29 ms·
If compression ratio or filesize isn't a priority, NVENC definitely is good enough to consider. The speed is just too good. It can do 300fps+ (for simply trans
by fireattack 6y ago
If compression ratio or filesize isn't a priority, NVENC definitely is good enough to consider. The speed is just too good.
It can do 300fps+ (for simply transcoding. Burning in subtitles probably will slow it down a little ibt) already on my very dated GPU, likely would be even faster on newer ones.
- ethanwillis 6y agoWhat some people might not know is that the transcoding results and quality are hardware dependent. You will get different results depending on whether you're using NVENC, intel's on chip stuff, actual encoding hardware, etc. Edit: Obviously it's more complicated than this. But I think this is one of the reasons behind the need for things like Netflix's VMAF
- izacus 6y agoAlso generations of hardware matter - earlier GeForces and Intel CPUs have a worse encoding block than newer generations. In any case, they massively lag behind software encoding.
- fireattack 6y agoI mean, obviously it would be the case for NVENC. Old(er) versions don't even support B frames. But I guess you can call it "firmware" or "software" dependant too, because they don't really use/support the same version of NVENC to begin with. And I doubt the result is significantly different, if any, for software encoders like x264 - of course assuming you use the exactly same version and parameter.