I'm encoding something that's going to take a long time.
Does encoding in Handbrake without Audio make the encode faster?
Try StreamFab Downloader and download from Netflix, Amazon, Youtube! Or Try DVDFab and copy Blu-rays! or rip iTunes movies!
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11
Thread
-
-
Usually audio encoding is very light in CPU power requirements, compared with video encoding, so it shouldn't affect the total encoding speed significantly. You could run a test with a 5min. sample to verify this. Although one justification of encoding audio separately would be to benefit from a better quality encoder than the ones implemented with Handbrake, qaac for instance. So you could first encode the audio with qaac, then encode the video and select the already encoded audio to be muxed directly in “pass-through” mode (no re-encoding).
Why is it going to take a long time, because it's a long video, a slow computer, or you are applying some slow filters ? -
Skipping audio won't speed up the process much more than a few minutes, on a 2hr video.
-
If it's too long to do in one operation you could encode it in several parts, and then append them together with MKVToolNix. In this case, preferably choose the cut points at distinct boundaries like a fade to black, and use the --stitchable optional switch in the x264 command.
Code:--stitchable Don't optimize headers based on video content Ensures ability to recombine a segmented encode
-
in my opinion first encode video then audio and after that mux both using mkv or mp4 container
-
in my opinion first encode video then audio and after that mux both using mkv or mp4 container
-
if source is on hard drive then you will have two readings from hard disk, one for video encoding and one for audio encoding and that will do heavy load to disk (if you use SSD no problem), imagine you encode source with 10-15Mbit video bitrate and source is about 10-15GBytes
also when you encode both video and audio (at same time) multithread (CPU) scaling tasks on CPU will be not so good as if it they are separately ....... -
if source is on hard drive then you will have two readings from hard disk, one for video encoding and one for audio encoding and that will do heavy load to disk (if you use SSD no problem), imagine you encode source with 10-15Mbit video bitrate and source is about 10-15GBytes
also when you encode both video and audio (at same time) multithread (CPU) scaling tasks on CPU will be not so good as if it they are separately ....... -
Usually HandBrake will be used to read from interleaved files. Doing video and audio together should be faster than separating the jobs. If you do it separately you will need to write the video data twice. Once when enconding and then again when muxing with audio.
I'd say doing multiple tasks on a multi-core CPU is a good way to increase the effective CPU utilization. Or does HandBrake not separate video and audio encoding into different threads?
Similar Threads
-
Handbrake Encode Time Help
By Alekos65 in forum Video ConversionReplies: 7Last Post: 20th Apr 2018, 07:17 -
How i can encode audio of "REMUX" to "BluRay.720p.DTS" wit handbrake?
By VideoHelp4Ever in forum Blu-ray RippingReplies: 1Last Post: 2nd Jul 2015, 11:41 -
How can I keep MPEG audio in a MKV file, encoding using Handbrake?
By fatammag in forum AudioReplies: 14Last Post: 24th Aug 2014, 10:36 -
How to encode to interlaced in Handbrake?
By VideoFanatic in forum Video ConversionReplies: 2Last Post: 21st Jun 2014, 09:18 -
I'm trying to encode a VIDEO_TS with Handbrake but it does not stop.
By Tetsuro in forum Newbie / General discussionsReplies: 6Last Post: 9th May 2014, 17:00