CPU chip for fast video coverting/compression question...

[siratfus]

A few years ago, I was compressing full disc blu rays that were 30 to 50 gb, taking the main movie and shrinking to like 5gb. I was using a Dell 9100 Inspiron, I forgot the CPU, but it was dual core or dual2core, but it took like 12 to 24 hours, sometimes longer.

I recently started getting back into this because I wanted to convert all my blu rays for my plex. My 2011 macbook pro is equipped with a i5-2415m. I was pleasantly surprised that shrinking 30 gb to 8gb dual layer dvd, dvdfab took about 22 to 30 minutes. And if I go to 2 gb, it took about 70 minutes. I never knew these i5's were that fast. Well, relatively fast compared to my inspiron that was taking a whole day. I thought I would need some sort of extreme i7 to get these completion times, but now I'll consider other i5's since 30 minutes is acceptable.

I want to free up my macbook and get something small like a Nuc, Zotac, Gigabyte unit. So I'd like advice on how these CPU's compare to what I already have with my macbook. Can you take a look at these and tell me if it'll be faster or slower compared to the i5-2415m?

These are found in NUCs:

i5-4250U
i5-5250U

These are found in ZOTACs and GIGABYTE units. I assume these i7's are obviously faster, but how much faster?

i7-4770T
i7-4770R

Thanks in advance!

[newpball]

For comparisons check a site like:

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/

[jagabo]

If DVD Fab uses the CPU for encoding the i7s in your list will be about twice as fast as the ultra low power (for their generation) i5s (twice as many cores, twice as many threads, higher base clock frequency). Not sure about Quick Sync though. I don't think there will be as big a difference.

[usually_quiet]

From slowest to fastest:
Intel Core i5-4250U = 1.30GHz/2.6GHz Turbo with 2 physical cores and 4 logical cores
Intel Core i5-5250U = 1.60GHz/2.7GHz Turbo with 2 physical cores and 4 logical cores
Intel Core i5-2415M = 2.30GHz/2.9GHz Turbo with 2 physical cores and 4 logical cores
Intel Core i7-4770T = 2.50GHz/3.7GHz Turbo with 4 physical cores and 8 logical cores
Intel Core i7-4770R = 3.20GHz/3.9GHz Turbo with 4 physical cores and 8 logical cores

Note that full turbo speed will not be available for multi-threaded programs. CPU throttling is used to keep the maximum TDP from going too high.

These little machines are not the greatest for video encoding. They are for HTPCs, office machines, and general computing at home. The small plastic enclosures don't dissipate heat very well.

Obviously the CPU in the Gigabyte BRIX is the fastest, but it also has the highest TDP. According to reviews, the Gigabyte BRIX's fan is noisy and yet insufficient to prevent overheating under sustained heavy loads. Some people who bought them are also complaining about bad quality control. The Zotac has fewer reported problems.

[jagabo]

Yes, if encoding with the CPU and a well multithreaded encoder you will be running at the base clock speed. Or slower when the boxes overheat and throttling kicks in. If using the Quick Sync encoder that won't be a problem. It takes very little energy. A quick look at DVD Fab's web site indicates they do support Quick Sync. Quick Sync doesn't deliver as good quality as a good h.264 encoder like x264.

[siratfus]

Thanks guys! Getting comments about how these little boxes are not the best for video work. I actually don't mind a more serious rig because the computer will be in the garage, out of site/out of mind when we watch movies. But I do work in the garage, and I guess the trade-off I've been weighing is the space saving aspect and lower electrical usage of those zotacs and nucs.

[siratfus]

When comparing the i7-4770R to the i7-4770T, CPU World website says the following:

The Core i7-4770T is manufactured in a package, that requires Socket 1150. CPUs in this package can be easily removed from the socket for replacement or upgrade.

Can someone explain what that really means? Does that the motherboard is "CPU" future proof?

[jagabo]

The 4770R only comes in a BGA package -- it's soldered directly to the motherboard. The 4770T comes in an LGA package -- it sits in a socket on the motherboard so it's easy to swap. Nothing is future proof. Intel changes sockets all the time.

By the way, if you only use the Quick Sync encoder (and don't otherwise stress the CPU) the small NUC packages aren't a problem.

[hogger129]

I would get the 4770T. As the others have said, it can be swapped out easily if you decide later down the road that you want something newer. My other advice would be to upgrade the cooler to something other than the stock Intel one. I run the Coolermaster 212 EVO in mine and it runs nice and quiet. The fact that the CPU is also not soldered down to the board means you can service it more easily when you have to reapply thermal paste (I do it every 6 months in my computers).

I would also avoid QuickSync encoding unless you just want "good enough" or you don't have the time to do a CPU encoding. QuickSync is very fast, but it compromises quality to achieve that speed. There are a number of threads here which go into detail about it. QuickSync was good enough for me for a long time until I watched these again and again and noticed artifacts like posterization aka banding. It was especially noticeable on my parents Samsung which I believe is 42".

I use DVDFab with an i7-4790 (just the basic one, no overclocking). I get between 2 and 5 hour encodes using "Software" encoding which is all CPU. The results look far and away better imo than QuickSync. Yes, that is a very long encode time, but just set it to run and auto shutdown either before I go to work or overnight. The only thing DVDFab isn't good at in my experience is subtitles which is why I keep a few other tools around for post-processing.

[jagabo]

I would also avoid QuickSync encoding unless you just want "good enough" or you don't have the time to do a CPU encoding. QuickSync is very fast, but it compromises quality to achieve that speed. There are a number of threads here which go into detail about it.

Yes, I mentioned the lower quality of QS earlier. But given the encoding times the OP quoted I suspect he's using Quick Sync now. Or very fast x264 settings which deliver similar quality.

[hogger129]

I would also avoid QuickSync encoding unless you just want "good enough" or you don't have the time to do a CPU encoding. QuickSync is very fast, but it compromises quality to achieve that speed. There are a number of threads here which go into detail about it.

Yes, I mentioned the lower quality of QS earlier. But given the encoding times the OP quoted I suspect he's using Quick Sync now. Or very fast x264 settings which deliver similar quality.

I see and I couldn't agree with your comments more. My experience is that QuickSync isn't terrible with a 2-pass encode, but obviously not on the same level as using CPU. Does DVDFab use x264 for its "Software" encoder? I notice in the options that it can use Intel QuickSync, Software, Software + CUDA and then it has a "Lightning Recode" option which I have shut off (I'm not totally sure what this even does but it's given me audio/visual sync problems in the past).

[jagabo]

Does DVDFab use x264 for its "Software" encoder?

I don't know. I've never used the programs encoding features (I use the x264 cli encoder most of the time). But even if it uses some other software encoder I doubt it will do any better than x264 at those high speeds.

Quick Sync quality on my i3 4130T is definitely better than on my older i5 2500K. But I still can't use it for anything other than a quick/dirty test. From what I've seen none of the other GPU encoders does any better.

[hogger129]

Does DVDFab use x264 for its "Software" encoder?

I don't know. I've never used the programs encoding features (I use the x264 cli encoder most of the time). But even if it uses some other software encoder I doubt it will do any better than x264 at those high speeds.

Quick Sync quality on my i3 4130T is definitely better than on my older i5 2500K. But I still can't use it for anything other than a quick/dirty test. From what I've seen none of the other GPU encoders does any better.

Why is that exactly though? Is it just because x264 processes the source more slowly that it can do better quality?

[usually_quiet]

I would get the 4770T. As the others have said, it can be swapped out easily if you decide later down the road that you want something newer. My other advice would be to upgrade the cooler to something other than the stock Intel one. I run the Coolermaster 212 EVO in mine and it runs nice and quiet. The fact that the CPU is also not soldered down to the board means you can service it more easily when you have to reapply thermal paste (I do it every 6 months in my computers).

Note that the OP wants to buy a Zotac ZBox with that CPU installed, not a standard PC. This means he probably cannot replace the supplied heat sink and fan with a better aftermarket model and may also be unable to upgrade the CPU later for the same reason.

[newpball]

Not sure why people who want good encoding are messing around with laptops and nucs.

Get a desktop with a Core i7 K (or X) version CPU, overclock it and get great performance and value for money. Easy extendable with a decent GPU and other peripherals.

A no brainer, really!

[siratfus]

Not sure why people who want good encoding are messing around with laptops and nucs.

Get a desktop with a Core i7 K (or X) version CPU, overclock it and get great performance and value for money. Easy extendable with a decent GPU and other peripherals.

A no brainer, really!

Trying to kill several birds with one stone sorta thing.

[zing269]

Techspot recently did an i3 vs i5 vs i7 comparison. For encoding they found an i5 was around 25%-50% faster than an i3 while an i7 was only about 10%-20% faster than the i5.

http://www.techspot.com/review/972-intel-core-i3-vs-i5-vs-i7/

[usually_quiet]

Techspot recently did an i3 vs i5 vs i7 comparison. For encoding they found an i5 was around 25%-50% faster than an i3 while an i7 was only about 10%-20% faster than the i5.

http://www.techspot.com/review/972-intel-core-i3-vs-i5-vs-i7/

The i5s that the OP is asking about are for mobile devices and have only 2 physical cores. The difference between these i5s and the i7s should be even greater than for the models compared in the article.