 core system with HT) and buffer sizes less than ~ 1 second, so I had to limit thread count in that case. I THINK this was fixed, but I'm not sure
__________________
These are all my personal statements, not those of my employer :) |
12th June 2014, 22:39 | #10 | Link |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 5,034
|
This thread is a good read on the subject.
|
|
|