View Single Post
Old 09-27-2017, 04:39 PM   #10
Ron Evans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,935
Default

I know that Quicksync is supposed to be less quality than pure software encoding but for my subject matter and with my displays I have never seen the difference for the data rates for Bluray I have used so encode speed is important. I believe that the Quicksync GPU in the new i7 8700K due out next week is supposed to be improved too. Comparing encode times for parts like this and pure software with a PC costing maybe three times as much is important. I think it is also important to compare quality at specific data rates because I think at data rates of 20Mbps or above there is likely very little difference between Quicksync and a software encoder. Low data rates for a small file size I can understand software encoding with 2 pass should be better so that application is important.

It will be interesting to see comparisons between encode times for the 6 core i7 8700K and the 10 core i7 7900K considering the potential difference in overclocking capability. It gets close to putting together a whole i7 8700K system for about the cost of the i7 7900 chip cost alone !!
__________________
Ron Evans

Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 SATA OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro

ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS 9.5 WG, Vegas 17, Resolve Studio 16


Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V
Ron Evans is offline   Reply With Quote