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. |
1st June 2016, 04:51 | #21 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2
|
Sorry, I didn't see the 2x number in this blog.
Would you please point it out for me? Thanks Quote:
|
|
5th June 2016, 00:48 | #23 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 12
|
Quote:
Not sure it's the same thing in your context, though. |
|
17th July 2016, 10:55 | #25 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,049
|
Quote:
IMHO 1060 (or 1070) should be first consumer HW encoder capable to provide 60 fps on H.265 (HEVC) - i observe in my setup that 980 is not capable to provide more than 30 fps on H.265 - QSV is slower than NVidia. |
|
19th July 2016, 21:21 | #26 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,901
|
Quote:
Quote:
Better quality and better speed using smaller files. Quote:
Which app do you use ? You should try QSVEncC in order to find out that Skylake has faster and better quality HW H.265 encoding than Nvidia. Also as I wrote on my first post Polaris 10 and 11 have already brought us 4K60 fps HW H.265 encoding.
__________________
Win 10 x64 (19042.572) - Core i5-2400 - Radeon RX 470 (20.10.1) HEVC decoding benchmarks H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all |
|||
19th July 2016, 22:14 | #27 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 332
|
Quote:
Which has the best quality ? I see in Encoder Application Note -> https://developer.nvidia.com/nvidia-video-codec-sdk new features for pascal cards like SAO ( with this comment : Significantly improves encoded video quality for HEVC. ) But no B-frames with HEVC If someone can do tests It would be very interseting to see if it really give some nice quality boost. rigaya has new NVEnc 2.08 for that. |
|
20th July 2016, 03:59 | #28 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 448
|
Quote:
Implemented look-ahead function is just being used to determine where to place I (HEVC and H264) and B (H264) frames optimally. Something like 'scenecut', it does its job well.....I-Frames are inserted during every scenechange from what I can check using HEVC bitstream analyser. At least there is quality improvement from using look-ahead and Long-Term Reference pictures. The only weird option from the SDK is ; uint16_t targetQuality; /**< [in]: Target CQ (Constant Quality) level for VBR mode (range 0-51 with 0-automatic) */ It said, CQ for VBR, does this mean there is no need to specify vbr bitrate value anymore? How about the Initial QP value? Or QP min and Max? Constant Quality VBR? --> Does this vary bitrate or quantizer for nvenc case? Documentation mentions Enables Constant Quality Mode where in video quality can be chosen by a quality factor. |
|
23rd July 2016, 17:07 | #29 | Link | ||||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,049
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
ffmpeg Quote:
And once again please provide me some reliable source for this information - for today NVidia provide best developer support, later Intel and AMD... well - silence. Last edited by pandy; 23rd July 2016 at 17:17. |
||||
27th August 2016, 08:44 | #30 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 6
|
Just thought I'd share this stuff here too since I don't see anyone else encoding H.265 on their AMD Polaris GPU yet.
Source Sample - ~15mbps H.264 1080p, bluray rip. AMD HEVC VCE Encodes: (You will have to save these files and view them locally most likely, only Microsoft Edge seems to be able to play HEVC in-browser) 1080p: 3mbps / 2.5mbps / 2mbps [edit] 3mbps with 150 GOP / 3mbps with 300 GOP 720p: 1.5mbps / 1mbps Example of settings: What's also incredible is the encoding speed. Sure, GPU H265 won't match software x265, but at ~5-10fps on my CPU there is no comparison to getting 360fps on the GPU: Encoding speed varies with resolution, over 500fps for low resolution stuff like DVD resolution. The 360fps I achieved in the screenshot was encoding 960x540. 720p yields about 220fps, 1080p about 120, 4K about ~40. However I think I'm software/CPU limited on some of these. The Tool I'm using is called A's video converter, officially it only supports H.264 via AMD's VCE though the developer kindly provided a test build with H.265 support for polaris - they don't own a polaris GPU yet. I assumed they used AMD's recently released Media SDK though apparently it doesn't support HEVC yet. Another developer did some poking and assumes they're querying the GPU through media foundation - which may be another encoding speed bottleneck factor. Overall I'm very impressed with the quality. This also isn't the best quality that an AMD GPU can encode HEVC with, there is no use of the 2-Pass functionality which would greatly improve quality further. This will probably be my only post here as the doom9 forum post requirements with these questions are ridiculous. Instead I'm happy to post more at videohelp: http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/3...coding-Samples Last edited by Roph; 27th August 2016 at 08:46. |
27th August 2016, 09:02 | #31 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,901
|
Indeed AMD has recently moved from its Media SDK to AMF (Advanced Media Framework) SDK which is part of GPUOPEN and it is open source.
It's OS and Framework agnostic and provides access to decoding UVD and encoding VCE fixed-function units along with pre/post processing. From MediaSDK v1.1 we now have AMF v1.3 with HEVC support. The runtime is inside the drivers for easy update and maintenance. BTW the developer of A's converter is the same of the DXVA Checker. Doom9 I think asks questions only the first time, then you could post freely. Thanks for your post anyway.
__________________
Win 10 x64 (19042.572) - Core i5-2400 - Radeon RX 470 (20.10.1) HEVC decoding benchmarks H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all Last edited by NikosD; 27th August 2016 at 09:06. |
27th August 2016, 11:58 | #32 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 448
|
Quote:
No B-Frame. No SAO. Okay....., full PU 4x4 until 32x32 for Intra PU. As for Inter PU, 64x64 LCU available. But it is not complete. Inter Frame PU sizes: 8x8 8x16 16x8 16x16 16x32 32x16 32x32 32x64 64x32 64x64 P-Frame still refers to 1 previous frame instead of multiple preceding frames. (Nvidia Nvenc also have similar problem/bug/feature) |
|
29th August 2016, 19:37 | #33 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 362
|
Quote:
QSV HEVC with TU7 is easily faster than NVENC comparing 6700k and GTX 970. With Pascal may be Nvidia is the faster one. Pascal has better quality because even Maxwell has with the newest SDK. Intel needs Kabylake and a new Media SDK update with Lookahead support to regain the lead. |
|
29th August 2016, 19:48 | #34 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 362
|
Quote:
Pretty slow compared to Intel, i7-6700k @HD530 gets over 250 fps with TU7 there. GTX 970 over 160 fps. I didn't check quality. |
|
29th August 2016, 20:30 | #35 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,049
|
As i struggle still on HW encoding (still some options are not work as described or work completely opposite) perhaps you can share command line (ffmpeg) to compare NVenc vs QSV - for today my observations are rather solid that QSV is somehow slightl slower than NVEnc and also QSV seem to be less robust (NVEnc work like a charm - just start and almost imeediately encoding session started, Intel is somehow slow in starting and need some time between starting session - i assume to close previous session - not sure how this is related to ffmpeg itself).
|
29th August 2016, 20:34 | #36 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,901
|
We never use ffmpeg for HW encoding.
Only rigaya's CLI tools usually via a nice GUI like StaxRip. Rigaya and StaxRip provide the interface for the best HW encoding in terms of quality, speed and robustness for all platforms - AMD, Intel, Nvidia
__________________
Win 10 x64 (19042.572) - Core i5-2400 - Radeon RX 470 (20.10.1) HEVC decoding benchmarks H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all |
30th August 2016, 00:57 | #37 | Link | |
insane college undergrad
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: middle of nowhere
Posts: 405
|
Quote:
I'm currently testing StaxRip/QSVEncC (ICQ at default settings) on my new Skylake laptop (i7-6500U). I'm using ICQ 20 and comparing frame by frame, there's noticeable smoothing on the encode. Of course, it's not really something I actually notice when watching the film. It's not what I'd consider fast either. It encodes at ~1.5-2x real-time, sure, but I've been spoiled by the ~200FPS I get with Handbrake/Intel QSV H.264 (High@L4.0, Balanced CQ 20). On the upside, ICQ 20 on H.265 QSV seems closer in quality to ICQ 18 on H.264 QSV at just ~70% file size so that's definitely good. Mind, my only reason for encoding is playback on mobile devices so speed and small file size at OK quality is my primary objective. |
|
30th August 2016, 09:20 | #38 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 6
|
Quote:
Quote:
In some cases, I'm also CPUlimited rather than GPU limited. FX-8320 (Still the ridiculous post question limit, come on - this isn't 1998 :/ ) Last edited by Roph; 30th August 2016 at 10:20. |
||
30th August 2016, 10:21 | #39 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,049
|
Quote:
Ok, i use synthetic video - internal ffmpeg source as such files can't provide required functionality, also i don't need gui. |
|
30th August 2016, 10:51 | #40 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,120
|
Have any of you guys tried comparing the best quality h265 hardware encode settings with the best quality software encoded x264 settings to see which offers the best quality and filesize? If hardware h265 looks better then i think a lot of people would want to switch as they would save a lot of time.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|