H.265 encode / decode, and Intel CPUs and QuickSync?

[frozentundra123456]

So cant you just run the encode overnight? Would seem the simplest and cheapest solution, especially if the pentium is good enough for your other uses.

 

[VirtualLarry]

What quality settings are you using? Dropping the QF of the encode might not do much, but going from High to Balanced usually drops it by quite a decent amount. I'd love to keep it at High, but there are times when I have to keep it at Balanced because the sizes are just too high.

I don't even have an option for "High", only "Balanced" (far right) and "Fast" (far left). I'm on "Balanced" (default).

 

[escrow4]

So, you would advocate to everyone on this forum, looking to buy a new rig, to buy a 5820K or better, rather than buy only what they need at the time? Because that's what I did, I bought what I needed at the time. And a G3258 OCed is hardly a "weak" CPU. It's faster at HB than my friend's A10-5800K, which is a quad-core, sort of.

Buy one up more than you need for desktops (and laptops depending on your situation). Pentium and below are junk, so i3 is the minimum. If you are looking at it, get an i5 unless its a really basic box. If you are looking at an i5, look at mainstream i7s. If you are looking at mainstream i7s consider hexa cores. If you are looking at hexa cores, then it gets really expensive fast to go one better unless your time is $$$$. Simple, with the exception of tablets. Which are all slow.

Rather than moaning about some frisbee CPU in a year when you start encoding, you have some grunt on tap. Plus a decent mobo and CPU are a foundation that you don't really need to upgrade as often as a GPU.

EDIT: What settings? Main Profile? 3.1? 4.1? ReFrames? Bitrate or CRF?

 

[VirtualLarry]

EDIT: What settings? Main Profile? 3.1? 4.1? ReFrames? Bitrate or CRF?

Whatever the default settings are for QSV in the newest HandBrake GUI 64-bit version for Windows. I believe "Main" and "4.0". "Balanced".

 

[BSim500]

So cant you just run the encode overnight? Would seem the simplest and cheapest solution, especially if the pentium is good enough for your other uses.

^ This. How much encoding do you plan to do VirtualLarry, rip your entire 1,000x DVD collection or just a few files? If you don't want to upgrade CPU, then the obvious common sense solution is make the most of your CPU when you're not using it (batch encode overnight, when you're out at work / shopping, eating dinner, etc). People used to do that anyway when single-core CPU's were the only option.

As for encoding, what x264 presets were you using before Quicksync? There's often little difference (in quality & file size) between Medium vs Faster or even Very Fast (the default Handbrake preset). It's only when you hit Superfast & particularly Ultrafast (no B frames) where quality falls & file sizes rise significantly. The general consensus is that Quicksync is typically somewhere between Superfast & Ultrafast presets. Quality of hardware encoding is still inferior to software at same file size. Conversely, file sizes will be much larger at same CRF. If x264 can produce a 30MB file at CRF 20, the same CRF 20 on Quicksync may produce nearer 50MB. If you then force QS down to same 30MB file by using average bitrate instead of CRF, the quality may be even worse than Superfast / Ultrafast preset. The main advantage of Quicksync is "quick & dirty" encodes, or when it'll end up being heavily recompressed anyway (Youtube), or "throwaway" stuff like video conferencing on dual-core laptops, etc. x264 is still the best for archival stuff typically achieving 30-35% smaller file sizes at same quality.

 

[mikk]

Handbrake is using poor gop settings. Intels default gop has a much better quality. Most people are unaware of this, hence why people complaining often. Also TU2 from Handbrake (quality) is nonsense.

 

[alcoholbob]

Lack of HDMI 2.0 on Broadwell alone did it for me.

Skylake NUC looks to be my new HTPC.

Yeah but will Skylake have HDMI 2.0? Probably not either. We aren't even expecting HDCP 2.2/4K60 4:4:4 Blu Ray players and TVs until end of 2015. Intel is hardly on the cutting edge when it comes to port tech, for true full 4K supported CPU I suspect you'd have to wait for whatever Skylake's refresh is at 10nm in 2017.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Yeah but will Skylake have HDMI 2.0? Probably not either. We aren't even expecting HDCP 2.2/4K60 4:4:4 Blu Ray players and TVs until end of 2015. Intel is hardly on the cutting edge when it comes to port tech, for true full 4K supported CPU I suspect you'd have to wait for whatever Skylake's refresh is at 10nm in 2017.

Skylake will have HDMI 2.0 yes. Still DP1.2 tho.

 

[Jorge_Orwell]

I think 90% of your problem is using H265 instead of H264.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Skylake will have HDMI 2.0 yes. Still DP1.2 tho.

HDMI 2.0 or 2.0a? And HDCP 2.2? Otherwise it's not so future proof.

 

[jkauff]

The main advantage of Quicksync is "quick & dirty" encodes, or when it'll end up being heavily recompressed anyway (Youtube), or "throwaway" stuff like video conferencing on dual-core laptops, etc. x264 is still the best for archival stuff typically achieving 30-35% smaller file sizes at same quality.

Very true. I only use QuickSync when I need a movie for my phone or tablet, or for YouTube. All my archival stuff is done in x264 set to Slow, with CRF 18 for SD material and CRF 20 for HD stuff. Probably slightly overkill, but I like the results and don't mind waiting a few extra minutes. Handbrake encoding times went down significantly when I upgraded my i5 3570K to an i7 4790K.

 

[mikk]

There is no native HDMI 2.0 in Skylake (expect for Thunderbolt 3.0), but there is a DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 converter which supports 4096x2160@60HZ (SKL-Y 3840x2160@60HZ).

 

[shady28]

Just started messing around with MakeMKV and HandBrake. Nifty little programs.

Only, an H.265 encode job on a main-movie MKV 1080P file, takes like 7 hours on my poor little G3258.

So I'm wondering about options.

Yes, I could get a 5820K, if I had about a grand spare, I suppose, but I'm looking for cheaper solutions.

Does Intel's Broadwell CPU have hardware ("QuickSync") support for H.265 encoding? Could I pick up a $300 Broadwell i3 NUC, and encode 1080P MKV file to H.265 in 2-3 hours instead?

Or am I dreaming here?

I think I recall something about updated Haswell drivers for H.265, but I'm pretty sure that's just for decode, right, not encode, on Haswell?

Don't know why you would use H.265 right now even if willing to put up with the encode times. Reason being nothing much supports hardware playback right now.

For anyone that wants to check it out and has Chrome, you can download the libde265 player - go to apps and search for HEVC, should be the 1st one listed.

I downloaded the 720p and 4K versions of "Tears of Steel" from here : http://www.libde265.org/downloads-videos/

The 4K video had my i7-4790 running 35-45% total CPU usage across 8 cores (4 physical / 4 HT), and I could barely watch it. In VLC it was even worse -
it was a slideshow with massive artifacting and whatnot.

Only those with GTX 960s can play these back with hardware decode support right now. With 4-16x the processing needs for decode vs h.264, using just the CPU is pretty much not an option unless you're at 720p. I suspect a lot of lower-end CPUs would struggle with 1080p h.265.

 

[Spjut]

Only those with GTX 960s can play these back with hardware decode support right now. With 4-16x the processing needs for decode vs h.264, using just the CPU is pretty much not an option unless you're at 720p. I suspect a lot of lower-end CPUs would struggle with 1080p h.265.

My old PC with an E6700 and GT 610 (no HEVC support at all) managed playing Sintel in 720p. 1080p worked, although I noticed slowdowns here and there.
4k unsurprisingly made it the slowest of slideshows.

 

[shady28]

My old PC with an E6700 and GT 610 (no HEVC support at all) managed playing Sintel in 720p. 1080p worked, although I noticed slowdowns here and there.
4k unsurprisingly made it the slowest of slideshows.

Yeah but was it using H.265? H.265 takes 4-16x as much cpu as H.264

 

[soccerballtux]

Just started messing around with MakeMKV and HandBrake. Nifty little programs.

Only, an H.265 encode job on a main-movie MKV 1080P file, takes like 7 hours on my poor little G3258.

So I'm wondering about options.

Yes, I could get a 5820K, if I had about a grand spare, I suppose, but I'm looking for cheaper solutions.

Does Intel's Broadwell CPU have hardware ("QuickSync") support for H.265 encoding? Could I pick up a $300 Broadwell i3 NUC, and encode 1080P MKV file to H.265 in 2-3 hours instead?

Or am I dreaming here?

I think I recall something about updated Haswell drivers for H.265, but I'm pretty sure that's just for decode, right, not encode, on Haswell?

can you start a benchmark thread with instructions and build mirror links and files to encode? interested to see how my CPU stacks up.

 

[soccerballtux]

I think 90% of your problem is using H265 instead of H264.

considering it uses half the bandwidth for the same quality, I'm not seeing a problem.

 

[shady28]

considering it uses half the bandwidth for the same quality, I'm not seeing a problem.

Yeah this is the big advantage of H.265 for 4K.

H.264 can do 4K, that's not the problem. It's streaming those huge files that is the issue. H.265 among other things minimizes that issue by reducing bandwidth needed by between 25 and 50%.

But it takes a lot more processing power than h.264, and there's nothing much out yet that can offload that from the CPU (except GTX 960).

 

[mikk]

considering it uses half the bandwidth for the same quality, I'm not seeing a problem.

This is marketing at the moment. Try it out before you trust marketing claims. When I tested HEVC last time it wasn't better than x264 at the same bitrate, and much slower encoding times. Maybe things improved for HEVC lately, but I don't trust it (unless it is a serious test) HEVC needs more development to make a difference against a deadly optimized x264.

 

[Lorne]

Is there a way for VL to set up all his little systems as a renderfarm.

 

[Spjut]

Yeah but was it using H.265? H.265 takes 4-16x as much cpu as H.264

They were HEVC samples. Both XBMC and VLC recognized it as HEVC.

If Fermi were to get partial/hybrid support for HEVC, it seems that that PC would be just fine for 1080p at least.

 

[NTMBK]

Is there a way for VL to set up all his little systems as a renderfarm.

1) List all 20 rubbish systems on Craigslist
2) Buy one (1) good, high performance desktop
3) Enjoy modern computing

 

[poofyhairguy]

considering it uses half the bandwidth for the same quality, I'm not seeing a problem.

The encoders aren't up-to-snuff yet for archival quality video.

 

[soccerballtux]

This is marketing at the moment. Try it out before you trust marketing claims. When I tested HEVC last time it wasn't better than x264 at the same bitrate, and much slower encoding times. Maybe things improved for HEVC lately, but I don't trust it (unless it is a serious test) HEVC needs more development to make a difference against a deadly optimized x264.

no it's not. this is easily testable, go look at the studies and comparisons.

Google's VP10 is the same. You think they like streaming 1080p HD content on Youtube? half the bandwidth halves youtube's operating margin. Both are

 

[2is]

So, you would advocate to everyone on this forum, looking to buy a new rig, to buy a 5820K or better, rather than buy only what they need at the time? Because that's what I did, I bought what I needed at the time. And a G3258 OCed is hardly a "weak" CPU. It's faster at HB than my friend's A10-5800K, which is a quad-core, sort of.

That isn't what he's saying at all. You are WELL aware that there are many lines of processors between a G3258 and a 5820k, so why play the ignorant card? It certainly doesn't prove the point you're trying to make.

Anyway, back on to the topic. I've been using QuickSync since HB supported it and have been very happy with it's speed and quality. There was one movie I did (forget which one) that I was not happy with the quality, but I've done several dozen and I personally am fine with it. I'm sure it's not as good as software, but for the casual movie watcher like myself, it's plenty adequate and the speed is well worth it.

I personally don't rip the BR before encoding it. I have ANYDVD on my machine and simply put the disk in the drive and have HB transcode directly from the disk to a M4V file that saves to my media server. It's the simplest, quickest solution I've fond and it's just a single step.

The only time I deviate from this is when I'm transcoding longer movies that span more than one disk, like Lord of the Rings. For that I transcode each disk to a MKV file then use MKV merge to join them and finally use xmedia recode to simply change the container to M4V/MP4 as they play nicer with my Apple products. When I use xmedia recode, I don't re-encode the files, I simply use the copy option and just change the container to M4V/MP4