3 ms·

Hi. The results on that video do not reflect your comments; The software encoder is obviously inferior. Also those results are old. I have also tried all the o

Hi. The results on that video do not reflect your comments; The software encoder is obviously inferior. Also those results are old. I have also tried all the options and there is no comparison. It's a night and day difference between software encoding and nvenc. It was more than triple the latency last I tested. I tested steam, parsec and also the best software available today for game streaming, Gamestream + Moonlight or Gamestream on the Shield TV. Anybody would notice the difference in quality and input lag between QuickSync, libx264 and NVEnc. The difference really is very large in higher resolutions (talking about 1440p and 4k in 60/144fps).

BuckRogers 6y ago
> Hi. The results on that video do not reflect your comments; The software encoder is obviously inferior. Well, you'd be wrong.[0] If you can provide timestamps or any sort of reference to backup your claim, as I have, that would help everyone. I'm not sure why you'd even respond if you're not going to bring any measurements or data. >Also those results are old. Yes, I was the first to point that out when I said they were from a few years ago, but still suggestive. The conclusion stands unless you have put together something as comprehensive for our review. I'd be happy to take a look at it since it sounds like you challenge the results. A comment on the internet is not good enough though to do that. If you have all the hardware to test software vs QuickSync vs NVENC, put a video out there. Many would be very interested, but credibility matters and I fully trust Chris from Battle(non)sense on latency and IQ benchmarks as I've been watching his content and methods for years. Sweeping statements with no citations aren't enough to erase data. Not knowing the first thing about you, your competency or setup, my initial bet is that there's something wrong with your setup to possibly get worse results using software over NVENC. As I have also personally compared them, and my conclusions align with my Youtube source. [0]https://youtu.be/ogNT6w4bzIs?t=694 https://youtu.be/ogNT6w4bzIs?t=694

BuckRogers 6y ago

> Hi. The results on that video do not reflect your comments; The software encoder is obviously inferior. Well, you'd be wrong.[0] If you can provide timestamps or any sort of reference to backup your claim, as I have, that would help everyone. I'm not sure why you'd even respond if you're not going to bring any measurements or data. >Also those results are old. Yes, I was the first to point that out when I said they were from a few years ago, but still suggestive. The conclusion stands unless you have put together something as comprehensive for our review. I'd be happy to take a look at it since it sounds like you challenge the results. A comment on the internet is not good enough though to do that. If you have all the hardware to test software vs QuickSync vs NVENC, put a video out there. Many would be very interested, but credibility matters and I fully trust Chris from Battle(non)sense on latency and IQ benchmarks as I've been watching his content and methods for years. Sweeping statements with no citations aren't enough to erase data. Not knowing the first thing about you, your competency or setup, my initial bet is that there's something wrong with your setup to possibly get worse results using software over NVENC. As I have also personally compared them, and my conclusions align with my Youtube source. [0]https://youtu.be/ogNT6w4bzIs?t=694 https://youtu.be/ogNT6w4bzIs?t=694