Jump to content

Video Encoding Challenge

nicklmg
 Share
Posted

pulling a Linus: spending all the money, and get worse preformance because you spent it wrong. :P 

I spent $2500 on building my PC and all i do with it is play no games atm & watch anime at 1080p(finally) watch YT and write essays...  nothing, it just sits there collecting dust...

Builds:

The Toaster Project! Northern Bee!

 

The original LAN PC build log! (Old, dead and replaced by The Toaster Project & 5.0)

Spoiler

"Here is some advice that might have gotten lost somewhere along the way in your life. 

 

#1. Treat others as you would like to be treated.

#2. It's best to keep your mouth shut; and appear to be stupid, rather than open it and remove all doubt.

#3. There is nothing "wrong" with being wrong. Learning from a mistake can be more valuable than not making one in the first place.

 

Follow these simple rules in life, and I promise you, things magically get easier. " - MageTank 31-10-2016

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

TLDW:

 

one does not simply buy a 22 core Xeon and expect the CPU to be worth the money spent

 

VMWare, HyperV and uRAID is where the 22 or 44 cores are fully used

 

with the exception of Folding@Home or other CPU bound applications will use all 22 cores evenly

Budget? Uses? Currency? Location? Operating System? Peripherals? Monitor? Use PCPartPicker wherever possible. 

Quote whom you're replying to, and set option to follow your topics. Or Else we can't see your reply.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I've noticed several problems with the video and the whole encoding process.

 

There's no mention of what encoding quality is expected, if there's some kind of standard of minimum encoding quality, something like that.

 

Since LMG has very good internet connection, they could very well upload videos with bitrates up to 200 mbps or more and Youtube will accept it and recompress it anyway for viewers, so you have the choice of either configuring high quality encoding parameters and take a lot of time to produce a decent quality 4K file at an average bitrate of about 40-60 mbps, or you could just configure the encoder on ultra fast (higher than realtime) speeds and give it enough bandwidth to consistently produce quality.

 

For example, x264 (software h264 encoder) can be configured in "constant quality" mode, where each second of video has the maximum quality, ignoring the bitrate. One second could be 50 mbps, the next second with more motion could be 150 mbps, so one 10 minute video could be 2 GB in size while another 10 minute video could be 5 GB, but the quality is consistent throughout the video.

On the other hand, x264 could be configured for a more predictable bitrate, let's say vbr 100 mbps and x264 will spend more time analyzing frames and compress as much quality in an average of 100 mbps for each second. This is close to what Youtube would do when recompressing the video.

 

Another thing is, multithreading is possible up to a point. In the case of x264, it can use lots of threads, but it's not a good idea to go above 16 threads because the quality starts to decrease (by a very small amount, but enough to recommend not going over 16 threads).

Also, it's in general recommended to not go below about 50 vertical pixels per thread, so for 1080p content it makes no sense to use more than around 12 threads for encoding, as they simply won't work.

 

So what would you do if you have 2 cpus with 20+ cores and maybe even hyperthreading (though hyperthreading won't matter much when cpu encoding)?  One solution would be to configure x264 to encode using  -stitchable parameter, which means each raw h264 output of the encoder can be concatenated to the previous segment simply by merging the files.

 

This way, you could launch several instances of x264 configured each to use 8-10 threads and specific quality settings, and set them each to encode 2-5 minute segments of the exported video, and when all instances are done you can just concatenate the raw h264 segments.  You can render the audio separately and then mux the video and audio parts into a mp4 or mkv file.

So instead of encoding several separate videos in a queue, you're working on same video but separate segments and then you glue all of them together.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

It would have been nice to have some discussion about the compression and quality of the output files comparing the GPU assisted to CPU only.

 

I have not used the software in this video, but with all of the video encoding that I have done I have always noticed better quality when using CPU only encoding, which is why I personally have avoided using GPU. As long as the output quality is fine, I can understand that in the case of LMG it would make more sense to reduce the conversion times as much as possible to meet video release deadlines. If there is a noticeable difference, I can still see the advantage to these expensive processors running CPU only conversions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I know this shouldn't matter, but isn't the 6700K a LGA1151 processor and the others LGA2011-3?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 hour ago, DrMikeNZ said:

It would have been nice to have some discussion about the compression and quality of the output files comparing the GPU assisted to CPU only.

 

I have not used the software in this video, but with all of the video encoding that I have done I have always noticed better quality when using CPU only encoding, which is why I personally have avoided using GPU. As long as the output quality is fine, I can understand that in the case of LMG it would make more sense to reduce the conversion times as much as possible to meet video release deadlines. If there is a noticeable difference, I can still see the advantage to these expensive processors running CPU only conversions.

 

Hmm this is interesting, one question though, where the settings (encoder, bitrate, resolution, quality setting etc) all out exactly the same in both cases? Because to my knowledge there shouldn't be any difference in it if everything is the same, atleast not that should be allowed to be.

May the light have your back and your ISO low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Is the Core i7s even overclocked (can't tell by how poorly the video was made)?

Yeah, we're all just a bunch of idiots experiencing nothing more than the placebo effect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
5 hours ago, dragoon20005 said:

TLDW:

 

one does not simply buy a 22 core Xeon and expect the CPU to be worth the money spent

 

VMWare, HyperV and uRAID is where the 22 or 44 cores are fully used

 

with the exception of Folding@Home or other CPU bound applications will use all 22 cores evenly

If devs actually made things for multiple cores and HT then the 22 core would beat everything but we don't...

▓ƆԀ▓ S▓₱▓Ɇ▓c▓s▓: i7 6ʇɥפᴉƎ00K (4.4ghz), Asus DeLuxe X99A II, GT҉X҉1҉0҉8҉0 Zotac Amp ExTrꍟꎭe),Si6F4Gb D???????r PlatinUm, EVGA G2 Sǝʌǝᘉ5ᙣᙍᖇᓎᙎᗅᖶt, Phanteks Enthoo Primo, 3TB WD Black, 500gb 850 Evo, H100iGeeTeeX, Windows 10, K70 R̸̢̡̭͍͕̱̭̟̩̀̀̃́̃͒̈́̈́͑̑́̆͘͜ͅG̶̦̬͊́B̸͈̝̖͗̈́, G502, HyperX Cloud 2s, Asus MX34. פN∩SW∀S 960 EVO

Just keeping this here as a backup 9̵̨̢̨̧̧̡̧̡̧̡̧̡̡̢̢̡̢̧̡̢̡̡̢̧̛̛̛̛̛̛̱̖͈̠̝̯̹͉̝̞̩̠̹̺̰̺̲̳͈̞̻̜̫̹̱̗̣͙̻̘͎̲̝͙͍͔̯̲̟̞͚̖̘͉̭̰̣͎͕̼̼̜̼͕͎̣͇͓͓͎̼̺̯͈̤̝͖̩̭͍̣̱̞̬̺̯̼̤̲͎̖̠̟͍̘̭͔̟̗̙̗̗̤̦͍̫̬͔̦̳̗̳͔̞̼̝͍̝͈̻͇̭̠͈̳͍̫̮̥̭͍͔͈̠̹̼̬̰͈̤͚̖̯͍͉͖̥̹̺͕̲̥̤̺̹̹̪̺̺̭͕͓̟̳̹͍̖͎̣̫͓͍͈͕̳̹̙̰͉͙̝̜̠̥̝̲̮̬͕̰̹̳͕̰̲̣̯̫̮͙̹̮͙̮̝̣͇̺̺͇̺̺͈̳̜̣̙̻̣̜̻̦͚̹̩͓͚̖͍̥̟͍͎̦͙̫̜͔̭̥͈̬̝̺̩͙͙͉̻̰̬̗̣͖̦͎̥̜̬̹͓͈͙̤̜̗͔̩̖̳̫̑̀̂̽̈́̈́̿͒̿̋̊͌̾̄̄̒̌͐̽̿̊͑̑̆͗̈̎̄͒̑̋͛̑͑̂͑̀͐̀͑̓͊̇͆̿͑͛͛͆́͆̓̿̇̀̓͑͆͂̓̾̏͊̀̇̍̃́̒̎̀̒̄̓̒̐̑̊̏̌̽̓͂͋̓̐̓͊̌͋̀̐̇̌̓̔͊̈̇́̏͒̋͊̓̆̋̈̀̌̔͆͑̈̐̈̍̀̉̋̈́͊̽͂̿͌͊̆̾̉͐̿̓̄̾͑̈́͗͗̂̂́̇͂̀̈́́̽̈́̓̓͂̽̓̀̄͌̐̔̄̄͒͌̈́̅̉͊̂͒̀̈́̌͂̽̀̑̏̽̀͑̐̐͋̀̀͋̓̅͋͗̍́͗̈́̆̏̇͊̌̏̔̑̐̈́͑̎͑͆̏̎́̑̍̏̒̌̊͘͘̚̕̚̕̕̚̕̚̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͠͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͠͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅ8̵̨̛̛̛̛̮͍͕̥͉̦̥̱̞̜̫̘̤̖̬͍͇͓̜̻̪̤̣̣̹̑͑̏̈́̐̐́̎͒̔͒̌̑̓̆̓͑̉̈́́͋̌͋͐͛͋̃̍̽̊͗͋͊̂̅͊͑́͋͛̉̏̓͌̾̈́̀͛͊̾͑̌̀̀̌̓̏̑́̄̉̌͂́͛̋͊̄͐͊̈́̀̌̆̎̿̓̔̍̎̀̍̚̕̕͘͘͘̕̚͝͝͠͠͠0̶̡̡̡̢̨̨͕̠̠͉̺̻̯̱̘͇̥͎͖̯͕̖̬̭͔̪̪͎̺̠̤̬̬̤̣̭̣͍̥̱̘̳̣̤͚̭̥͚̦͙̱̦͕̼͖͙͕͇̭͓͉͎̹̣̣͕̜͍͖̳̭͕̼̳̖̩͍͔̱̙̠̝̺̰̦̱̿̄̀͐͜͜ͅͅt̶̡̨̡̨̧̢̧̢̨̧̧̧̧̢̡̨̨̢̨̢̧̢̛̛̛̛̛̠͍̞̮͇̪͉̩̗̗͖̫͉͎͓̮̣̘̫͔̘̬̮̙̯̣͕͓̲̣͓͓̣̹̟͈̱͚̘̼̙̖̖̼̙̜̝͙̣̠̪̲̞̖̠̯̖̠̜̱͉̲̺͙̤̻̦̜͎̙̳̺̭̪̱͓̦̹̺͙̫̖̖̰̣͈͍̜̺̘͕̬̥͇̗̖̺̣̲̫̟̣̜̭̟̱̳̳̖͖͇̹̯̜̹͙̻̥̙͉͕̜͎͕̦͕̱͖͉̜̹̱̦͔͎̲̦͔̖̘̫̻̹̮̗̮̜̰͇̰͔̱͙̞̠͍͉͕̳͍̰̠̗̠̯̜̩͓̭̺̦̲̲͖̯̩̲̣̠͉̦̬͓̠̜̲͍̘͇̳̳͔̼̣͚̙͙͚͕̙̘̣̠͍̟̪̝̲͇͚̦̖͕̰̟̪͖̳̲͉͙̰̭̼̩̟̝̣̝̬̳͎̙̱͒̃̈͊̔͒͗̐̄̌͐͆̍͂̃̈́̾͗̅̐͒̓̆͛̂̾͋̍͂̂̄̇̿̈͌̅̈́̃̾̔̇̇̾̀͊͋̋̌̄͌͆͆̎̓̈́̾̊͊̇̌̔̈́̈́̀̐͊̊̍͑̊̈̓͑̀́̅̀̑̈́̽̃̽͛̇́̐̓̀͆̔̈̀̍̏̆̓̆͒̋́̋̍́̂̉͛̓̓̂̋̎́̒̏̈͋̃̽͆̓̀̔͑̈́̓͌͑̅̽́̐̍̉̑̓̈́͌̋̈́͂̊́͆͂̇̈́̔̃͌̅̈́͌͛̑̐̓̔̈́̀͊͛̐̾͐̔̾̈̃̈̄͑̓̋̇̉̉̚̕̚͘̕̚̚̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝͝͠ͅͅͅͅͅi̵̢̧̢̧̡̧̢̢̧̢̢̢̡̡̡̧̧̡̡̧̛̛͈̺̲̫͕̞͓̥̖̭̜̫͉̻̗̭̖͔̮̠͇̩̹̱͈̗̭͈̤̠̮͙͇̲͙̰̳̹̲͙̜̟͚͎͓̦̫͚̻̟̰̣̲̺̦̫͓̖̯̝̬͉̯͓͈̫̭̜̱̞̹̪͔̤̜͙͓̗̗̻̟͎͇̺̘̯̲̝̫͚̰̹̫̗̳̣͙̮̱̲͕̺̠͉̫̖̟͖̦͉̟͈̭̣̹̱̖̗̺̘̦̠̯̲͔̘̱̣͙̩̻̰̠͓͙̰̺̠̖̟̗̖͉̞̣̥̝̤̫̫̜͕̻͉̺͚̣̝̥͇̭͎̖̦̙̲͈̲̠̹̼͎͕̩͓̖̥̘̱̜͙̹̝͔̭̣̮̗̞̩̣̬̯̜̻̯̩̮̩̹̻̯̬̖͂̈͂̒̇͗͑̐̌̎̑̽̑̈̈́͑̽́̊͋̿͊͋̅̐̈́͑̇̿̈́̌͌̊̅͂̎͆̏̓͂̈̿̏̃͑̏̓͆̔̋̎̕͘͘͘͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͠͠ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅZ̴̧̢̨̢̧̢̢̡̧̢̢̢̨̨̨̡̨̧̢̧̛̛̬̖͈̮̝̭̖͖̗̹̣̼̼̘̘̫̠̭̞͙͔͙̜̠̗̪̠̼̫̻͓̳̟̲̳̻̙̼͇̺͎̘̹̼͔̺̹̬̯̤̮̟͈̭̻͚̣̲͔͙̥͕̣̻̰͈̼̱̺̤̤͉̙̦̩̗͎̞͓̭̞̗͉̳̭̭̺̹̹̮͕̘̪̞̱̥͈̹̳͇̟̹̱̙͚̯̮̳̤͍̪̞̦̳̦͍̲̥̳͇̪̬̰̠͙͕̖̝̫̩̯̱̘͓͎̪͈̤̜͎̱̹̹̱̲̻͎̖̳͚̭̪̦̗̬͍̯̘̣̩̬͖̝̹̣̗̭͖̜͕̼̼̲̭͕͔̩͓̞̝͓͍̗̙̯͔̯̞̝̳̜̜͉̖̩͇̩̘̪̥̱͓̭͎͖̱̙̩̜͎̙͉̟͎͔̝̥͕͍͓̹̮̦̫͚̠̯͓̱͖͔͓̤͉̠͙̋͐̀͌̈́͆̾͆̑̔͂͒̀̊̀͋͑̂͊̅͐̿́̈́̐̀̏̋̃̄͆͒̈́̿̎́́̈̀̀͌̔͋͊̊̉̿͗͊͑̔͐̇͆͛̂̐͊̉̄̈́̄̐͂͂͒͑͗̓͑̓̾̑͋̒͐͑̾͂̎̋̃̽̂̅̇̿̍̈́́̄̍͂͑̏̐̾̎̆̉̾͂̽̈̆̔́͋͗̓̑̕͘̕͘͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͝͝͠͠͝ͅo̶̪͆́̀͂̂́̄̅͂̿͛̈́̿͊͗́͘͝t̴̡̨̧̨̧̡̧̨̡̢̧̢̡̨̛̪͈̣̭̺̱̪̹̺̣̬̖̣̻͈̞̙͇̩̻̫͈̝̭̟͎̻̟̻̝̱͔̝̼͍̞̼̣̘̤̯͓͉̖̠̤͔̜̙͚͓̻͓̬͓̻̜̯̱̖̳̱̗̠̝̥̩͓̗̪̙͓̖̠͎̗͎̱̮̯̮͙̩̫̹̹̖͙̙͖̻͈̙̻͇͔̙̣̱͔̜̣̭̱͈͕̠̹͙̹͇̻̼͎͍̥̘͙̘̤̜͎̟͖̹̦̺̤͍̣̼̻̱̲͎̗̹͉͙̪̞̻̹͚̰̻͈͈͊̈́̽̀̎̃̊́̈́̏̃̍̉̇̑̂̇̏̀͊̑̓͛̽͋̈́͆́̊͊̍͌̈́̓͊̌̿̂̾̐͑̓̀́͒̃̋̓͆̇̀͊̆͗̂͑͐̀͗̅̆͘̕͘̕̕͜͜͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅḁ̶̢̡̨̧̡̡̨̨̧̨̡̡̢̧̨̡̡̛̛̛͍̱̳͚͕̩͍̺̪̻̫̙͈̬͙̖͙̬͍̬̟̣̝̲̼̜̼̺͎̥̮̝͙̪̘̙̻͖͇͚͙̣̬̖̲̲̥̯̦̗̰̙̗̪̞̗̩̻̪̤̣̜̳̩̦̻͓̞̙͍͙̫̩̹̥͚̻̦̗̰̲̙̫̬̱̺̞̟̻͓̞͚̦̘̝̤͎̤̜̜̥̗̱͈̣̻̰̮̼̙͚͚̠͚̲̤͔̰̭̙̳͍̭͎̙͚͍̟̺͎̝͓̹̰̟͈͈̖̺͙̩̯͔̙̭̟̞̟̼̮̦̜̳͕̞̼͈̜͍̮͕̜͚̝̦̞̥̜̥̗̠̦͇͖̳͈̜̮̣͚̲̟͙̎̈́́͊̔̑̽̅͐͐͆̀͐́̓̅̈͑͑̍̿̏́͆͌̋̌̃̒̽̀̋̀̃̏̌́͂̿̃̎̐͊̒̀̊̅͒̎͆̿̈́̑̐̒̀̈́̓̾͋͆̇̋͒̎̈̄̓̂͊̆͂̈́̒̎͐̇̍̆̋̅̿̔͒̄̇̂̋̈́͆̎̔̇͊̊̈́̔̏͋́̀͂̈́̊͋͂̍̾̓͛̇̔̚͘̚̕̚͘͘̕̕̕̚͘͘̚̕̚̕͜͜͜͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅç̵̧̢̨̢̢̢̧̧̡̨̡̢̧̧̧̨̡̡̨̨̢̢̢̧̨̢̨̢̛̛͉̗̠͇̹̖̝͕͚͎̟̻͓̳̰̻̺̞̣͚̤͙͍͇̗̼͖͔͕͙͖̺͙̖̹̘̘̺͓̜͍̣̰̗̖̺̗̪̘̯̘͚̲͚̲̬̞̹̹͕̭͔̳̘̝̬͉̗̪͉͕̞̫͔̭̭̜͉͔̬̫͙̖̙͚͔͙͚͍̲̘͚̪̗̞̣̞̲͎͔͖̺͍͎̝͎͍̣͍̩̟͈͕̗͉̪̯͉͎͖͍̖͎̖̯̲̘̦̟̭͍͚͓͈͙̬͖̘̱̝̜̘̹̩̝̥̜͎̬͓̬͙͍͇͚̟̫͇̬̲̥̘̞̘̟̘̝̫͈̙̻͇͎̣̪̪̠̲͓͉͙͚̭̪͇̯̠̯̠͖̞̜͓̲͎͇̼̱̦͍͉͈͕͉̗̟̖̗̱̭͚͎̘͓̬͍̱͍̖̯̜̗̹̰̲̩̪͍̞̜̫̩̠͔̻̫͍͇͕̰̰̘͚͈̠̻̮͊̐̿̏̐̀̇̑̐̈͛͑͑̍̑̔̃̈́̓̈́̇̐͑̐̊̆͂̀̏͛̊̔̍̽͗͋̊̍̓̈́̏̅͌̀̽́̑͒͒̓͗̈́̎͌͂̕̚͘͘͜͜͜͜͜͠͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅS̵̡̡̧̧̨̨̡̢̡̡̡̡̧̧̡̧̢̫̯͔̼̲͉͙̱̮̭̗͖̯̤͙̜͚̰̮̝͚̥̜̞̠̤̺̝͇̻̱͙̩̲̺͍̳̤̺̖̝̳̪̻̗̮̪̖̺̹̭͍͇̗̝̱̻̳̝̖̝͎̙͉̞̱̯̙̜͇̯̻̞̱̭̗͉̰̮̞͍̫̺͙͎̙̞̯̟͓͉̹̲͖͎̼̫̩̱͇̲͓̪͉̺̞̻͎̤̥̭̺̘̻̥͇̤̖̰̘̭̳̫̙̤̻͇̪̦̭̱͎̥̟͖͕̣̤̩̟̲̭̹̦̹̣͖̖͒̈́̈́̓͗̈̄͂̈́̅̐̐̿̎̂͗̎̿̕͘͜͜͜͜͝͝ͅͅt̸̡̡̧̧̨̡̢̛̥̥̭͍̗͈̩͕͔͔̞̟͍̭͇̙̺̤͚͎͈͎͕̱͈̦͍͔͓̬͚̗̰̦͓̭̰̭̎̀̂̈́̓̒̈́̈́̂̄̋́̇̂͐͒̋̋̉͐̉̏̇͋̓̈́͐̾͋̒͒͐̊̊̀̄͆̄͆̑͆̇̊̓̚̚̕̚̕͜͠͝͝ͅͅơ̵̡̨̡̡̡̨̛̺͕̼͔̼̪̳͖͓̠̘̘̳̼͚͙͙͚̰͚͚͖̥̦̥̘̖̜̰͔̠͕̦͎̞̮͚͕͍̤̠̦͍̥̝̰̖̳̫̮̪͇̤̱̜͙͔̯͙̙̼͇̹̥̜͈̲̺̝̻̮̬̼̫̞̗̣̪̱͓̺̜̠͇͚͓̳̹̥̳̠͍̫͈̟͈̘̯̬̞͔̝͍͍̥̒̐͗͒͂͆̑̀̿̏́̀͑͗̐́̀̾̓́̌̇̒̈́̌̓͐̃̈́̒̂̀̾͂̊̀̂͐̃̄̓̔̽̒̈́̇̓͌̇̂̆̒̏̊̋͊͛͌̊̇̒̅͌̄̎̔̈́͊́̽̋̈̇̈́́͊̅͂̎̃͌͊͛͂̄̽̈́̿͐̉̽̿́́̉͆̈́̒́̂̾̄̇̌̒̈̅̍̿̐͑̓͊̈́̈̋̈́̉̍̋̊̈̀̈́̾̿̌̀̈́͌̑̍́̋̒̀̂̈́́̾̏̐̅̈̑͗͐̈͂̄̾̄̈́̍̉͑͛͗͋̈́̃̄̊́́͐̀̀̽̇̓̄̓̃͋͋̂̽̔̀̎͌̈́̈́̑̓̔̀̓͐͛͆̿̋͑͛̈́͂̅̋̅͆͗̇́̀̒́̏͒̐̍͂̓͐͐̇̂̉̑̊͑̉̋̍͊̄̀͂̎͒̔͊̃̏̕̚̕̕͘͘͘̚͘̚͘̕͘̚͘̚̚̚̕͘͜͜͜͝͝͠͠͝͝͠͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅc̴̨̡̢̢̢̡̡̢̛̛̛̻͇̝̣͉͚͎͕̻̦͖̤̖͇̪̩̤̻̭̮̙̰̖̰̳̪̱̹̳̬͖̣͙̼̙̰̻̘͇͚̺̗̩̫̞̳̼̤͔͍͉̟͕̯̺͈̤̰̹̍̋́͆̾̆̊͆͋̀͑͒̄̿̄̀̂͋̊͆́͑̑̽͊̓́̔̽̌͊̄͑͒͐̑͗̿̃̀̓̅́̿͗̈́͌̋̀̏̂͌̓́̇̀͒͋̌̌̅͋͌̆͐̀̔̒͐̊̇̿̽̀̈́̃̒̋̀̈́̃̏̂̊͗̑̊̈̇̀̌͐̈́̉̂̏͊̄͐̈̽͒̏̒̓́̌̓̅́̓̃͐͊͒̄͑̒͌̍̈́̕͘̚͘̕͘̚̕͜͝͠͝͝͝ͅǩ̴̢̢̢̧̨̢̢̢̨̨̨̢̢̢̨̧̨̡̡̢̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̜̥̩̙͕̮̪̻͈̘̯̼̰̜͚̰͖̬̳͖̣̭̼͔̲͉̭̺͚̺̟͉̝̱̲͎͉̙̥̤͚͙̬̪̜̺͙͍̱̞̭̬̩̖̤̹̤̺̦͈̰̗̰͍͇̱̤̬̬͙̙̲̙̜͖͓̙̟̙̯̪͍̺̥͔͕̝̳̹̻͇̠̣͈̰̦͓͕̩͇͈͇̖͙͍̰̲̤̞͎̟̝̝͈͖͔͖̦̮̗̬̞̞̜̬̠̹̣̣̲̮̞̤̜̤̲̙͔͕̯͔͍̤͕̣͔͙̪̫̝̣̰̬̬̭̞͔̦̟̥̣̻͉͈̮̥̦̮̦͕̤͇̺͆͆̈͗̄̀̌̔̈́̈̉̾̊̐̆̂͛̀̋́̏̀̿͒̓̈́̈́͂̽̾͗͊̋̐̓̓̀̃̊̊͑̓̈̎̇͑̆̂̉̾̾̑͊̉̃́̑͌̀̌̐̅̃̿̆̎̈́̀̒́͛̓̀̊́̋͛͒͊̆̀̃̊͋̋̾̇̒̋͂̏͗͆̂̔́̐̀́͗̅̈̋̂̎̒͊̌̉̈̈́͌̈́̔̾̊̎́͐͒̋̽̽́̾̿̚̕͘͘̚̕̕̕̚̚̕̚̕͘͜͜͜͝͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅB̸̢̧̨̡̢̧̨̡̡̨̡̨̡̡̡̢̨̢̨̛̛̛̛̛̛͉̞͚̰̭̲͈͎͕͈̦͍͈̮̪̤̻̻͉̫̱͔̞̫̦̰͈̗̯̜̩̪̲̻̖̳͖̦͎͔̮̺̬̬̼̦̠̪̤͙͍͓̜̥̙̖̫̻̜͍̻̙̖̜̹͔̗̪̜̖̼̞̣̠̫͉̯̮̤͈͎̝̪͎͇͙̦̥͙̳̫̰̪̣̱̘̤̭̱͍̦͔̖͎̺̝̰̦̱̣͙̙̤͚̲͔̘̱̜̻͔̥̻͖̭͔̜͉̺͕͙͖̜͉͕̤͚̠̩̮̟͚̗͈͙̟̞̮̬̺̻̞͔̥͉͍̦̤͓̦̻̦̯̟̰̭̝̘̩̖̝͔̳͉̗̖̱̩̩̟͙͙͛̀͐̈́̂̇͛̅̒̉̏̈́̿͐́̏̃̏̓̌̽͐̈́͛̍͗͆͛̋̔̉͂̔̂̓̌͌͋̂͆̉͑̊̎́̈́̈̂͆͑́̃̍̇̿̅̾́́̿̅̾̆̅̈́̈̓͒͌͛̃͆̋͂̏̓̅̀͂̽̂̈̈́̎̾̐͋͑̅̍̈́̑̅̄͆̓̾̈́͐̎̊͐̌̌̓͊̊̔̈́̃͗̓͊͐̌͆̓͗̓̓̾̂̽͊͗́́́̽͊͆͋͊̀̑̿̔͒̏̈́́̏͆̈́͋̒͗͂̄̇̒͐̃͑̅̍͒̎̈́̌̋́̓͂̀̇͛̋͊͆̈́̋́̍̃͒̆̕̚̚̕̕̕͘̕̚̚͘̕͜͜͜͜͝͠͠͝͠͝͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅI̵̡̢̧̨̡̢̨̡̡̢̡̧̡̢̢̢̡̢̛̛͕͎͕̩̠̹̩̺̣̳̱͈̻̮̺̟̘̩̻̫͖̟͓̩̜̙͓͇̙̱̭̰̻̫̥̗̠͍͍͚̞̘̫͉̬̫̖̖̦͖͉̖̩̩̖̤̺̥̻̝͈͎̻͓̟̹͍̲͚͙̹̟̟̯͚̳̟͕̮̻̟͈͇̩̝̼̭̯͚͕̬͇̲̲̯̰̖̙̣̝͇̠̞̙͖͎̮̬̳̥̣̺̰͔̳̳̝̩̤̦̳̞̰̩̫̟͚̱̪̘͕̫̼͉̹̹̟̮̱̤̜͚̝̠̤̖̮̯̳͖̗̹̞̜̹̭̿̏͋̒͆̔̄̃̾̓͛̾̌́̅̂͆̔͌͆͋̔̾́̈̇̐̄̑̓̂̾́̄̿̓̅̆͌̉̎̏̄͛̉͆̓̎͒͘̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝͠ͅͅƠ̷̢̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̟̰͔͔͇̲̰̮̘̭̭̖̥̟̘̠̬̺̪͇̲͋͂̅̈́̍͂̽͗̾͒̇̇̒͐̍̽͊́̑̇̑̾̉̓̈̾͒̍̌̅̒̾̈́̆͌̌̾̎̽̐̅̏́̈̔͛̀̋̃͊̒̓͗͒̑͒̃͂̌̄̇̑̇͛̆̾͛̒̇̍̒̓̀̈́̄̐͂̍͊͗̎̔͌͛̂̏̉̊̎͗͊͒̂̈̽̊́̔̊̃͑̈́̑̌̋̓̅̔́́͒̄̈́̈̂͐̈̅̈̓͌̓͊́̆͌̉͐̊̉͛̓̏̓̅̈́͂̉̒̇̉̆̀̍̄̇͆͛̏̉̑̃̓͂́͋̃̆̒͋̓͊̄́̓̕̕̕̚͘͘͘̚̕̚͘̕̕͜͜͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝͠ͅS̷̢̨̧̢̡̨̢̨̢̨̧̧̨̧͚̱̪͇̱̮̪̮̦̝͖̜͙̘̪̘̟̱͇͎̻̪͚̩͍̠̹̮͚̦̝̤͖̙͔͚̙̺̩̥̻͈̺̦͕͈̹̳̖͓̜͚̜̭͉͇͖̟͔͕̹̯̬͍̱̫̮͓̙͇̗̙̼͚̪͇̦̗̜̼̠͈̩̠͉͉̘̱̯̪̟͕̘͖̝͇̼͕̳̻̜͖̜͇̣̠̹̬̗̝͓̖͚̺̫͛̉̅̐̕͘͜͜͜͜ͅͅͅ.̶̨̢̢̨̢̨̢̛̻͙̜̼̮̝̙̣̘̗̪̜̬̳̫̙̮̣̹̥̲̥͇͈̮̟͉̰̮̪̲̗̳̰̫̙͍̦̘̠̗̥̮̹̤̼̼̩͕͉͕͇͙̯̫̩̦̟̦̹͈͔̱̝͈̤͓̻̟̮̱͖̟̹̝͉̰͊̓̏̇͂̅̀̌͑̿͆̿̿͗̽̌̈́̉̂̀̒̊̿͆̃̄͑͆̃̇͒̀͐̍̅̃̍̈́̃̕͘͜͜͝͠͠z̴̢̢̡̧̢̢̧̢̨̡̨̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̲͚̠̜̮̠̜̞̤̺͈̘͍̻̫͖̣̥̗̙̳͓͙̫̫͖͍͇̬̲̳̭̘̮̤̬̖̼͎̬̯̼̮͔̭̠͎͓̼̖̟͈͓̦̩̦̳̙̮̗̮̩͙͓̮̰̜͎̺̞̝̪͎̯̜͈͇̪̙͎̩͖̭̟͎̲̩͔͓͈͌́̿͐̍̓͗͑̒̈́̎͂̋͂̀͂̑͂͊͆̍͛̄̃͌͗̌́̈̊́́̅͗̉͛͌͋̂̋̇̅̔̇͊͑͆̐̇͊͋̄̈́͆̍̋̏͑̓̈́̏̀͒̂̔̄̅̇̌̀̈́̿̽̋͐̾̆͆͆̈̌̿̈́̎͌̊̓̒͐̾̇̈́̍͛̅͌̽́̏͆̉́̉̓̅́͂͛̄̆͌̈́̇͐̒̿̾͌͊͗̀͑̃̊̓̈̈́̊͒̒̏̿́͑̄̑͋̀̽̀̔̀̎̄͑̌̔́̉̐͛̓̐̅́̒̎̈͆̀̍̾̀͂̄̈́̈́̈́̑̏̈́̐̽̐́̏̂̐̔̓̉̈́͂̕̚̕͘͘̚͘̚̕̚̚̚͘̕̕̕͜͜͝͠͠͝͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅī̸̧̧̧̡̨̨̢̨̛̛̘͓̼̰̰̮̗̰͚̙̥̣͍̦̺͈̣̻͇̱͔̰͈͓͖͈̻̲̫̪̲͈̜̲̬̖̻̰̦̰͙̤̘̝̦̟͈̭̱̮̠͍̖̲͉̫͔͖͔͈̻̖̝͎̖͕͔̣͈̤̗̱̀̅̃̈́͌̿̏͋̊̇̂̀̀̒̉̄̈́͋͌̽́̈́̓̑̈̀̍͗͜͜͠͠ͅp̴̢̢̧̨̡̡̨̢̨̢̢̢̨̡̛̛͕̩͕̟̫̝͈̖̟̣̲̖̭̙͇̟̗͖͎̹͇̘̰̗̝̹̤̺͉͎̙̝̟͙͚̦͚͖̜̫̰͖̼̤̥̤̹̖͉͚̺̥̮̮̫͖͍̼̰̭̤̲͔̩̯̣͖̻͇̞̳̬͉̣̖̥̣͓̤͔̪̙͎̰̬͚̣̭̞̬͎̼͉͓̮͙͕̗̦̞̥̮̘̻͎̭̼͚͎͈͇̥̗͖̫̮̤̦͙̭͎̝͖̣̰̱̩͎̩͎̘͇̟̠̱̬͈̗͍̦̘̱̰̤̱̘̫̫̮̥͕͉̥̜̯͖̖͍̮̼̲͓̤̮͈̤͓̭̝̟̲̲̳̟̠͉̙̻͕͙̞͔̖͈̱̞͓͔̬̮͎̙̭͎̩̟̖͚̆͐̅͆̿͐̄̓̀̇̂̊̃̂̄̊̀͐̍̌̅͌̆͊̆̓́̄́̃̆͗͊́̓̀͑͐̐̇͐̍́̓̈́̓̑̈̈́̽͂́̑͒͐͋̊͊̇̇̆̑̃̈́̎͛̎̓͊͛̐̾́̀͌̐̈́͛̃̂̈̿̽̇̋̍͒̍͗̈͘̚̚͘̚͘͘͜͜͜͜͜͜͠͠͝͝ͅͅͅ☻♥■∞{╚mYÄÜXτ╕○\╚Θº£¥ΘBM@Q05♠{{↨↨▬§¶‼↕◄►☼1♦  wumbo╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

hardware canucks did a similar test but with 6 core i7 and a 4 core i7

Silverstone FT-05: 8 Broadwell Xeon (6900k soon), Asus X99 A, Asus GTX 1070, 1tb Samsung 850 pro, NH-D15

 

Resist!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Did you try setting the affinity for the Xeon 2699v4 to 2 or 4 cores for the CUDA tests? That way you can use the turbo boost performance. Also the 2699v4 isn't the top of the line.. its the 2696v4 with a higher TDP and Turbo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 hours ago, SamStrecker said:

If devs actually made things for multiple cores and HT then the 22 core would beat everything but we don't...

Not always. Farming a process out to multiple threads will not always increase performance. In general, the more parallel threads you have, the larger the minimum threshold to see the benefit. This is due simply to how parallelization works.

 

Most highly-parallel applications are custom written for the platform that will be running it. And with off-the-shelf software, that's not always possible. Instead the developers anticipate the most common workflows and setups their customers will use. So the software is written with lesser parallelization in mind, not more, emphasizing per-thread performance instead of scaling, since scaling is a lesser need.

 

As Linus mentioned toward the end of his video, they are often trying to encode or transcode multiple files at once, and that is where more cores will help, since it can run multiple jobs. If the software is written intelligently, then it should be able to farm out the jobs to get the maximum use for all the cores and threads supported. In Linus's testing, they were running 1 job to get a benchmark. If they ran all of the test jobs at once, then on CPU-bound tasks, the Xeon would have much more room for farming out the processes, and that is where the high-core, high-thread count of the Xeon would show it's worth.

Wife's build: Amethyst - Ryzen 9 3900X, 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3200, ASUS Prime X570-P, EVGA RTX 3080 FTW3 12GB, Corsair Obsidian 750D, Corsair RM1000 (yellow label)

My build: Mira - Ryzen 7 3700X, 32GB EVGA DDR4-3200, ASUS Prime X470-PRO, EVGA RTX 3070 XC3, beQuiet Dark Base 900, EVGA 1000 G6

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I'm very interested in this topic, because I had considered a new build based on my performance with 6 core and 12 threads.  Essentially what one poster is saying is that if I jumped much higher in CPU cores I won't get much better performance.  

 

I recently posted in the video section about codecs that are efficient for playing that are also high quality in 4K and 1080p.  I ran a bunch of tests and posted my results in regards to drop frames.  My problem with cuneiform form is that it's CPU heavy.  It's interesting to know that LMG uses 1080p files and up converts after originally acquiring in 4K.  

 

I also am doing testing with multiple video streams with those codecs.  My conclusion right now

is that my hard drives with 1GB/s transfers aren't my limitation, but my CPU is.  Jow far I can improve my hardware is the question without making the mistake that Linus made.  That is, getting hardware that Adobe can't fully utilize in premiere and media encoder specifically.

 

I would say say that we don't necessarily have all the information on the Adobe products.  It would be nice to know upfront what the hardware limitations are and what's the most efficient and FAST hardware configurations.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
13 hours ago, nicklmg said:

Buy Intel Core i7 6900K on Amazon: http://geni.us/61B5V

 

Well... We haven't made a mistake this significant in quite some time, so let's get into how you can avoid "pulling a Linus" with your own setup...

 

Next time make the mistake with 1 or 2 "really" core optimized Intel CPU (not counting "PHI") xD

http://ark.intel.com/de/products/93790/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E7-8890-v4-60M-Cache-2_20-GHz

24Cores á 2,2GHz

The 2 More Cores make a huge different! (Especially in the price...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I have noticed this behavior also. While very good with the editing process. Adobe premiere CC does not take advantage of multiple cores as well as many other programs.

The issues get worst in after effects, where most common CPU intensive effects, are all single threaded.

 

This video shows a good job at showing just how poor the multi-threading of adobe premiere CC is.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P5UWEKSUXo

 

Since apple typically goes with underpowered hardware, apple puts a ton of work into optimizing their professional applications. Basically multi-threading everywhere, along with GPU acceleration wherever possible.

 

Adobe really needs to fix their software. Over the years, at one point or another, adobe had added certain types of acceleration, but ultimately removed them, thus we end up with software where most of the functions, only use 1 core, and no GPU.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
18 hours ago, DrMikeNZ said:

It would have been nice to have some discussion about the compression and quality of the output files comparing the GPU assisted to CPU only.

 

I have not used the software in this video, but with all of the video encoding that I have done I have always noticed better quality when using CPU only encoding, which is why I personally have avoided using GPU. As long as the output quality is fine, I can understand that in the case of LMG it would make more sense to reduce the conversion times as much as possible to meet video release deadlines. If there is a noticeable difference, I can still see the advantage to these expensive processors running CPU only conversions.

In premiere, the h264 encoding is always done on the cpu. The gpu is used for effects and certian codecs, like cineform. Quality is the same(ive tested)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
17 hours ago, Bsmith said:

Hmm this is interesting, one question though, where the settings (encoder, bitrate, resolution, quality setting etc) all out exactly the same in both cases? Because to my knowledge there shouldn't be any difference in it if everything is the same, atleast not that should be allowed to be.

Bitrate, resolution and quality settings were the same, however as the CPU and GPU use different architecture the encoders are different.

 

Just now, Electronics Wizardy said:

In premiere, the h264 encoding is always done on the cpu. The gpu is used for effects and certian codecs, like cineform. Quality is the same(ive tested)

Makes sense. It is interesting then that the encoding is not scaling well with more cores. In other videos on the premier workload they showed that it also didn't scale as well as expected with GPU either, so I wonder where the bottleneck is...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, DrMikeNZ said:

Makes sense. It is interesting then that the encoding is not scaling well with more cores. In other videos on the premier workload they showed that it also didn't scale as well as expected with GPU either, so I wonder where the bottleneck is...

To my knolege there are using the main concept encoder(good list of encoders here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Software_encoders)

 

The cpu is the bottleneck, but it doesn't just want more cores. It could be cache or memory limation as well. It would be nice to see how a cpu does at 1,2,3,4,5,6ghz to see how it scales.

 

Normally h264 encoders max at around 16 threads due to how that workload works. H264 was designed when there were no dual core computers and there were only a few dual socket servers.

 

H265 should work with multi cores(on my system h264 uses about 80% cpu and h265 maxes it), and would probably do better on that xeon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 minute ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

To my knolege there are using the main concept encoder(good list of encoders here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Software_encoders)

 

The cpu is the bottleneck, but it doesn't just want more cores. It could be cache or memory limation as well. It would be nice to see how a cpu does at 1,2,3,4,5,6ghz to see how it scales.

 

Normally h264 encoders max at around 16 threads due to how that workload works. H264 was designed when there were no dual core computers and there were only a few dual socket servers.

 

H265 should work with multi cores(on my system h264 uses about 80% cpu and h265 maxes it), and would probably do better on that xeon.

The Xeon has a hell of a lot more cache, if that was the limiting factor, I would have expected better.

I would also like to see them take one of the processors, and run at a few different CPU and cache clock speeds to assess scaling.

 

I use H265 on 16 threads, great for 1080p and higher, although it doesn't make very good use of the CPU encoding SD content (why anyone would do that I don't know).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 hour ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

To my knolege there are using the main concept encoder(good list of encoders here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Software_encoders)

 

The cpu is the bottleneck, but it doesn't just want more cores. It could be cache or memory limation as well. It would be nice to see how a cpu does at 1,2,3,4,5,6ghz to see how it scales.

 

Normally h264 encoders max at around 16 threads due to how that workload works. H264 was designed when there were no dual core computers and there were only a few dual socket servers.

 

H265 should work with multi cores(on my system h264 uses about 80% cpu and h265 maxes it), and would probably do better on that xeon.

x264 is actually quite good at multithreading, it's just limitations of the h264 (AVC) format that make it very hard (and not advisable due to losses in quality) to use lots of threads.

 

The maximum threads which can work on a frame of the image analyzing it depends on the vertical height of the image, and there's some dependency between threads (a thread can't work until the thread processing the chunk of the image above processed a part of it, something like that) but x264 works around that by analyzing multiple frames in parallel in memory... basically even though x264 was started when single and dual cores were all the range, it has matured and has very good multi threading code.

 

if I'm not mistaken, some of the developers working on x264 also worked on MainConcept, so the Main Concept codec should be very good but it doesn't help you if the codec options aren't exposed to you by the Adobe interface, or they're set on some defaults which limit multithreading or force the codec to spend too much time on trying to reach a certain quality threshold for some amount of bitrate. Basically, less flexibility.

 

x265 (hevc codec) used the x264 code as the base, and takes advantage of things in HEVC standard to use more threads when encoding and decoding. There are things in the standard like Wavefront Parallel Processing which makes it easier to parallelize some things, here's an example of what that means : https://www.parabolaresearch.com/blog/2013-12-01-hevc-wavefront-animation.html

 

CPU cache doesn't matter much for video encoding, as long as it's minimum size is big enough (and most modern processors have big enough cache). Memory speeds and latencies are also usually not a limiting factor, the encoding speed is not big enough for memory latency or frequency to matter that much.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

That CPU price vs. "total GHz" table gave me an idea:

 

Plot1.png

 

THE INTEL FORMULA
 

240 - 20.7x + 1.45x² dollars per Jiggahertz

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing LTT Releases

×