View Single Post
Old 10th July 2009, 09:19   #10  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanleyhuang View Post
Actually x264 do generate better quality when it is configured for maximum quality, but that will also make the transcoding extremely slow.
You hardly need "maximum quality"; even the (reasonable) faster settings beat the crappy CUDA encoder easily quality-wise, as has been tested dozens of time before with exactly this encoder.

Of course, it doesn't help that he even turned off subpixel motion vectors though... his settings are completely ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr4nz View Post
This is a totally b0rked comparison...
Yes, and he posted it in a very official-looking fashion despite the entire thing being done in a completely idiotic and haphazard manner.

I mean seriously:

1. Pick a GPU that's more costly and faster than the CPU.
2. Go out of the way to pick the worst possible settings for x264 (literally!)
3. Use two different decoders to feed the different encoders.
4. Show how the GPU encoder looks so much better than x264.

I'm not going to bother with this anymore as it's clear that this guy is here solely to try to advertise crappy encoders by performing intentionally bad tests.

Last edited by Dark Shikari; 10th July 2009 at 09:22.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote