Question Handbrake 1.3.3 - Benchmark your System - COMPLETE Overhaul of the test

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,095
3,595
136
A little background...
Handbrake is a ubiquitous encoding application and happens to be one that makes good use of multicore/thread CPU's when encoding x265. x265 is a widely used and efficient compression scheme that requires significant compute to encode. While hardware encoders are faster, at the same bitrates, CPU (software) encode produces better video quality. Of course this assumes the use of lower bitrates as quality for both hardware and software encodes will be indistinguishable at higher bitrates. But the point of the video encode is to get good quality at low bitrates so we are therefore testing software encode.

fps/GHz/core is a representation of how efficient a given CPU core is at encoding the test file using the x265 format. The number is arrived at by multiplying the number of physical cores by the average frequency they are running at and then dividing by the fps from the Handbrake test. It tells us for a given core how many fps can this core encode the test if it was running at 1GHz. We could consider this an "IPC" of sorts for this test but strictly speaking this would be closer to the word "throughput." And as you know many around here are indeed strict with terminology so I will avoid the word IPC at it denotes Instructions Per Cycle and that is not actually what we are measuring.

Some people will go "all out" and try and run their system as close to the limit as possible and others (like me) just run at stock. All of the data is valuable and informative as long as it is collected from each person in the same manner and there for comparable.

I went through all of the results and created a new table. In respecting everyone's time who participated in the old data I am keeping that data on the 2nd page of this post.

Here's the test file: https://4kmedia.org/lg-new-york-hdr-uhd-4k-demo/


1. Use the following version of Handbrake with the built-in h.265 mkv 2160p60 preset
HandBrake-1.3.3-x86_64-Win_GUI.exe
Don't forget to turn on logging in Handbrake so you can retrieve your time. Tools>Preferences>Advanced>Logging
Once this current version is replaced you'll be able to access this version from the following link.
HandBrake: Nightly Builds
Nightly builds of HandBrake
handbrake.fr

2. Report your encoding time, average CPU frequency, and Package Power. If you have a hybrid CPU you can turn off the E's in the BIOS. For E testing turn off all P's except one in the BIOS, clock it down to 800MHz, and then shut it down with Process Lasso. Or just report your score with 1 P at 800MHz and let me know you did that so I can subtract out that P core's (minor) contribution to the encode.

Here's how to report your average clock and package power so we are all doing it the same way.
Handbrake does some housekeeping right after you start encode and when the progress bar gets to 100%.
This could result in lower than actual average clock.
After you start the encode, wait a few seconds until you see the green Handbrake bar appear, then reset the HWinfo counter.
At the end don't wait to grab the screen shot at 100%, just do it sometime after about 95%.

3. CPU Model, and RAM specs
 

Attachments

  • Handbrake.chart.jpg
    Handbrake.chart.jpg
    581.4 KB · Views: 37
  • Handbrake.new.jpg
    Handbrake.new.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 27
Last edited:

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,095
3,595
136
well ArrogantHair's 285K isnt stock (E-Cores are oced to 5.0 from 4.6) and isnt consumig 200w on average while running the encoding bench but while he has hwinfo open (which is for a longer time than the encoding task). Looking at peak, it is 285W, so I guess that encoding average power consumption for his 285K really is 265-275W. Far from efficient.
Good points. Perhaps ArrogantHair could jump in here. I had assumed the power jumped to 285W at the start, like a PL1 thing and then came down.
But if you are right then the average clocks I used are incorrect as well.

@ArrogantHair - Can you confirm that you reset the HWinfo counter right after the encoding started and stopped it right before the encode was finished? In order to make these results legit for analysis we need to make sure everyone is following the same protocol.
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,772
4,684
136
At Computerbase they use currently Handbrake to mesure power comsumption.
The 285K in this task, H265 converted to H264, is 6% faster than the 9950X but to do so it require 242W on average while the 9950X average is 177W.

285K hoover at 222 - 263W and the 9950X at 159 - 196W.

 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2025-02-08 at 02-22-56 Intel Core Ultra 9 285K 7 265K & 5 245K vs. AMD Ryzen im Tes...png
    Screenshot 2025-02-08 at 02-22-56 Intel Core Ultra 9 285K 7 265K & 5 245K vs. AMD Ryzen im Tes...png
    92.6 KB · Views: 5
  • Screenshot 2025-02-08 at 02-23-30 Intel Core Ultra 9 285K 7 265K & 5 245K vs. AMD Ryzen im Tes...png
    Screenshot 2025-02-08 at 02-23-30 Intel Core Ultra 9 285K 7 265K & 5 245K vs. AMD Ryzen im Tes...png
    95.3 KB · Views: 9
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek
Jul 27, 2020
24,026
16,794
146
Funny thing. Encode completed fine on my 12700K with P52 E39 but during the E-core only run, the CPU fan doesn't ramp up so the E-cores heat up too much around 26% of the way and the system suffers a thermally triggered restart. Had to undo the overclock for the E-cores to chug along at 3.6 GHz. Four E-cores shouldering this encode is like reliving the good old days of Core i5 with no HT: painfully slow!
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

ArrogantHair

Member
Feb 6, 2025
34
18
41
Good points. Perhaps ArrogantHair could jump in here. I had assumed the power jumped to 285W at the start, like a PL1 thing and then came down.
But if you are right then the average clocks I used are incorrect as well.

@ArrogantHair - Can you confirm that you reset the HWinfo counter right after the encoding started and stopped it right before the encode was finished? In order to make these results legit for analysis we need to make sure everyone is following the same protocol.
I stopped it before starting and snapped a pic when it finished. (I think it's correct, but when I share another run we can confirm)

The arrow lake boosts for short periods per core before remaining below a threshold, so wattage isn't a flat draw. Yeah, it consumes more power than the 9950X when benching, but consumes a LOT less while idle. So both CPUs are efficiency opposites.

I have to tune mine more, as I am not getting full performance out of my P-Cores. I don't think it's due to lacking a custom water setup - although that would help. I think I have something misconfigured. E-Cores are solid.
 

Det0x

Golden Member
Sep 11, 2014
1,421
4,812
136
Free guessing, does it says 2min and 16sec here ?
1738979870222.png

136s - 99s runtime = system was ideling for 37s after the run and lowering the averages (?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,095
3,595
136
AVX512 did actually help out a tiny bit in handbrake1.33 for the 9950X ;)

Went from 22.75 FPS to 24.51 FPS when maxed out on PBO tune :cool:

  • 9950X @ optimus signature v3 waterblock
  • ROG CROSSHAIR X870E APEX
  • 2x16GB G.Skill Trident 8000 Z5 Royal Neo hynix a-die @ custom heatsinks + 2x noctua 60mm fans ontop
  • memory is running ~8509MT/s CL32 (8400 * 1.013 baseclock)
  • FCLK is running ~2228mhz (2200 * 1.013 baseclock)
  • hwinfo have snapshot pulling mode enabled, not sure how much it lowers performance having it open
16/32 AVX512 with PBO curve optimizer maxed out
HandBrake 1.3.3 (2020061300)
OS: Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.22631.0
CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core Processor
Ram: 32402 MB,
GPU Information:
Microsoft Basic Display Adapter - 10.0.22621.1
Screen: 3840x2160
Temp Dir: C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\
Install Dir: H:\Clean install Windows 11\5950x\programmer\Handbreak\Handbreak 1.33\HandBrake
Data Dir: C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Roaming\HandBrake

-------------------------------------------


# Starting Encode ...

[11:59:42] base preset: H.265 MKV 2160p60 (Modified)
[11:59:42] hb_init: starting libhb thread
[11:59:42] Starting work at: Fri Feb 07 11:59:42 2025
[11:59:42] 1 job(s) to process
[11:59:42] json job:
{
"Audio": {
"AudioList": [
{
"Bitrate": 160,
"DRC": 0.0,
"Encoder": "av_aac",
"Gain": 0.0,
"Mixdown": 4,
"NormalizeMixLevel": false,
"Samplerate": 0,
"Track": 0,
"DitherMethod": 0
}
],
"CopyMask": [
"copy:aac",
"copy:ac3",
"copy:dtshd",
"copy:dts",
"copy:eac3",
"copy:flac",
"copy:mp3",
"copy:truehd"
],
"FallbackEncoder": "ac3"
},
"Destination": {
"ChapterList": [
{
"Name": "Chapter 1"
}
],
"ChapterMarkers": true,
"AlignAVStart": false,
"File": "I:\\Lg New York Hdr Uhd 4K Demo-1.mkv",
"Mp4Options": {
"IpodAtom": false,
"Mp4Optimize": false
},
"Mux": "av_mkv"
},
"Filters": {
"FilterList": [
{
"ID": 4,
"Settings": {
"mode": "7"
}
},
{
"ID": 3,
"Settings": {
"block-height": "16",
"block-thresh": "40",
"block-width": "16",
"filter-mode": "2",
"mode": "3",
"motion-thresh": "1",
"spatial-metric": "2",
"spatial-thresh": "1"
}
},
{
"ID": 12,
"Settings": {
"crop-bottom": "0",
"crop-left": "0",
"crop-right": "0",
"crop-top": "0",
"height": "2160",
"width": "3840"
}
},
{
"ID": 6,
"Settings": {
"mode": "2",
"rate": "27000000/450000"
}
}
]
},
"PAR": {
"Num": 1,
"Den": 1
},
"Metadata": {},
"SequenceID": 0,
"Source": {
"Angle": 1,
"Range": {
"Type": "chapter",
"Start": 1,
"End": 1
},
"Title": 1,
"Path": "H:\\Clean install Windows 11\\5950x\\programmer\\Handbreak\\Handbreak 1.33\\LG New York HDR UHD 4K Demo.ts"
},
"Subtitle": {
"Search": {
"Burn": true,
"Default": false,
"Enable": true,
"Forced": true
},
"SubtitleList": []
},
"Video": {
"Encoder": "x265",
"Level": "auto",
"TwoPass": false,
"Turbo": false,
"ColorMatrixCode": 0,
"Options": "strong-intra-smoothing=0:rect=0:aq-mode=1:asm=avx512",
"Preset": "slow",
"Profile": "main",
"Quality": 24.0,
"QSV": {
"Decode": false,
"AsyncDepth": 0
}
}
}
[11:59:42] CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core Processor
[11:59:42] - logical processor count: 32
[11:59:42] Intel Quick Sync Video support: no
[11:59:42] hb_scan: path=H:\Clean install Windows 11\5950x\programmer\Handbreak\Handbreak 1.33\LG New York HDR UHD 4K Demo.ts, title_index=1
udfread ERROR: ECMA 167 Volume Recognition failed
src/libbluray/disc/disc.c:323: failed opening UDF image H:\Clean install Windows 11\5950x\programmer\Handbreak\Handbreak 1.33\LG New York HDR UHD 4K Demo.ts
src/libbluray/disc/disc.c:424: error opening file BDMV\index.bdmv
src/libbluray/disc/disc.c:424: error opening file BDMV\BACKUP\index.bdmv
src/libbluray/bluray.c:2585: nav_get_title_list(H:\Clean install Windows 11\5950x\programmer\Handbreak\Handbreak 1.33\LG New York HDR UHD 4K Demo.ts\) failed
[11:59:42] bd: not a bd - trying as a stream/file instead
libdvdnav: Using dvdnav version 6.0.1
libdvdread: Encrypted DVD support unavailable.
libdvdread:DVDOpenFileUDF:UDFFindFile /VIDEO_TS/VIDEO_TS.IFO failed
libdvdread:DVDOpenFileUDF:UDFFindFile /VIDEO_TS/VIDEO_TS.BUP failed
libdvdread: Can't open file VIDEO_TS.IFO.
libdvdnav: vm: failed to read VIDEO_TS.IFO
[11:59:42] dvd: not a dvd - trying as a stream/file instead
[11:59:42] file is MPEG Transport Stream with 188 byte packets offset 0 bytes
[11:59:42] hb_ts_stream_find_pids - end of file
Input #0, mpegts, from 'H:\Clean install Windows 11\5950x\programmer\Handbreak\Handbreak 1.33\LG New York HDR UHD 4K Demo.ts':
Duration: 00:01:12.15, start: 0.999989, bitrate: 52098 kb/s
Program 1
Stream #0:0[0x101]: Video: hevc (Main 10) ([36][0][0][0] / 0x0024), yuv420p10le(tv, bt2020nc/bt2020/smpte2084), 3840x2160 [SAR 1:1 DAR 16:9], 25 fps, 25 tbr, 90k tbn, 25 tbc
Stream #0:1[0x102](und): Audio: aac (LC) ([15][0][0][0] / 0x000F), 48000 Hz, stereo, fltp, 192 kb/s
[11:59:42] scan: decoding previews for title 1
[11:59:42] file is MPEG Transport Stream with 188 byte packets offset 0 bytes
[11:59:42] hb_ts_stream_find_pids - end of file
[11:59:42] scan: audio 0x1: aac, rate=48000Hz, bitrate=192000 Unknown (AAC LC) (2.0 ch) (192 kbps)
[11:59:44] scan: 10 previews, 3840x2160, 25.000 fps, autocrop = 0/0/0/0, aspect 16:9, PAR 1:1
[11:59:44] scan: supported video decoders: avcodec qsv
[11:59:44] libhb: scan thread found 1 valid title(s)
[11:59:44] Skipping subtitle scan. No suitable subtitle tracks.
[11:59:44] Starting Task: Encoding Pass
[11:59:44] Skipping crop/scale filter
[11:59:44] work: only 1 chapter, disabling chapter markers
[11:59:44] job configuration:
[11:59:44] * source
[11:59:44] + H:\Clean install Windows 11\5950x\programmer\Handbreak\Handbreak 1.33\LG New York HDR UHD 4K Demo.ts
[11:59:44] + title 1, chapter(s) 1 to 1
[11:59:44] + container: mpegts
[11:59:44] + data rate: 52098 kbps
[11:59:44] * destination
[11:59:44] + I:\Lg New York Hdr Uhd 4K Demo-1.mkv
[11:59:44] + container: Matroska (libavformat)
[11:59:44] * video track
[11:59:44] + decoder: hevc
[11:59:44] + filters
[11:59:44] + Comb Detect (mode=3:spatial-metric=2:motion-thresh=1:spatial-thresh=1:filter-mode=2:block-thresh=40:block-width=16:block-height=16)
[11:59:44] + Decomb (mode=39)
[11:59:44] + Framerate Shaper (mode=2:rate=27000000/450000)
[11:59:44] + frame rate: 25.000 fps -> peak rate limited to 60.000 fps
[11:59:44] + Output geometry
[11:59:44] + storage dimensions: 3840 x 2160
[11:59:44] + pixel aspect ratio: 1 : 1
[11:59:44] + display dimensions: 3840 x 2160
[11:59:44] + encoder: H.265 (libx265)
[11:59:44] + preset: slow
[11:59:44] + options: strong-intra-smoothing=0:rect=0:aq-mode=1:asm=avx512
[11:59:44] + profile: main
[11:59:44] + level: auto
[11:59:44] + quality: 24.00 (RF)
[11:59:44] + color profile: 9-16-9
[11:59:44] * audio track 1
[11:59:44] + decoder: Unknown (AAC LC) (2.0 ch) (192 kbps) (track 1, id 0x1)
[11:59:44] + bitrate: 192 kbps, samplerate: 48000 Hz
[11:59:44] + mixdown: Stereo
[11:59:44] + dither: none
[11:59:44] + encoder: AAC (libavcodec)
[11:59:44] + bitrate: 160 kbps, samplerate: 48000 Hz
[11:59:44] file is MPEG Transport Stream with 188 byte packets offset 0 bytes
[11:59:44] hb_ts_stream_find_pids - end of file
[11:59:44] sync: expecting 1803 video frames
x265 [info]: HEVC encoder version 3.2.1+1-b5c86a64bbbe
x265 [info]: build info [Windows][GCC 9.2.0][64 bit] 8bit+10bit+12bit
x265 [info]: using cpu capabilities: MMX2 SSE2Fast LZCNT SSSE3 SSE4.2 AVX FMA3 BMI2 AVX2 AVX512
x265 [info]: Main profile, Level-5 (Main tier)
x265 [info]: Thread pool created using 32 threads
x265 [info]: Slices : 1
x265 [info]: frame threads / pool features : 6 / wpp(34 rows)
x265 [info]: Coding QT: max CU size, min CU size : 64 / 8
x265 [info]: Residual QT: max TU size, max depth : 32 / 1 inter / 1 intra
x265 [info]: ME / range / subpel / merge : star / 57 / 3 / 3
x265 [info]: Keyframe min / max / scenecut / bias: 25 / 250 / 40 / 5.00
x265 [info]: Lookahead / bframes / badapt : 25 / 4 / 2
x265 [info]: b-pyramid / weightp / weightb : 1 / 1 / 0
x265 [info]: References / ref-limit cu / depth : 4 / on / on
x265 [info]: AQ: mode / str / qg-size / cu-tree : 1 / 1.0 / 32 / 1
x265 [info]: Rate Control / qCompress : CRF-24.0 / 0.60
x265 [info]: tools: limit-modes rd=4 psy-rd=2.00 rdoq=2 psy-rdoq=1.00 rskip
x265 [info]: tools: signhide tmvp lslices=4 deblock sao
[11:59:44] sync: first pts video is 0
[11:59:44] sync: "Chapter 1" (1) at frame 1 time 0
[11:59:44] sync: first pts audio 0x1 is 0
[12:00:54] reader: done. 1 scr changes
[12:00:57] work: average encoding speed for job is 24.879637 fps
[12:00:57] comb detect: heavy 1091 | light 277 | uncombed 438 | total 1806
[12:00:57] decomb: deinterlaced 1091 | blended 277 | unfiltered 438 | total 1806
[12:00:57] vfr: 1806 frames output, 0 dropped and 0 duped for CFR/PFR
[12:00:57] vfr: lost time: 0 (0 frames)
[12:00:57] vfr: gained time: 0 (0 frames) (0 not accounted for)
[12:00:57] aac-decoder done: 3384 frames, 0 decoder errors
[12:00:57] hevc-decoder done: 1806 frames, 0 decoder errors
[12:00:57] sync: got 1806 frames, 1803 expected
[12:00:57] sync: framerate min 25.000 fps, max 25.000 fps, avg 25.000 fps
x265 [info]: frame I: 20, Avg QP:22.74 kb/s: 84168.04
x265 [info]: frame P: 426, Avg QP:24.64 kb/s: 29918.47
x265 [info]: frame B: 1360, Avg QP:30.58 kb/s: 5087.03
x265 [info]: Weighted P-Frames: Y:15.7% UV:11.0%
x265 [info]: consecutive B-frames: 9.6% 1.8% 7.6% 35.9% 45.1%
encoded 1806 frames in 73.68s (24.51 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09
[12:00:57] mux: track 0, 1806 frames, 106742176 bytes, 11814.30 kbps, fifo 512
[12:00:57] mux: track 1, 3385 frames, 1365514 bytes, 151.14 kbps, fifo 1024
[12:00:57] Finished work at: Fri Feb 07 12:00:57 2025
[12:00:57] libhb: work result = 0

# Encode Completed ...
View attachment 116525

I did some testing and here is what I found.
Using Handbrake version 1.9 without AVX my encode is 4 seconds slower. With AVX512 enabled it is 5 seconds faster.

Using version 1.3.3 the encode is about 4 seconds faster with AVX512.

Are you sure you are using the same settings in 1.9 as 1.3.3 because there isn't a template that is the same?
I created a custom user template in 1.3.3 called "Handbrake Test" and then exported that. It won't let you export a preset, you must load it (select it) and then export.
Then I imported that template into version 1.9 and ran the tests to be sure I was using the exact same settings.

I don't know if I want to get into adding AVX512 results to the chart because then for this chart we won't be looking at apples-to-apples settings.

I would consider ending this benchmark and starting a new one with the newest version of Handbrake? Thing is if we do that an allow benchmarkers to use AVX512 Intel users will be at a disadvantage. Yes, I realize that is the system they selected but the end result will probably be that they won't participate in the test.

While this is a fun competitive part of this, I'm looking at it as more informational to feed our curiousity about various CPU's and how well they perform when encoding video.

I was thinking of perhaps starting a new bench using AV1 but after doing some preliminary testing in Handbrake it is less computational intensive than x265. We could go so "slower" on the settings but that really doesn't increase quality and I think "slow" is the sweet spot for actual encoding. It's what I use. I think it's nice that the benchmark does simulate an actual encoding situation you might complete.

Finally, I know you said that you didn't think HWinfo was "catching" your CPU frequency flucuations. I'm not so sure about that. You can change the rate at which HWinfo updates the display, I think default is 2 seconds, but regardless of that setting I believe HWinfo is polling the sensors MUCH faster. Like thousands of times per second and then integrating the results to calculate averages. I think I remember reading that when I was learning about effective clock way back when this benchmark started.

I don't mind doing the house keeping for this but we do need everybody on the same page as to how we run the test in order to have valid and comparable results
 

MarkPost

Senior member
Mar 1, 2017
376
788
136
I stopped it before starting and snapped a pic when it finished. (I think it's correct, but when I share another run we can confirm)

The arrow lake boosts for short periods per core before remaining below a threshold, so wattage isn't a flat draw. Yeah, it consumes more power than the 9950X when benching, but consumes a LOT less while idle. So both CPUs are efficiency opposites.

I have to tune mine more, as I am not getting full performance out of my P-Cores. I don't think it's due to lacking a custom water setup - although that would help. I think I have something misconfigured. E-Cores are solid.
For an accuracy measurement, As @Hulk says, you need to reset the HWinfo counter right after the encoding started (a pair of seconds after it started, for example) and take a screenshot a second or so before it finishes
 
Jul 27, 2020
24,026
16,794
146
P+E encoded 1806 frames in 182.09s (9.92 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09

handbralke.PNG

P (HT on) encoded 1806 frames in 204.78s (8.82 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09

handbralke P.PNG

P (HT off) encoded 1806 frames in 227.96s (7.92 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09

handbralke P ht off.png

E only encoded 1806 frames in 1001.98s (1.80 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09

handbralke E.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

poke01

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2022
3,421
4,690
106
I would consider ending this benchmark and starting a new one with the newest version of Handbrake? Thing is if we do that an allow benchmarkers to use AVX512 Intel users will be at a disadvantage. Yes, I realize that is the system they selected but the end result will probably be that they won't participate in the test.
yes please, include AV1 encoding as well. The AV1-SVT software encoder makes use AVX-512 by default. I suggest these settings for AV1 encoding:
1738980248351.png

Is it a disadvange to make use of your CPU instructions? I don't think so. btw the 7700X is fast with AV1 encoding. Imagine the 9950X

EDIT added more details:

1738980706988.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

MarkPost

Senior member
Mar 1, 2017
376
788
136

Det0x

Golden Member
Sep 11, 2014
1,421
4,812
136
Are you sure you are using the same settings in 1.9 as 1.3.3 because there isn't a template that is the same?
I'm showing the video settings in my screenhots with version 1.9
They are as close to 1:1 with version 1.33 as far as i could get them

1.33
1738980931573.png

1.9
1738980949373.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,095
3,595
136
yes please, include AV1 encoding as well. The AV1-SVT software encoder makes use AVX-512 by default. I suggest these settings for AV1 encoding:
View attachment 116557

Is it a disadvange to make use of your CPU instructions? I don't think so. btw the 7700X is fast with AV1 encoding. Imagine the 9950X

I'd be up for that if others here are into it. I would stop the current test because I don't want to have to update scores for two very similar benchmarks. Too much work.

Looks like that is the first Matroska preset with the Encoder Preset moved from "8" to "5" right?

On my 9950X that encode is actually a little faster than the old test. Probably due to AVX512 being in the mix.

Anybody else have opinions on this? I'd like to roll it around a bit before makign a decision.
 

Thunder 57

Diamond Member
Aug 19, 2007
3,474
5,749
136
I'd probably be more interested in AV1 than x256. Isn't AV1 supposed to be the future because people had issues with royalities regarding h265?
 

poke01

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2022
3,421
4,690
106
1738982729415.png

Just a tip when doing AV1 encoding. The logs won't show the time run or avg fps for AV1, so click on queue to gather this info.
 

Thunder 57

Diamond Member
Aug 19, 2007
3,474
5,749
136
I'd probably be more interested in AV1 than x256. Isn't AV1 supposed to be the future because people had issues with royalities regarding h265?

Maybe not. Did not realize h.264 also had roalities so not sure why it should be such a big deal as it was very successfull. A lot more devices support HEVC as well and it is more seemingly more mature. x265 is probably the way to go. Not sure I agree with @poke01 in using 10 bit though. I'd like to know what others think though.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: poke01

poke01

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2022
3,421
4,690
106
Maybe not. Did not realize h.264 also had roalities so not sure why it should be such a big deal as it was very successfull. A lot more devices support HEVC as well and it is more seemingly more mature. x265 is probably the way to go. Not sure I agree with @poke01 and using 10 bit though. I'd like to know what others think though.
yeah x265 seems good, covers more devices
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thunder 57

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,095
3,595
136
Maybe not. Did not realize h.264 also had roalities so not sure why it should be such a big deal as it was very successfull. A lot more devices support HEVC as well and it is more seemingly more mature. x265 is probably the way to go. Not sure I agree with @poke01 and using 10 bit though. I'd like to know what others think though.
10 bit is a bit much for a delivery format. Usually I'd use that for an editing format.

I also notice that when I send videos to friends with Apple phones they can't decode the video of x265, they only get the audio.

x265 does seem to have replaced x264 for the most part though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thunder 57

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,095
3,595
136
I just looked at AV1 decoding and it very limited, as in RTX 3000/RDNA2 and Intel Arc/Xe and newer obviously. I'd say that seals the deal for x265.
Seems like we should just stay with the current benchmark for now and re-evaluate at a later date, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: poke01

Thunder 57

Diamond Member
Aug 19, 2007
3,474
5,749
136
Seems like we should just stay with the current benchmark for now and re-evaluate at a later date, right?

I haven't participated I'm so I have no real opinion. It seems to be relevant so that would be my guess (your suggestion of re-evaluate later).
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,095
3,595
136
Hope this did not go unnoticed: https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...te-overhaul-of-the-test.2588294/post-41390427

Wondering when I can see Golden Cove in the fps/core/GHz chart :)
This is great data but can you double check your average frequencies on these? They seem a little low based on min frequencies in your data.

After you start the encode, wait a few seconds until you actually see the green progress line so you know the encode is taking place, then reset the HWinfo counter. Near the end you can grab the screenshot at less than 100%, things are going to change much even from 95% to 100%. At the end the encode stop and Handbrake is just doing some housekeeping, which could also bring down the average clock.

You have a lot of data that is going to chance the "throughput" chart quite a bit so I want to make sure all of the data is spot on!

Thanks.