View Single Post
Old 1st February 2016, 19:57   #4  |  Link
vivan
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy View Post
And were is the difference between Intel GPU (Quick Sync) and Nvidia GPU (CUDA?) compared in accurate and speed?
QuickSync is intel hardware (ASIC, fixed-function) encoder. NVidia's alternative is NVENC, ATI's is VCE.
CUDA is API for running code on GPU, it's alternative is OpenCL.

Hardware encoders are fixed-function, they do all the work and the best you can do is to fiddle with couple of settings. They're fast, but they're far from beating best cpu encoders in quality-per-bit ratio. That's why trying different encoders doesn't make much sence - they still use same fixed-function hardware.

Encoders written solely for CUDA/OpenCL are even worse, and this is the reason why all GPU manufactures decided to include ASIC encoders instead of developing those (they actually tried at first).

There were efforts to use CUDA/OpenCL for partial encoding acceleration, the most notable is OpenCL accelerated lookahead in x264. Still, it wasn't really useful (few percent faster in some cases, while slower in other).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy View Post
What are the advantages of DivX and kvazaar? Respectively are they useful in addition to the X256 version?
In addition to? They are just other HEVC encoders.
If there were any other competitive encoders there would've been at least threads about them. But since there aren't...
vivan is offline   Reply With Quote