The NVENC and QSV encodings were done on a laptop while plugged in on maximum power mode.
#STAXRIP TEMPLATES WINDOWS 10#
All tests were run on Windows 10 Version 2 Build 19042 with the following settings. To that end, I wrote a script to run all these tests so that there were no quarrels about how they were tested (downloadable here). Tests like this are only as good as their documentation of how they were acquired. All encodes produced valid HDR10 videos and used the same settings per encode (except for one hiccup with Intel QSV erroring using –extbrc on one video.) Methodolgy We are going to compare two videos against four different encoders. This is probably why you’re here, to see how they stack up to each other. Sadly, AMD still doesn’t have any support for it with HEVC videos. Thankfully Nvidia and Intel have both decided that it’s time to bring some quality to the hardware world, and do have B-frames in their latest hardware encoders.
Whereas by using a B-frame, it can be stored as a motion vector from the following frame, thus saving large amounts of bitrate. If the B-Frame was replaced with a P-frame (so it was I P P I) the P-frame with the sun in it would require additional image data stored in that frame. They never thought to stop to wait to build frames that came behind the current one, who would want that? Well without the B-frame, you have to either compensate by having more index frames or having larger P-frames. Until recently, hardware encoders were only thinking of moving in a forward direction. That’s right, you have to first encode the I frame, and the P-frame (or another I frame) that comes after it, before calculating the B-frames between them. B is for Bidirectional, which means they not only look at the frame that was encoded before them, but also the frame that will come after them. You would have knocked off almost 60% of the bitrate! However, the problem there is that B-frames are crazy hard to calculate. Imagine having a single I frame, then two B-frames, a P-frame, then two more B-frames. That means if you have one I-frame and two P-frames after it for the entire movie, you’ve just cut off a third of the bitrate! B-framesī-frames are even more efficient, they can be half the size of a P-frame in an ideal world, aka a quarter of an I frame. In idea scenarios, P-frames are about half the size of I-frames.
#STAXRIP TEMPLATES FULL#
However with modern video codecs, like HEVC, there are in-between frames that don’t have the full picture, instead are half filled with a bunch of math (motion vectors) that say “hey, move that area over this way for this frame.” P-frames do just that, they use the data in the frame before them and store the different as motion vectors. It’s what everyone thinks about when they assume a video file is a bunch of pictures in a row, like it was back with real film. I frames are pretty easy to understand, an I frame is a full picture. In HEVC videos there are three types of frames, Index (I) frames, Predicted (P) frames, and Bidirectionally Predicted (B) frames. I believe a large part of this is due to the introduction of the B-frame.
#STAXRIP TEMPLATES SOFTWARE#
However, as their hardware and software matured it is now reaching a point where they can reasonably be considered instead of using crazy slow software encoders. They always wanted good quality of course, but speed was always more important. That way they could be used with video conferencing like Zoom or transcode videos as needed as you watch them. Whereas, historically, hardware encoders were designed with the singular purpose to encode above real-time speeds.
That means you want to get as much quality as you can, into the smallest package possible. For example, a single megabyte difference for a popular file on a large site could start costing hundreds of dollars of bandwidth fees. This can help save on disk space or on bandwidth usage if the file will be transferred a lot. When looking to compress an existing video file, one of the main purposes is to save disk space, i.e. What’s so odd about using a hardware encoder for encoding videos? Is there hope for a true consumer hardware encoding competitor to x265 quality?.Would I use hardware encoders for my own videos?.Has HEVC hardware encoding caught up to the quality of software encoding?.Samsung x RedBull: See the Unexpected – 4K HDR10 – 60fps – 51.8 Mb/s bitrate.Dobly’s Glass Blowing Demo – 4K HDR10 – 60fps – 15.1 Mb/s bitrate.Wonderland Two – 4K HDR10 – 24fps – 51.4 Mb/s bitrate.What’s so odd about using a hardware encoder for encoding videos?.
0 kommentar(er)
