4 ms·
> Intel QuickSync isn't the same quality as software based transcoding, and not everyone wants to compromise on quality. Perhaps not, but when you want to do r
by otterley 1y ago
> Intel QuickSync isn't the same quality as software based transcoding, and not everyone wants to compromise on quality.
Perhaps not, but when you want to do realtime transcoding so you can view a video on the device of your choice without pre-transcoding, there's really no price/performance comparison.
- johnklos 1y ago> there's really no price/performance comparison Huh? A Ryzen can easily do real time transcoding. So why can't we do a price/performance comparison? A low end Ryzen that can easily do 4K 60 fps transcoding in real time costs $300 (with 24 gigs of DDR5 and 500 gig NVMe) and offers many times the overall performance of an N100 / N150 / N200. One can go even cheaper on a Ryzen, but that's just an example from Amazon. Would some people pay twice as much for a computer many times faster, with more memory and more storage, and that can do software transcoding in real time? Sure.
- otterley 1y agoTo be clear, I was referring to the benefits of hardware transcoding, not trying to compare vendor solutions. If there's a Ryzen-based alternative that offers better price/performance, that's great!