GPU pipelines deal with geometry and spatial vectors to compute final pixels, so arguing about video encoders at this stage misses the point - you can only star

GPU pipelines deal with geometry and spatial vectors to compute final pixels, so arguing about video encoders at this stage misses the point - you can only start encoding after you have an image, not before. This could only be a post production step (basically what the Steam Link does, I guess). Generally it does not make sense, because you'd get a lower framerate that would have a higher latency. It would also be inferior in quality and consume more power. Encoding in something that needs less bandwith does make sense if you try to send the signal through a network connection e.g. to your TV, but none at all if you have a screen next to your computer. Also, where do you get the impression that the input is small? A typical game now-a-days comes in at multiple gigabytes, nothing small there; tons of high res textures that go into the rendering pipeline - if anything the combined output is much smaller than the input.