Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > (HD) DVD, Blu-ray & (S)VCD > DVD & BD Rebuilder

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 3rd February 2020, 20:51   #29241  |  Link
cartman0208
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdobbs View Post
Yeah. I was thinking about a GTX1660 or GTX1660 ti, and that's around the price point I've been seeing too. Have you done any HEVC encoding with it? Opinion?
Yep, I just uploaded some Samples with different CRF, let the video enthusiasts decide ... I can't see much of a difference ... even at a tenth of the original filesize.
The encoding for each file took less than 10 seconds, but the secondary stream from the orignal is lost in the samples
Original.mkv - 270MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP14.mkv - 207MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP18.mkv - 105MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP20.mkv - 75MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP22.mkv - 53MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP24.mkv - 38MB
cartman0208 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd February 2020, 22:35   #29242  |  Link
jdobbs
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 20,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by cartman0208 View Post
Yep, I just uploaded some Samples with different CRF, let the video enthusiasts decide ... I can't see much of a difference ... even at a tenth of the original filesize.
The encoding for each file took less than 10 seconds, but the secondary stream from the orignal is lost in the samples
Original.mkv - 270MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP14.mkv - 207MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP18.mkv - 105MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP20.mkv - 75MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP22.mkv - 53MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP24.mkv - 38MB
Thanks!

I'll take a look at these, and I'll also do some PSNR and SSIM comparisons.

[Edit] You're right... you'd never guess by looking that the 38MB file was compressed that much more than the 270MB original.
__________________
Help with development of new apps: Donations.
Website: www.jdobbs.net

Last edited by jdobbs; 3rd February 2020 at 22:41.
jdobbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd February 2020, 23:05   #29243  |  Link
gonca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 1,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrVideo View Post
I think it needs to be a GTX-1050, or better, for HEVC hardware encoding support.

The GTX-1050 has the 2176p issue. AIUI, it needs to be a RTX-20xx to get 2160p support (a turing card).
A GTX-10xx will do 4k, no B frames on HEVC though
gonca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2020, 00:43   #29244  |  Link
Sharc
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdobbs View Post
Thanks!

I'll take a look at these, and I'll also do some PSNR and SSIM comparisons.

[Edit] You're right... you'd never guess by looking that the 38MB file was compressed that much more than the 270MB original.
Well, the smoothing (loss of details) is obvious when you step through the frames in interleaved mode. It doesn't mean that the compressed version is not pleasant to view, it just looks like a denoised original and loss of details in low contrast areas.
Comparisons with SSIM, PSNR and VMAF have already been posted in doom9, but one has definitely to make his own tests and optimize encoder settings, like constant quality versus constant quantizer etc. for ffmpeg NVEnc or rigaya's NVEncC.
One 'problem' I see with HW encoding is that BD-RB would have to analyze the user's HW in order to suggest the appropriate encoder settings.

Last edited by Sharc; 4th February 2020 at 00:49.
Sharc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2020, 08:55   #29245  |  Link
cartman0208
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharc View Post
Well, the smoothing (loss of details) is obvious when you step through the frames in interleaved mode. It doesn't mean that the compressed version is not pleasant to view, it just looks like a denoised original and loss of details in low contrast areas.
Comparisons with SSIM, PSNR and VMAF have already been posted in doom9, but one has definitely to make his own tests and optimize encoder settings, like constant quality versus constant quantizer etc. for ffmpeg NVEnc or rigaya's NVEncC.
One 'problem' I see with HW encoding is that BD-RB would have to analyze the user's HW in order to suggest the appropriate encoder settings.
I can't repeat it enough: the main reason for HW encoding is speed ... Usually my 4K encodes with medium to high settings run at 1-2 fps ... HW does the same with over 60 fps
cartman0208 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2020, 10:09   #29246  |  Link
Sharc
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by cartman0208 View Post
I can't repeat it enough: the main reason for HW encoding is speed ...
Sure, I know. There is little other good reason to prefer HW over SW encoding. Also keep in mind if CPU demanding avisynth scripts get involved the overall speed gain can significantly drop.
I do not at all argue against HW encoding. The speed/quality/compression compromise has always been a personal decision .
Sharc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2020, 14:31   #29247  |  Link
jdobbs
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 20,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharc View Post
Sure, I know. There is little other good reason to prefer HW over SW encoding. Also keep in mind if CPU demanding avisynth scripts get involved the overall speed gain can significantly drop.
I do not at all argue against HW encoding. The speed/quality/compression compromise has always been a personal decision .
Exactly. Right now BD-RB doesn't offer that choice. Hopefully at some point it will.

One other point. There's also the option to choose the fastest speed for X265 in BD-RB. My guess would be that it is similar to hardware encoding in quality -- and is a lot faster than, say, the default "High Quality" mode in BD-RB. Even on my old AMD FX-8350 I can get 5-7 fps with that setting. It still takes 8-10 hours to encode -- but it doesn't require a $200 investment in a new video card.
Quote:
One 'problem' I see with HW encoding is that BD-RB would have to analyze the user's HW in order to suggest the appropriate encoder settings.
Does anyone know if the Nvidia API or FFMPEG/NVENC offer ways to report the capabilities of existing Nvidia hardware? That's one problem I foresee with support for HW encoding -- it changes so much that it could become a full-time job just trying to keep up with it. The Nvidia support matrix shows the variety of cards and capabilities that you might have to support.
__________________
Help with development of new apps: Donations.
Website: www.jdobbs.net

Last edited by jdobbs; 4th February 2020 at 14:46.
jdobbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2020, 15:18   #29248  |  Link
Sharc
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdobbs View Post
...Does anyone know if the Nvidia API or FFMPEG/NVENC offer ways to report the capabilities of existing Nvidia hardware? That's one problem I foresee with support for HW encoding -- it changes so much that it could become a full-time job just trying to keep up with it. The Nvidia support matrix shows the variety of cards and capabilities that you might have to support.
I only know for NVEncC:
Code:
NVEncC.exe --check-features
I didn't find something similar for ffmpeg.
Sharc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2020, 17:53   #29249  |  Link
jfcarbel
Programmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 495
Is MULTIPROCESS setting even needed anymore as I seem to recall that both x264 and x265 and multi-threaded by default?

Also I noticed that some rebuilds the extras are not using Quicker for extras CRF setting as likely not identified as extras since the file size of some extras can match the episodes/movie due to length. Is there a way to force a CRF per title or mark certain streams as extras?
jfcarbel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2020, 18:00   #29250  |  Link
jdobbs
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 20,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfcarbel View Post
Is MULTIPROCESS setting even needed anymore as I seem to recall that both x264 and x265 and multi-threaded by default?

Also I noticed that some rebuilds the extras are not using Quicker for extras CRF setting as likely not identified as extras since the file size of some extras can match the episodes/movie due to length. Is there a way to force a CRF per title or mark certain streams as extras?
MULIPROCESS has outlived its usefulness. I should probably remove it as an option.

Right now there is no easy way to mark streams as extras or force a CRF per title.
__________________
Help with development of new apps: Donations.
Website: www.jdobbs.net
jdobbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2020, 03:13   #29251  |  Link
jfcarbel
Programmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdobbs View Post
MULIPROCESS has outlived its usefulness. I should probably remove it as an option.

Right now there is no easy way to mark streams as extras or force a CRF per title.
Is NeroAAC another that is no longer useful, that is, have other AAC libraries you use now equal or better quality to Nero's AAC?

Also for MULTIPROCESS=4 with my 6 core/12 thread CPU I am seeing CPU utilization pegged at 100% where without the CPU usage never goes above 30%. Seems it would be much faster with the setting. Does the splitting of the parts into 4 per movie add more time than the Multiprocess gains would give?

Last edited by jfcarbel; 5th February 2020 at 06:01.
jfcarbel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2020, 10:55   #29252  |  Link
Ch3vr0n
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,337
I'm using multi-process=8 on my 9900k, speeds it up quite nicely. Defo not useless.
Ch3vr0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2020, 12:24   #29253  |  Link
Mike-uk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Dorset
Posts: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfcarbel View Post
Is NeroAAC another that is no longer useful, that is, have other AAC libraries you use now equal or better quality to Nero's AAC?

Also for MULTIPROCESS=4 with my 6 core/12 thread CPU I am seeing CPU utilization pegged at 100% where without the CPU usage never goes above 30%. Seems it would be much faster with the setting. Does the splitting of the parts into 4 per movie add more time than the Multiprocess gains would give?
odd I have a 8700K, BDR ver .05 setting very slow 2 pass

no matter what MULTIPROSESS setting I use n, 6, 2, I see no difference in first pass encode, my cpu is working anywhere between 87-100% giving me 6.50X speed ( pass 1 ) no matter the setting

in resorce manager it shows all cores and threads at 87-100 cpu usage

Last edited by Mike-uk; 5th February 2020 at 12:27.
Mike-uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2020, 21:52   #29254  |  Link
jdobbs
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 20,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfcarbel View Post
Is NeroAAC another that is no longer useful, that is, have other AAC libraries you use now equal or better quality to Nero's AAC?

Also for MULTIPROCESS=4 with my 6 core/12 thread CPU I am seeing CPU utilization pegged at 100% where without the CPU usage never goes above 30%. Seems it would be much faster with the setting. Does the splitting of the parts into 4 per movie add more time than the Multiprocess gains would give?
Not sure if other encoders have grown to equal NeroAAC. I know I still use it.

Interesting. No. I don't believe the splitting would add anything more than a negligible amout of time.

Glad you told me. I wasn't sure if anyone was using MULTIPROCESS.
__________________
Help with development of new apps: Donations.
Website: www.jdobbs.net
jdobbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2020, 00:03   #29255  |  Link
LowDead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 188
Could the difference in speed, using MULTIPROCESS, that is reported above be due to the use of different decoders as in BD-RB will choose the older (faster) x264 or the newer (slower) x264?

//LD
LowDead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2020, 02:42   #29256  |  Link
jfcarbel
Programmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 495
I am going to do a test on my 6 core to compare. I had heard that about 4 for MULTIPROCESS does not make that much difference but never really tested that.

I also have a Ryzen 3900X build coming so be interesting to compare the 2 platforms.
jfcarbel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2020, 09:45   #29257  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdobbs View Post
Not sure if other encoders have grown to equal NeroAAC.
Maybe qaac is better for low bitrates, but for NeroAAC quality 0.5 is not possible ear differences with same size than qaac.

NeroAACenc.exe can be distributed (or linked) without copyright problems.
qaac need a instalation process not easy to override copyright.

If low bitrates are desired maybe the free opus is the best option.
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder.
tebasuna51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2020, 18:40   #29258  |  Link
musiclover
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 116
I installed BD-RB on a new Windows 10 box. After starting the program I got the message "Your Windows 7 system has been succesfully configured to use LAV with BD Rebuilder". Is BD-RB not recognising my Windows 10 system correctly?
musiclover is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2020, 21:37   #29259  |  Link
jdobbs
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 20,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by musiclover View Post
I installed BD-RB on a new Windows 10 box. After starting the program I got the message "Your Windows 7 system has been succesfully configured to use LAV with BD Rebuilder". Is BD-RB not recognising my Windows 10 system correctly?
No. Actually I was surprised at your post and went back and looked... for some reason I made the message box say "Windows 7"... Nothing to worry about, I'll change it.
__________________
Help with development of new apps: Donations.
Website: www.jdobbs.net
jdobbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2020, 23:37   #29260  |  Link
terrykuntz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16
Slow frame rate doing uhd disk

I just put together a PC with a AMD Ryzen 3900X processor and currently trying to shrink UHD Aladdin to a 50GB disk. Why is my frame rate only 2-3 frames per second? I do have it set to do the highest quality. With this same settings on other Blu ray's I get frame rates around 40 frames per second?
terrykuntz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:00.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.