Do you transcode video? Very interesting read

[Dillon 1st MRB]

First off, transcoding is the conversion of one video file from one format and/or resolution into another. That being said, I was doing some research, and I wanted to find out what which graphics were included with the Core i5-2500k, the Core i7-2600, and the Core i7-2600k. Turns out, the 2600 has Intel 2000, while the two k models have Intel 3000. Why is this important? Well, Intel introduced Quicksync with the Sandy Bridge model of cpus. This allow them to use both the cpu and the on-die video decoder/encoder to assist with the transcode.

Most people who perform transcodes utilize Handbrake. Its good and its free. However, the two big products out there, Cyberlnk's Media Espresso and ArcSoft Media Converter 7 utilize Quicksync. What difference does it make? Here is an example:

~15Mbps 1080p movie into 720p H.264 at 4Mbps

Intel Quicksync on an i5-2500k - 98.4 fps

nVidia 460GTX - 66.2 fps

Intel i5, no Quicksync - 57.4 fps

Radeon 6970 - 57.4 fps

Radeon 6870 - 57.4 fps

Phenom II X6 1100T - 53.9 fps

Here is the thing - for some reason, nVidia's CUDA conversion looks.. well, terrible. In my own experience, I can't get a good looking video conversion (with a good source) on my GTX 460 for the life of me. However, I go to my HTPC's i3-2120, turn on Quicksync, and I am able to do it faster and better.

There is a source aticle I found, which oddly enough is on one of the websites I frequent a lot when I was trying to find out what I was doing wrong. Turns out, I didn't do anything wrong. The author had the same issues.

Source Article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-san...3-2100-tested/9

The lesson here for me:

If you need it fast and good, use the Intel Sandy Bridge with Quicksync (if you have the programs).

If you just need it fast - nvidia is okay.

If you just need it good - use the cpu or an AMD video card.

[Maines]

Very nice info Dillon

Bored at work again?