Quick Sync Vs GPU Encoding

[Rev Jim Jones]

Which gives better quality ?

Latest Kaby Lake QS or Latest 1050 Nvida GPU encoding ?

Lets assume all settings on each type of encode are of approx same quality output.

[jagabo]

Mpeg 2? Avc? Hevc?

http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2016/

Doesn't include NVEnc though.

[Rev Jim Jones]

My bad.

AVC.


Trying to figure out if GPU encoding is worth while or not. I can get a mobile 1050 to go into a laptop. Dont know if its worth bothering with or not.

I am ordering a Kaby Lake Laptop. Probably the i7 7500U with HD620 QS and 16 Gigs RAM.

The Acer can be configured with up to 32GB ram + M2 SSD +Sata HDD. Wondering if it makes sense to get 32GB Ram and copy files to be encoded to the 1TB spinner, then make a RAM drive from the 32GB of RAM and copy the files from the spinner to the RAM drive and then write the encoded files back to the spinner. Trying to save lots of writes to the SSD that will hold the OS and programs.

Another option would be to go for a different laptop and put in the mobile 1060 nvida card.

So going to give HW encoding a shot because it makes sense to my situation. But will QS be better then GPU ?

I will do a full desktop CPU right a bit later. Will probably wait for cannon lake for that one. But for now the HW encoded will suit my purpose just fine. So the options are QS or GPU

(I have over 1200 movies to encode and would like to keep file sizes to around 2GB per movie for 9" screen use - so will be busy - seems to me HW encode is perfect for this use)

[ezcapper]

This is the 1050 on a common test file at different vbr bitrates :

http://files.videohelp.com/u/234095/AVC3kbps.mkv
http://files.videohelp.com/u/234095/AVC5kbps.mkv
http://files.videohelp.com/u/234095/AVC8kbps.mkv
http://files.videohelp.com/u/234095/AVC12kbps.mkv
http://files.videohelp.com/u/234095/AVC19kbps.mkv

Source:
https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/31105-1428466828/SVT_1080p50.mkv

I think there is an encode of that file somewhere on this forum done with the latest QSV iGPU but not sure. For your file size, I think the 1050 is a little too poor quality. The Nvidia HEVC encoding is good and on par with x264 medium, but Nvidia AVC is not really designed for encoding movies, it's for people who stream video games

[Rev Jim Jones]

Good to know. Thanks.

WOW done a real deep dive into this over the last few days.

Getting on top of it now.

Thanks to you all for the guidance

[jagabo]

Just to add to the array, I encoded the sample video with x264 at the veryfast and slow settings on my i5 2500K (quad core, no hypterthreading):

x264.exe --preset=veryfast --crf=23.8 --sar=1:1 --output %1.mkv %1
x264.exe --preset=slow --crf=24.5 --sar=1:1 --output %1.mkv %1

I adjusted the crf value until I got a file that was about the same size as the Nvidia 1050 AVC19kbps.mkv file. The veryfast encoding ran at about 47 fps, the slow encoding about 10 fps.

I also encoded with QSVEnc:

QSVEncC.exe -i %1 --codec h264 --quality best --gop-len 250 --scenechange  --cqp 30:32:34 --ref 4 -o "%~dpnx1.qsvenc.mkv"

It encoded at about 93 fps.

All were opened with AviSynth:

LWLibavVideoSource("SVT_1080p50.mkv")

In my estimation, the 1080 NVEnc encoding was a little better than the x264 veryfast encoding. The x264 slow encoding was clearly better than both. The QS encoding was inferior to all of them. But later generations of QS deliver slightly better quality.

[Rev Jim Jones]

Jagabo,

What you are saying is that you think the 1050 encoding is better then the QS encode?

There is no doubt the software encode is still best, but at cost of time.

It will be interesting to test KabyLake Qs Vs 1050Ti encodes.

Downloading your files now to review. Thanks for your efforts.

[sophisticles]

Just to add to the array, I encoded the sample video with x264 at the veryfast and slow settings on my i5 2500K (quad core, no hypterthreading):

x264.exe --preset=veryfast --crf=23.8 --sar=1:1 --output %1.mkv %1
x264.exe --preset=slow --crf=24.5 --sar=1:1 --output %1.mkv %1

I adjusted the crf value until I got a file that was about the same size as the Nvidia 1050 AVC19kbps.mkv file. The veryfast encoding ran at about 47 fps, the slow encoding about 10 fps.

I also encoded with QSVEnc:

QSVEncC.exe -i %1 --codec h264 --quality best --gop-len 250 --scenechange  --cqp 30:32:34 --ref 4 -o "%~dpnx1.qsvenc.mkv"

It encoded at about 93 fps.

All were opened with AviSynth:

LWLibavVideoSource("SVT_1080p50.mkv")

In my estimation, the 1080 NVEnc encoding was a little better than the x264 veryfast encoding. The x264 slow encoding was clearly better than both. The QS encoding was inferior to all of them. But later generations of QS deliver slightly better quality.

NVIDIA has always said that they targeted x264+vf for their quality levels, so your observations are probably right in the mark. Having said that, I don't see the NVENC sample attached, could you post it so we can see it?

As for x264+slow, fine it was better but ran at about 1/5 the encode speed as very fast (you don't mention how fact NVENC ran) but here's the reality check: how much better was x264+slow vs x264+4f? In other words, how much more bit rate do you need with very fast to match slow?

If the difference is less than 20% I would argue that you are much better off going with the hardware encoder under most circumstances.

Think of it this way, based on your tests a cpu needs to be nearly 4.7 times faster than a 2500k in order to be able to encode x264+slow at the speed your cpu can encode VF, meaning that if nvenc/x264+vf can, with the addition of 20% more bit rate match x264+slow then there is no compelling reason to buy a faster cpu (not that you could find one that's nearly 5 times faster at a reasonable price). you're better off buying the cheapest Pascal based Nvidia card you can find and calling it a day.

[poisondeathray]

ezcapper's original GTX 1050 post with HEVC and AVC files are here
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/379666-A-budget-Nvidia-card-for-H265-hardware-encod...=1#post2472141

[pandy]

AFAIK QS doesn't support 10 but H.265 when NV 1050 perform 10 bit H.265.
Both are somehow limited not only in terms of quality but also in terms used codec syntax (this may partially explain also lower quality than encoders with full codec syntax usage).

IMHO NV seem to be easier to use (better documentation) and more stable than QS.

[Rev Jim Jones]

@pandy,

When you say more stable then QS - in what context?

Also, are referring to latest QS or earlier QS versions?

I have decided to go with the latest Dell 15 7000 Gaming Laptop (7567) - KabyLake i7 - 7700HQ 4C/8T 2.8GHz/3.8GHz , with 32GB Ram and 1050Ti GPU, 1TB spinner and 1TB SSD. This gives all possibilites - software encode with the 4C/8T 2.8GHz CPU - QS HD 630 from Kaby Lake Generation, and NVENC from Pascal Generation Nvida GPU.

The 32GB RAM allows for 24GB RAM drive for writing files to (8GB RAM for OS) before writing out to external drive (saves wear and tear on ANY other type of drive from the constant writing from encoding), the SSD is for fast booting and snappy response and the 1TB spinner allows bulk space to move BD's into as a staging area and to read the files off and into RAM.

I think that pretty much covers all bases for now. Software X264/QS HD630/ Pascal NVENC encodes with enough firepower onboard for possibilities. Total cost is about $1400.

How would you setup a laptop as an encoding rig ?

[jagabo]

What you are saying is that you think the 1050 encoding is better then the QS encode?

The 1050 encoding is slightly better than the veryfast x264 encoding. Although, if you look closely there are some parts of the image/video that look better in one, some parts that look better in the other. On the other hand, the slow x264 encoding was obviously better than the 1050 encoding, with x264 looking better almost everywhere. If I understand ezcapper's post correctly, the 1050 encoded that video at 350 fps. That's much faster than all the x264 and QSVEnc encodes I did.

It will be interesting to test KabyLake Qs Vs 1050Ti encodes.

I also ran the QSVEnc encoding on a Celeron N3150 (Braswell 1.6 GHz dual core + hyperthreading). The quality was better than the i5 2500K QSVEnc encoding, but it was much slower. I don't know exactly how much of that was the decoding of the source vs. the encoding. But I do know that decoding of the source by LWLibavVideoSource() on the i5 2500K is limited to about 150 fps. The N3150 computer is difficult to access so I haven't run many tests with it. I don't know how much difference Kaby Lake would make with either quality or speed.

[pandy]

@pandy,

When you say more stable then QS - in what context?

In context of Intel API - my observations are purely related to way how QS is used by ffmpeg - seem there is some issue withe starting and ending QS session (restarting encoding too fast lead to errors and some internal QS stall - NV in same conditions is stable as a rock)

Also, are referring to latest QS or earlier QS versions?

Referring to I7 with DDR4 support - it must be clear that QS is 3 way solution - full HW (with some limitations), hybrid (this one support 10 bit and less limitations than HW) and Intel software QS (most complete solution at a cost of speed) - depend on usage context QS may mean different things.

I have decided to go with the latest Dell 15 7000 Gaming Laptop (7567) - KabyLake i7 - 7700HQ 4C/8T 2.8GHz/3.8GHz , with 32GB Ram and 1050Ti GPU, 1TB spinner and 1TB SSD. This gives all possibilites - software encode with the 4C/8T 2.8GHz CPU - QS HD 630 from Kaby Lake Generation, and NVENC from Pascal Generation Nvida GPU.

The 32GB RAM allows for 24GB RAM drive for writing files to (8GB RAM for OS) before writing out to external drive (saves wear and tear on ANY other type of drive from the constant writing from encoding), the SSD is for fast booting and snappy response and the 1TB spinner allows bulk space to move BD's into as a staging area and to read the files off and into RAM.

I think that pretty much covers all bases for now. Software X264/QS HD630/ Pascal NVENC encodes with enough firepower onboard for possibilities. Total cost is about $1400.

How would you setup a laptop as an encoding rig ?

Generally i have concerns related to thermal design for notebook - they may have insufficient heat dissipation especially for long high load situations (as common for video encoding) - notebook may be wise choice for flexibility but for serious long/constant work/load i would go for stationary solution (easier to maintain especially in longer time frame - even dust removal is more difficult in such case - assume that after 1 - 1.5 year notebook need to be fully dismantled for cleaning).

[Rev Jim Jones]

Re the notebook for encoding use;

Agree on thermals and why i looked at gaming laptops. The Dell i referenced has some pretty hardcore cooling on board (twin fans and big heat spreaders) so i am hoping that will take care of that aspect.

Re the dust - again this Dell i referenced is easy to strip down - i downloaded the service manual to check that aspect out.


I choose the i7-7700HQ as its 4C/8T at 2.8GHz - respectable. Should be OK for software x264 encodes.

Its Gen 7 i7 so KL. Given this is my first try of QS i want to be at the latest level i can be at. I dont know much about the practical day to day setup and running of QS - plan to use Staxrip. Will pick it all up as i go along and mess with settings till i get to where i want to be with it all.

The Nvida Pascal GPU is a bonus on this Laptop - was not planning on looking into GPU at all as my understanding is its geared towards H.265 rather H.264. But since the Laptop comes with the 1050Ti i may as well broaden my horizons so to speak and learn it all. Who knows - maybe GPU H.264 will be the fastest and good enough for my basic needs - which are simple for now. Still want the headroom to grow with though, hence this laptop fits the bill for me right now.

I was set on the ACER. But some issues with the i3 version - no screw for the SSD drive and hard to find apparently - i just cant deal with that from here (remote location). An SSD drive is critical to my needs. Then the i3 is a "U" variant so HD620. Not sure how much more HD 630 gives as found on the i7-7700HQ but its there so will take it. The i3 is dual core and as pointed out, for software encoding the 4C/8T CPU is much much better. By time i fit 32GB RAM and an 1TB SSD and go for the i7 "U" variant , there is not much difference in cost, so it was an easy decision to go for the Dell Gaming Laptop. Should be an awesome mobile encoding rig.

Doing a lot of reading right now to determine if i should replace the 1TB spinner with 1TB SSD Drive (Mushkin reactor or Crucial MX-300) because the Read/Write times blow the spinner out of the water as you all know. I think these 2 SSD's referenced are cheap enough not to worry about "writing" them to death. End plan is to write out encoded files to a fast USB drive;

(http://www.angelbird.com/en/conf/ssd2go-pkt-1031/ and/or https://www.amazon.com/VisionTek-120GB-Pocket-Solid-State/dp/B00O0NV570/ref=sr_1_2?s=p...visiontek&th=1)

So the advantage is to read/write to/from those SSD USB drives (that visiontek is actually an SSD drive in a USB thumb drive body). From an internal SSD this makes sense to read/write to those USB drives referenced - some big files to throw around here as my whole collection is BD remux's (avg 25GB size, some 40+ GB)

So that's the game plan - in theory. Will see how it pans out in practice.

I am in this for the long haul - serious about encoding, so want to learn it all. Nice to have the current HW to do this on.

Lets see what QS and NVENC does Vs software x264. This will be super interesting. Now for the wait for it all to come in. Takes weeks in this neck of the woods to get a package in.